2018 Toxics Release Inventory National Analysis Comparing Industry Sectors

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Comparing Industry Sectors

This section examines how different industrial sectors manage their chemical waste. This
sector-specific approach can highlight progress made in improving environmental performance,
identify emerging issues, and reveal opportunities for better waste management practices.

The industries that are subject to TRI reporting requirements vary substantially in size, scope,
and business type. As a result, the amounts and types of chemicals used, generated, and
managed by facilities within a given industry sector often differ greatly from those of facilities in
other sectors. For facilities in the same sector, however, the processes, products, and
regulatory requirements are often similar, resulting in similar manufacture, processing, or other
use of chemicals.

For analysis purposes, the TRI Program has aggregated the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) codes at the 3- and 4-digit levels, creating 29 industry sector
categories. To learn more about which business activities are subject to TRI reporting
requirements, see this list of covered NAICS codes.

The following pie chart shows the industry sectors that reported the most production-related
waste for 2018.

vvEPA

Production-Related Waste Managed by Industry, 2018
32.12 billion pounds

Electric Utilities:
4%

Paper
Manufacturing:
4%

Food Manufacturing:

All others

Metal Mining:

Petroleum Product-/
Manufacturing:

Primary Metals:

Chemical
Manufacturing:
55%

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Seven industry sectors reported 89% of the quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production-related waste in 2018. A majority of TRI chemical waste managed originated
from the chemical manufacturing sector (55%).

The following pie chart shows the industry sectors that reported the most disposal or other
releases for 2018.

vvEPA

Total Disposal or Other Releases by Industry, 2018
3.80 billion pounds

All Others: 9%
Food |

Manufacturing: 4%

Paper
Manufacturing: 4%

Hazardous Waste
Management: 4%

Primary Metals: 9%

Electric Utilities: 9%

Chemical
Manufacturing
14%

Metal Mining: 47%

This pie chart shows that 4 of the 29 TRI reporting sectors reported 79% of the quantities of
TRI chemicals disposed of or otherwise released: metal mining (47%), chemical manufacturing
(14%), electric utilities (9%), and primary metals (9%).

For more details on how the amounts and proportions of TRI chemicals managed as waste have
changed over time, see the production-related waste managed bv industry trend graph.

For more information on the breakdown of these releases by environmental medium, see air
releases bv industry, water releases bv industry and land disposal bv industry.

As with any dataset, there are several factors to consider when using the TRI data. Key factors
associated with data presented are summarized in the Introduction. For more information see
Factors to Consider When Using Toxics Release Inventory Data. Also note that the list of TRI
chemicals has changed over the years. For comparability, trend graphs include only those

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

chemicals that were reportable for all years presented. Figures that focus only on the year 2018
include all chemicals reportable for 2018, therefore, values for a 2018-only analysis may differ
slightly from results for 2018 in a trend analysis.

vvEPA

3

-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Manufacturing Sectors

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the manufacturing sectors.

What the Sector Does

The manufacturing sectors are goods-producing
industries that transform materials into new
products. These sectors include businesses
involved in the production of food,
textiles, paper, chemicals, plastics,
petroleum products, metal
products, electronics,
furniture, vehicles,
equipment, and
other products.

THE SECTOR

EMPLOYS

11.1 MILLION

PEOPLE

U.S. Census Annual Survey of Manufactures
2016 data

THE SECTOR

CONTRIBUTES
2.3 TRILLION

TO U.S. GDP

In value-added. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Year 2018 data.

19,254 facilities in the sector report to TRI

	U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2018

This map shows the locations of the manufacturing facilities (defined as facilities reporting their
primary NAICS codes as 31-33) that reported to TRI for 2018. Click on a facility for details on its
TRI reporting.

4

-------
kvEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018

www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Winnipeg

Montreal



6 R E A

NEBRASKA

Sari
F ranclsco >

Tijuana

Herincslllo

Chihuahua

TorreOn

Monterrey



Guadalaj.

s

Mexico City, o Pufebla



|AMAICA



HONDURAS

Tegucigalpa

Manufacturing Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2018

View Larger Map

For 2018, nearly 90% of the facilities that reported to TRI were in a manufacturing sector.
These sectors accounted for most (88%) of the 32.1 billion pounds of production-related waste
reported to TRI for 2018. Two subsectors of manufacturing, chemical manufacturing and
aerospace manufacturing, are highlighted in more detail later in this section.

The TRI-covered industry sectors not categorized under manufacturing include metal mining,
coal mining, electric utilities, chemical wholesalers, petroleum terminals, hazardous waste
management, and others.

