TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
Each year, the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) collects information from more than 21,000
facilities on the quantities of TRI-listed chemicals they recycle, combust for energy recovery,
treat for destruction, and dispose of or otherwise release both on and off site as part of their
normal operations. These quantities, in total, are collectively referred to as the quantity
of production-related waste managed.
Looking at production-related waste managed over
time helps track progress made by industrial
facilities in reducing the amount of chemical waste
generated and in adopting waste management
practices that are preferable to disposing of or
otherwise releasing waste to the environment. EPA
encourages facilities to first eliminate the creation of
chemical waste through source reduction activities.
For wastes that are generated, the most preferred
management method is recycling, followed by combusting for energy recovery, treatment, and,
as a last resort, disposing of or otherwise releasing the chemical waste into the environment.
These waste management practices are illustrated in the waste management hierarchy image
shown here and discussed in the Pollution Prevention Act fPPAl of 1990. One goal of the PPA is
that over time facilities will shift from disposal or other releases toward the more preferred
techniques in the waste management hierarchy that do not result in releases to the
environment.
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 chemicals that were reportable for all years presented. Figures that
focus only on the year 2017 include all chemicals reportable for 2017, therefore, values for a
2017-only analysis may differ slightly from results for 2017 in a trend analysis.
vvEPA
Source Reduction
Recycling
Energy Recovery
Treatment
8
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Source Reduction Activities Reported
Facilities are required to report to TRI new source reduction activities that they started or fully
implemented during the year. Source reduction includes activities that eliminate or reduce the
generation of chemical waste. Other waste management practices, such as recycling and
treatment, refer to how chemical waste is managed after it is generated and are not considered
source reduction activities.
Source Reduction Activities Reported
Good Operating Practices
Process Modifications
¦ Spill and Leak Prevention
¦ Inventory Control
Raw Material Modifications
¦ Product Modifications
¦ Cleaning and Degreasing
¦ Surface Preparation and
Finishing
Note: Facilities report their source reduction activities by selecting codes that describe their activities. These codes fall into
one of eight categories listed in the graph legend and are defined in the TRI Reporting Forms and Instructions.
Percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
In 2017:
• 1,581 facilities (7% of all facilities that reported to TRI) initiated or implemented a total
of 3,994 new source reduction activities.
• Note that facilities may have ongoing source reduction activities initiated in previous
years that are not included in this figure. You can find information on previously
implemented source reduction activities bv using the TRI Pollution Prevention fP21
Search Tool.
vvEPA
9
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Green Chemistry Activities
Green chemistry is a discipline within the field of chemistry which seeks to prevent formation of
pollution through the design and implementation of manufacturing syntheses that use safer
reagents (e.g., green solvents) or feedstocks, use minimal energy, and produce the desired
product in high yield without forming unwanted byproducts or wastes. It is based on the
premise that the best way to deal with pollution is to not generate it in the first place. In the
pollution prevention hierarchy green chemistry is a means to achieve source reduction.
Advancements in green chemistry allow industry to reduce or even prevent pollution at its
source by, for example, designing manufacturing processes that use or produce fewer
quantities of TRI chemicals, or no TRI chemicals at all. Starting with the 2012 reporting year,
EPA added six green chemistry activities to its list of source reduction activities so that facilities
could indicate the green chemistry practices they implemented. This figure shows the chemicals
for which the most green chemistry activities were implemented and the sectors that reported
those activities.
vvEPA
Green Chemistry Activities for Top Chemicals, by Industry, 2012-2017
LEAD AND LEAD COMPOUNDS
METHANOL
TOLUENE
COPPER AND COPPER COMPOUNDS
CHROMIUM AND CHROMIUM COMPOUNDS
AMMONIA
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Number of Green Chemistry Activities Reported
Chemical Manufacturing ¦ Fabricated Metals
(Transportation Equipment Machinery
Computers and Electronics
All others
160 180
• Since 2012, facilities have reported 2,226 green chemistry activities for 147 TRI
chemicals and chemical categories. Green chemistry activities were reported most
frequently for lead and lead compounds, methanol, toluene, copper and copper
10
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
compounds, chromium and chromium compounds, and ammonia. The sectors reporting
the highest number of green chemistry activities were chemical manufacturing,
fabricated metals, and computers and electronics.
• Chemical manufacturers used green chemistry to reduce or eliminate their use of TRI
solvent and reagent chemicals, such as methanol, toluene, and ammonia. For example:
o A pharmaceutical manufacturing facility scaled up a process to increase
product yields. The facility also modified a process for production qualification
to reduce raw material needs and toluene waste generated per pound of
product produced. fClickto view facility details in the Pollution