5

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/

February 2020

Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals managed as waste by the
manufacturing sectors.

vvEPA

Production-Related Waste Managed:
Manufacturing Sectors

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment

Energy Recovery Recycling
—•—Value Added (billions, 2018 Dollars)

$2,500

$2,000

$1,500

<
Q>

>
Q.
Q.
(D
Q.

$1,000 =

$500

N>
O

00
-tA

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• Production-related waste managed by the manufacturing sectors decreased through
2009, following the trend of reduced production resulting from the economic recession.
Since 2009, total quantities of waste managed have increased.

o Quantities of waste released and treated decreased, while the quantity of waste
combusted for energy recovery and waste recycled increased.

• It is important to consider the influence the economy has on production and production-
related waste generation. This figure includes the trend in the manufacturing sectors'
value added (represented by the black line as reported by the Bureau of Economic
Analysis. Value Added bv Industry). Value added is a measure of production that is
defined as the contribution of these manufacturing sectors to the national gross

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

domestic product. Since 2007, value added by the manufacturing sectors increased by
5%.

o Production-related waste managed by the manufacturing sectors increased by
35% since 2007, driven by increased recycling. The large increase in recycled
chemical waste starting in 2014 was primarily due to an increase in the quantity
of cumene recycled by one facility and dichloromethane recycled by two other
facilities.

From 2017 to 2018:

•	Production-related waste managed increased by 11% (2.87 billion pounds). This
increase was largely due to a single facility that reported recycling 2.0 billion pounds of
dichloromethane on site in 2018. This facility did not previously report recycling this
chemical on site. The facility claimed that for the 2018 reporting year, it had reviewed
and reinterpreted the TRI Program's guidance on estimating recycling quantities of TRI
chemicals, which is the reason the facility reported recycling such a large quantity of
dichloromethane on site during 2018 compared to 2017. Excluding this amount for
2018, the total quantity of the manufacturing sectors' production-related waste
managed increased by 4%.

•	In 2018, only 5% of the manufacturing sectors' production-related waste was released
into the environment, while the rest was managed through treatment, energy recovery,
and recycling.

7

-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Manufacturing Releases Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals released by the
manufacturing sectors.

Total Disposal or Other Releases:
Manufacturing Sectors

2,000

O
CL

II

£ 1,000 —H—¦—U~

\r>
c
o

•1 500 —

ill Ml I

III

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

On-site Air Releases	¦ On-site Surface Water Discharges

i On-site Land Disposal

Off-site Disposal or Other Releases

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

•	Total releases by the manufacturing sectors decreased by 19%. This is primarily due to
a reduction in air emissions and off-site disposal or other releases.

•	Releases to water also declined, while on-site land disposal increased by 17%.

From 2017 to 2018:

Total releases increased by 5% (70 million pounds). This is largely due to a 15%
increase (48 million pounds) in off-site releases.

8

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Source Reduction in the Manufacturing Sectors:

In 2018, 6% of manufacturing facilities initiated more than 2,800 source reduction activities to
reduce TRI chemical use and waste generation. The most commonly reported types of source
reduction activitites were good operating practices and process modifications. For example:

•	A metal container manufacturing facility changed the scheduling of drum production to
minimize the number of color changes necessary, thus reducing its use of certain glycol
ethers. fClick to view facility details in the Pollution Prevention rP21 Tooll

•	A biodiesel manufacturer reported adding a methanol recovery system to reuse the
chemical in the process. fClick to view facility details in the P2 tooll.

You can learn more about pollution prevention opportunities in this sector bv using the TRI
Pollution Prevention fP21 Search Tool

9

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Chemical Manufacturing

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the chemical manufacturing
sector.

vvEPA

What the Sector Does

Chemical manufacturers convert raw materials

into thousands of different products, including

basic chemicals, products used by other

manufacturers (such as synthetic

fibers, plastics, and

pigments), |^i /~J

pesticides, and

cosmetics, to

name a few.

THE SECTOR

EMPLOYS 1

745,000 1

PEOPLE

U.S. Census Annual Survey of Manufactures
2016 data

•
1

1

i



THE SECTOR

CONTRIBUTES B
$378 BILLION

TO U.S. GDP

In value-added. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Year 2018 date

i

i

3,455 facilities in the sector report to TRI

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2018

This map shows the locations of the chemical manufacturing facilities (defined as facilities
reporting their primary NAICS code as 325) that reported to TRI for 2018. Click on a facility for
details on its TRI reporting.

10

-------
kvEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018

www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Seattle^ fa	•

* ••

* vJhinoton	•

NORfH DAKOTA	••

•#	• •• MINNESOTA#

• d*E

•	%seQN<1„	.

• li '*1 •• V'« * «-•

•	r* fefa-.aajWi . . V* ,

"^fiSon	o

> "

~*Orlami

4i

Culiacan o BS

o MEXICO

assr-*

Mexico- Cily. o Puebla

Prince /
|amaic-\	HArrf

wtfjlto

HONDURAS

Chemical Manufacturing Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2018
View Larger Map

For 2018, the chemical manufacturing sector had the most facilities (3,455, 16% of facilities
that reported for 2018) report to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and reported 55% of all
production-related waste managed, more than any other sector.

11

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/

February 2020	

Chemical Manufacturing Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals managed as waste by the
chemical manufacturing sector.

vvEPA

18,000

15,000

| 12,000
o

Q.

o 9,000

U)

£

0

1	6,000
3,000

0

Production-Related Waste Managed:
Chemical Manufacturing

1111111

I r I Mi

~i— —i— —i— —i— —i— —i— —i— —r

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

100

80

o

60 Q-

40

20

Q.

n>
x

Disposal or Other Releases
Energy Recovery
•Production

Treatment
i Recycling

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• Production-related waste managed by the chemical manufacturing sector increased by
71%, while production volume (represented by the black line as reported by the Federal
Reserve Board. Industrial Production Indexl decreased by 15%. In recent years,
production has been fairly constant and increased in 2018.

o The large increase in reported quantities of waste recycled starting in 2014 was
primarily due to increased quantities of recycling reported by chemical
manufacturers, with an increase in the quantity of cumene recycled by one
facility and dichloromethane recycled by two other facilities.

12

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

•	Quantities of TRI chemicals treated or combusted for energy recovery decreased, while
the quantities of TRI chemicals recycled and released increased.

From 2017 to 2018:

•	Production-related waste managed at chemical manufacturing facilities increased by 2.5
billion pounds (16%), while production volume increased by 4%.

o The increase in production-related waste is largely due to a 2.0 billion pound
increase in the quantity of dichloromethane reported as recycled by one chemical
manufacturing facility I"click to view facility details in the P2 tool"!. The facility
claimed that for the 2018 reporting year, it had reviewed and reinterpreted the
TRI Program's guidance on estimating recycling quantities of TRI chemicals,
which is the reason the facility reported recycling such a large quantity of
dichloromethane on site during 2018 compared to 2017.

•	In 2018, only 3% of this sector's waste was managed as releases into the environment,
while the rest was managed through treatment, energy recovery, and recycling.

13

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Chemical Manufacturing Releases Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals released by the chemical
manufacturing industry.

cnn

Total Disposal or Other Releases:
Chemical Manufacturing

cnn

—

Millions of Pounds

1—i NJ U> ^ L
O O O O C
D O O O O C

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

On-site Air Releases ¦ On-site Surface Water Discharges
¦ On-site Land Disposal ¦ Off-site Disposal or Other Releases

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• Total releases by the chemical manufacturing sector increased by 8%.

• The distribution of releases has changed during this time period. This change has been
driven largely by decreased air releases of common chemicals including methanol,
hydrochloric acid, and carbonvl sulfide and increased on-site land disposal, particularly
for metal compounds.

From 2017 to 2018:

• Total releases increased by 38 million pounds (7%).

• For 2018, the chemical manufacturing sector reported larger air release quantities than
any other sector, accounting for 25% of all reported quantities of TRI chemicals emitted
to air.

vvEPA

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Source Reduction in the Chemical Manufacturing Sector:

Although chemical manufacturing has consistently been the sector with the most production-
related waste managed, 280 facilities (8% of facilities) in this sector initiated source reduction
activities in 2018 to reduce their TRI chemical use and waste generation. The most commonly
reported types of source reduction activities were good operating practices and process
modifications. For example,

• An organic chemical manufacturing facility reduced hvdroauinone waste by improving
the heating system of its outdoor storage tanks to reduce the quantity of sludge formed.
Minimizing sludge formation reduces the facility's hazardous waste generated. fClick to
view facility details in the Pollution Prevention rP21 Tooll

• A fertilizer manufacturing facility began transitioning to using chlorine dioxide instead of
chlorine for cooling water treatment. The transition is expected to eliminate the storage
of up to 16,000 pounds of chlorine on site. fClick to view facility details in the P2 Tooll

Additional Resources

EPA's Smart Sectors Program is partnering with chemical manufacturing trade associations to
develop sensible approaches that better protect the environment and public health.

TRI's Pollution Prevention Olik Dashboard can help you learn more about production-related
waste, releases, and pollution prevention opportunities in this sector.

For more information on how this and other industry sectors can choose safer chemicals, visit
EPA's Safer Choice Program pages for Alternatives Assessments and the Safer Choice
Ingredients List.

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Aerospace Manufacturing

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the aerospace manufacturing
sector.

vvEPA

O
Z

UJr

of*

8>y

LU^

s

What the Sector Does

The aerospace sector manufactures
aircraft and spacecraft, including their
parts and engines. The sector also
manufactures missiles and overhauls
and rebuilds aircraft
and propulsion

THE SECTOR ##<

EMPLOYS Mi

420,000 11

PEOPLE

U.S. Census Annual Survey of Manufactures 2016 data





THE SECTOR

CONTIBUTES IS
$117 BILLION jl

TO U.S. GDP

In value-added. U.S. Census Annual Survey of Manufactures
2016 data



i

278 facilities in the sector report to TRI

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2018

This map shows the locations of the aerospace manufacturing facilities (defined as facilities
reporting their primary NAICS code as 3364) that reported to TRI for 2018. Click on a facility for
details on its TRI reporting.

16

-------
kvEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018

www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

f WASHING! ON

NORTH DAKOTA

4<^^Ang>
in Dlego^

oRado

UTH DAKOTA

U N I T E D
S TATE S

tllwaukee <^an
-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Aerospace Manufacturing Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals managed as waste by the
aerospace manufacturing industry.

Production-Related Waste Managed: Aerospace Manufacturing

l/>

-o

3
O

M—

l/>

300
250

Z
£

200 3

150 O

ioo a

r+"

50 5
0

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

I Disposal or Other Releases Treatment Energy Recovery Recycling ^^^Number of Facilities

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• Although production-related waste managed by the aerospace manufacturing sector
fluctuated between years, the quantity of waste managed in 2018 is 3.8 million pounds
(5%) less than it was in 2007, while the number of facilities increased from 243 to 278
(14%).

From 2017 to 2018:

• Production-related waste managed increased by 4.8 million pounds (7%), largely due to
an aircraft parts manufacturing facility which reported an increase of over 3 million
pounds of waste managed through energy recovery from 2017 to 2018. fClick to view
facility details in the Pollution Prevention rP21 Tooll

• In 2018, only 5% of this sector's waste was released into the environment, while the
rest was managed through treatment, energy recovery, and recycling.

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/

February 2020

Aerospace Manufacturing Releases Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals released by the aerospace
manufacturing industry.

vvEPA

Total Disposal or Other Releases: Aerospace Manufacturing

6,000

-c 5,000

E
3

£ 4,000

M-

° 3,000

T3
C

E 2,000

¦ i

1,000 -

I ¦ III11

-I

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

On-site Air Releases ¦ On-site Water Releases

¦ On-site Land Releases ¦ Off-site Disposal or Other Releases

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• Total releases by the aerospace manufacturing sector decreased by 29%.

o The decrease in releases was mainly driven by large releases of hydrochloric acid
to air by one aerospace products and parts manufacturing facility in 2007 and
2008, followed by smaller releases in subsequent years. fClick to view facility
details in the Pollution Prevention rP21 Tooll

From 2017 to 2018:

• Total releases increased by 591 thousand pounds (19%). The increase in releases was
not driven by any one facility.

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Source Reduction in the Aerospace Manufacturing Sector:

Between 2010 and 2018, the aerospace manufacturing sector had a higher than average rate of
initiating source reduction activities compared with the rate across all industries that report to
TRI. For 2018, 8% of facilities in the aerospace manufacturing sector reported source reduction
activities, compared to 6% of all facilities that reported to TRI.

The most commonly reported types of source reduction activities in the aerospace
manufacturing sector were good operating practices and inventory control. Several facilities in
this sector reported initiating source reduction activities to reduce scrap generation. Note that
minimizing the generation of scrap metal is a source reduction activity, while recycling scrap
metal is a waste management practice. Examples of source reduction activities reported by the
sector include:

• An aircraft engine manufacturing facility revised dimensions for raw material purchases
to reduce scrap created by cutting pieces to fit production. fClick to view facility details
in the P2 Tooll

• An aircraft manufacturing facility installed a non-chemical floor coating that is removable
which eliminated the need to clean booth floors with a product containing toluene. fClick
to view facility details in the Pollution Prevention rP21 Tooll

Additional Resources

EPA's Smart Sectors Program is partnering with the aerospace sector to develop sensible
approaches that better protect the environment and public health.

TRI's Pollution Prevention Olik Dashboard can help you learn more about production-related
waste, releases, and pollution prevention opportunities in this sector.

-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Metal Mining

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the metal mining sector.

What the Sector Does

The metal mining sector extracts and
processes ores (metal-bearing rock) to
refine the valuable target metals. The
portion of the metal mining sector
covered by TRI reporting requirements
includes facilities mining
copper, lead, zinc,
silver, gold, \
and several ""
other metals.

THE SECTOR

EMPLOYS 1

37,000 1

PEOPLE

U.S. Census County Business Patterns
2017 data

•
1

VALUE OF MINE

PRODUCTION ng
$26 BILLION X}

USGS Mineral Commodities Summary 2019 data ®

Note: Both metrics include all metal mining sectors; not limited tc
those covered by TRI.

86 facilities in the sector report to TRI

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2018

This map shows the locations of the metal mining facilities (defined as facilities reporting their
primary NAICS code as 2122) that reported to TRI for 2018. Click on a facility for details on its
TRI reporting. Mines are shown on this map based on their longitude/latitude, which may be
miles from the city identified on the mine's TRI reporting forms. Mines can qualify their location
relative to the city by noting the distance in the street address data field of their TRI reporting
forms.

-------
kvEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018

www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

CANADA

Edmonton

-f- Calgary

Vancouver „

*
m °

Seattle

:• %

GREAT PLAINS Chicago 0Detroit

gnver UNITED
S TATE S

Ottawa Montreal
o o

Toronto# . ^

Boston

*0 New York
^Philadelphia
Washington

1.05 Angel®

Metal Mines Reporting to TRI, 2018

View Larger Map

For 2018, 86 metal mining facilities reported to TRI. 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 and Tennessee, as well as Alaska. Metals generated from U.S. mining operations are
used in a wide range of products, including automobiles, electric and industrial equipment,
jewelry, and decorative objects. The extraction and processing of these minerals generate large

amounts of on-site land disposals, primarily of metals
included on the TRI list of chemicals contained in the ore
and waste rock. To learn more about metal mining
operations and their TRI reporting, explore the interactive
metal mining diagram. Metal mining operations are subject
to federal and state regulations.

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/

February 2020

Metal Mining Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals managed as waste by the
metal mining industry from 2007 to 2018, mainly in the form of on-site land disposal.

vvEPA

Production-Related Waste Managed:
Metal Mining

2,500

2,000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

l/l

n"
-I
O

Disposal or Other Releases
Energy Recovery
•Mine Production

Treatment
Recycling

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• While metal mining production (as reported in the United States Geological Survey)
remained relatively steady, the quantity of waste managed fluctuated.

• Besides production volume, one factor commonly cited by facilities as a contributor to
the changes in quantities of waste managed is the chemical composition of the
extracted ore, which can vary substantially from year to year. In some cases, small
changes in the ore's composition can impact whether chemicals in ore qualify for a
concentration-based exemption from TRI reporting in one year but not in the next year
or vice versa.

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

From 2017 to 2018:

• The quantity of TRI chemical waste managed by this sector decreased by 160 million
pounds (8%) between 2017 and 2018.

• During 2018, 96% of the metal mining sector's production-related waste was disposed
of or otherwise released. The majority of this waste consisted of metals, which were
primarily disposed of to land on site at the mine.

-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Metal Mining Releases Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals released by the metal mining
industry, primarily through on-site land disposal.

Total Disposal or Other Releases:
Metal Mining

~i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

On-site Air Releases
i On-site Land Disposal

On-site Surface Water Discharges
Off-site Disposal or Other Releases

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• More than 99% of the metal mining sector's releases were in the form of on-site land
disposal. The quantity of on-site land disposal by metal mines has fluctuated in recent
years.

• Several mines have reported that changes in production volume and changes in the
chemical composition of the deposit being mined are the primary causes of fluctuations
in the amount of chemicals reported as disposed of on site at the mine.

• 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 TRI chemicals reported.

• The quantity of TRI chemicals released is not an indicator of health risks posed by the
chemicals, as described in the Introduction. For more information, see the TRI
document, Factors to Consider When Using Toxics Release Inventory Data.

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

In 2018:

• The metal mining sector reported the largest quantity of total disposal or other releases,
accounting for 47% of total TRI releases and 70% of on-site land disposal for all
industries.

Source Reduction in the Metal Mining Sector:

None of the 86 metal mining facilities reported initiating source reduction activities for TRI
chemicals in 2018. Unlike manufacturing, the nature of mining—the necessary movement and
disposal of TRI chemicals present in large volumes of earth to access the target ore—does not
lend itself to source reduction. TRI's Pollution Prevention Olik Dashboard can help you learn
more about production-related waste, releases, and pollution prevention opportunities in this
sector.

EPA's Smart Sectors Program is partnering with the mining sector to develop sensible
approaches that better protect the environment and public health.

-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Electric Utilities

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the electric utilities sector.

What the Sector Does

Electric utilities generate, transmit, and
distribute electric power. Electric-generating
facilities use a variety of fuels to generate

THE SECTOR t#*

EMPLOYS Mil

511,000 f

PEOPLE

I-

electricity; however, only those electricity
generating facilities that combust

U.S. Census County Business Patterns 2017 data. Includes all fuel types
for electricity generation; not limited to those fuels covered by TRI

coal or oil to generate
power for distribution ^
in commerce are
subject to TRI reporting

r,r
v

GENERATES W
909 BILLION /BR

111

requirements.

U.S. Department of Energy 2019 data by electric utilities that
combust coal or oil for electricity generation

111

487 facilities in the sector report to TRI

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2018

This map shows the locations of the electric utilities (defined as facilities reporting their primary
NAICS code as 2211) that reported to TRI for 2018. Click on a facility for details on its TRI
reporting.

-------
kvEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018

www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

* WASHINGTON

DAKOTA
*

Portland

UTH DAKOTA » f ®

• •

® A TofonIooiai»,Cn
-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/

February 2020

Electric Utilities Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals that electric utility facilities
manage as waste.

vvEPA

2,500

2,000

o 1,500

Cl '

M-

§ 1,000

500

Production-Related Waste Managed:
Electric Utilities

1111

H *

llll

Mill ii

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment

Energy Recovery Recycling

^^—Electricity Generation

1.5 |
o"

1.2 o
£T)
£

0.9 ="
m

0.6 |

r+
<
o
n>

0.3

0.0

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• Production-related waste managed decreased by 618 million pounds (32%) since 2007,
driven by reduced releases.

• Net electricity generation by electric utilities using coal and oil fuels decreased by 43%
(as reported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration1).
The recent production decrease (beginning in 2014) was driven by the industry's
transition to natural gas. Note that only facilities that combust coal or oil to produce
power are covered under TRI reporting requirements.

In 2018:

• Approximately three-quarters of the production-related waste was treated, while one-
quarter was released to the environment.

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

o This is in contrast to 2007, when over half of the waste from this sector was
released. This trend is largely due to an increase in scrubbers at electric utilities
that treat (or destroy) TRI-reportable acid gases to reduce the quantities of the
chemicals that would otherwise be released to the air.

vvEPA

-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Electric Utilities Releases Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals released by electric utilities.

Total Disposal or Other Releases:

Electric Utilities

1,250

1,000
750
500
250
0

¦I;..

'"UliM!

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Year

On-site Air Releases
On-site Land Disposal

On-site Surface Water Discharges
Off-site Disposal or Other Releases

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2007 to 2018:

• Releases from the electric utilities sector decreased by 66%. This decrease was driven
by an 87% (555 million pounds) decrease in on-site air releases. On-site land disposal
and off-site disposal also decreased, but to a lesser extent.

From 2017 to 2018:

• Releases by electric utilities decreased by 2% (8.0 million pounds). This decrease was
driven by reductions in on-site land disposal to surface impoundments and off-site
disposal.

Source Reduction in the Electric Utilities Sector:

In the electric utilities sector, 8 facilities (2% of the electric utility facilities reporting to TRI)
initiated source reduction activities in 2018 to reduce their use of TRI chemicals and generation
of wastes that contain TRI chemicals. Note that adding treatment equipment is considered a
control technology for TRI chemical waste that is generated, and is not a source reduction

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

activity that prevents waste from being generated. TRI's Pollution Prevention Olik Dashboard
can help you learn more about production-related waste, releases, and pollution prevention
opportunities in this sector.

EPA's Smart Sectors Program is partnering with the sector to develop sensible approaches that
better protect the environment and public health.

-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Hazardous Waste Management

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the hazardous waste
management sector.

-------
kvEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018

www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Vo
%¦ -f-

* WASHING

NORTH DAKOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

WISCONSIN

IOWA* * •

GREAT* PLAINS Chicafc^ MltHlG.'^P

« «'a«*SKA . ^

InAanap^k

Kansas Oily

Totor*ooiyak*.Qal4'io
Gr^nd Rapids ^ ^Rocl^ster ^

Buflalo u\,? m£:"

. ^ Albany •»

Boston
ovidence

U N I T E D
S TATE S

£ ^ittsburgh^' , $$jhp

r • %$ %

L~f»

COLORADO

••

• # KENTUCKY • RicfimShd n0[

• Greensb«o .

Nashville® Knoxvllg* #Raleigh

Memphis^ TENNESSEE Char loll e ^ N0RTH

• »»R°LINA

» 'cms,*

SEORG|A

~if"-'

Culiacan o ®

Mexico- Cily. o Puebla

Prince

|amaic-\ HArrf

San Juan
ruuA kico

nOATFWAl.A

r HONDURAS

Guatemala0 Tegucigalpa

Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2018

View Larger Map

For 2018, 226 facilities in the hazardous waste management sector submitted 2,591 TRI
reporting forms for 341 unique chemicals, averaging 11 forms (i.e., forms for 11 different
chemicals) per facility. This is considerably higher than the average of 4 forms submitted per
facility across all sectors. The sector also includes seven facilities that each submitted forms for
more than 100 chemicals for 2018. The high average number of forms per facility reflects the
diversity of the sector's operations where wastes of varying chemical composition are received
from many different types of industrial processes.

Given the considerable year-to-year variability in facilities' inputs, examining TRI trends of this
sector is not meaningful. Therefore, this sector profile only examines the most recent year of
data and does not show any long-term trend information.

-------
oEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Hazardous Waste Management Sector Waste Management

The quantity of waste managed and released by hazardous waste management facilities
depends on the quantity of waste received from their customers. The following pie chart shows
how hazardous waste management facilities managed waste, as reported to TRI for 2018.

Production-Related Waste Managed by Hazardous Waste
Management Sector, 2018
629 Million pounds

Disposal or Other
Releases: 28%

Treatment: 37%

Energy Recovery: 14%

Recycling: 21%

Hazardous waste management facilities managed most of their TRI chemical waste through the
preferred methods of treatment, recycling, and energy recovery, while 28% was released. This
is comparable to other recent years, when about 70-80% of production-related waste managed
by the sector was managed through the preferred methods of treatment, recycling, and energy
recovery.

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Hazardous Waste Management Sector Releases

Releases by Hazardous Waste Management Sector, 2018

173 million pounds

On-site Air Releases:

On-site Surface

<1%

Water Discharges:

<1%

Off-site Disposal or

Other Releases: 27%

—On-site Land

Disposal: 73%

• Most of the sector's releases (145 million lb, 83%) were of metal and metal compounds
which cannot be treated. Most of the on-site land disposal was to landfills, primarily
landfills that are regulated by subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

vvEPA

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/

February 2020

Releases by Parent Company

Releases in the hazardous waste management sector are concentrated in a few parent
companies.

vvEPA

Waste Management Inc
US Ecology Inc
Clean Harbors Inc
Coulter Cos Inc
EnergySolutions LLC
All Others

Releases by Parent Company, 2018

173 million pounds

20 30 40

Millions of pounds

Note: This figure uses the standardized TRI parent company name.

• 5 parent companies accounted for 81% of releases from the hazardous waste
management sector for 2018.

• To view the number of facilities that reported to TRI for 2018 by parent company,
mouse over the bar graph.

Source Reduction in the Hazardous Waste Management Sector:

The nature of hazardous waste management facilities' operations generally does not lend itself
to source reduction activities. Hazardous waste management facilities commonly report that the
variable nature of received waste streams is a barrier to source reduction. While not considered
source reduction, these facilities apply control technologies and environmental practices like
recycling and energy recovery to reduce environmental impacts.

-------
kvEPA

TRI National Analysis 2018

www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Federal Facilities

This map shows the locations of 449 federal facilities that reported to TRI in 2018. Federal
facilities are subject to TRI reporting requirements, regardless of the type of operations at the
facility as described by their NAICS code. Click on a facility for details on its TRI reporting.

MONTANA

Sail
Ldfce Vly

Sacramefilo

. . . CO i. 0* A
^ • ¦¦ -A' £/

O WISCONSIN

Milwaukee Grand Rapids

R E A T P L A l9N S Chicago MICHIGAN

and Rapids ^ o Rochester ^ • a®

BUK.IO

UNITfD

STATES

Indianapolis Columbus

.Kansas City

OHIo • Pittsburgh^• ONe^Yc

olumbus ^ ^ * _•

tflpJfcNA cincijnati A •^Wladalphi

* • ^ ttVashington

• # •. ' .

$ma Ng,i®<#no«vJ^ '^"'bo ° * Raleigh* •

i * - Mrtmnh,-. • •. . . . « . ~ •Charlotte... •

% m

Son | ^ 0

NEW MEXIC

El.Pas^

Oklahoma

Ok'lI'c

..temphi:. TENNE

V • "• •

Greenville" v • r

\ Atlanta _4^iHNA

R<*. ,A •

T"*' • .• • . o ' •'

Auxn u?U.S|AN«#, /'

«HWK«i "H»» Orleans

Orlando
° %

ffissr*

Mexico City, o Pueblo

0 o

HAITI Santo I'UUiTCftlUCO

Domingo

Federal Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2018

View Larger Map

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

The 1993 Executive Order 12856, "Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution
Prevention Requirements," established the requirement that all federal facilities, including
facilities operated by the EPA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of the Treasury
are subject to the TRI reporting requirements, regardless of the type of operations at the
facility as described by their NAICS code. This executive order has been reaffirmed by
subsequent administrations.

Federal Facilities by Industry

The following chart shows the number of federal facilities reporting to TRI by sector for 2018.

vvEPA

Federal Facilities by Sector, 2018
449 facilities

Police Protection
(e.g., firing
range): 6%

Correctional
Institutions (e.g.,
federal prison):
12%

Electric Utilities:

All Others: 16%

National Security
(e.g., US Army
Base): 63%

For 2018, 449 federal facilities in 38 different types of operations (based on their 6-digit NAICS
codes) reported to TRI. Almost two-thirds of these facilities were in the National Security sector,
which includes Department of Defense facilities such as Army and Air Force bases. All federal
facilities are subject to TRI reporting requirements regardless of their sector. Therefore, for
some industry sectors, the TRI database only includes data from federal facilities. Most federal
facilities are in such sectors, including Military Bases (63%); Correctional Institutions (12%);
and Police Protection, such as training sites for Border Patrol stations (6%).

As with non-federal facilities, activities at federal facilities drive the types and quantities of
chemical waste managed and reported to TRI. Some of the activities at federal facilities that are

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

captured by TRI reporting are similar to those at non-federal facilities, such as electric utilities.
In other cases, federal facilities may report waste managed from specialized activities that are
not usually performed by non-federal facilities. For example, all of the federal facilities included
under Police Protection and Correctional Institutions only reported for lead and lead
compounds, likely due to the use of lead ammunition on firing ranges at these facilities.

-------
TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/

February 2020

Waste Management by Federal Facilities

The following pie chart shows the percentages of TRI chemicals managed as waste by federal
government organizations in 2018.

vvEPA

Production-Related Waste Managed by
Government Organization, 2018
140.5 million pounds

All Others:

• The types of waste reported by federal facilities vary by the type of operation.

o The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is a government-owned electric utility that
provides power to southeastern states. Out of the 18 TVA facilities that reported
to TRI for 2018, virtually all of the production-related waste comes from the
fossil fuel plants that report in the electric utilities sector. Over 80% of their
reported waste was hydrochloric and sulfuric acid aerosols which were mostly
treated on site.

o The Department of the Treasury facilities reporting to TRI are mints for

manufacturing currency and, accordingly, they report metals (e.g., copper and
nickell to TRI. Almost all of their metal waste was recycled off site.

-------
v>EPA

TRI National Analysis 2018
www, epa. aov/trinationa lana lysis/
February 2020

Source Reduction at Federal Facilities:

Since federal facilities are subject to TRI reporting regardless of their industry sector
classification, their operations are diverse and few focus on manufacturing processes. Due to
their unique functions, some federal facilities may face challenges in implementing source
reduction strategies to reduce chemical waste. For the 2018 reporting year, 18 federal facilities
(4%) reported implementing source reduction activities.

Federal facilities have often indicated barriers to reducing use of lead because it is contained in
ammunition used at National Security and Park Service facilities. For 2018, several federal
facilities reported using green ammuntion in accordance with National Park Service policy to use
non-lead ammunition where feasible. To find more examples of federal facilities' source
reduction activities and the barriers they face to implementing source reduction, visit TRI's
Pollution Prevention Search Tool and select industry sectors such as National Security,
Correctional Institutions or Police Protection from the dropdown menu under "search criteria."

-------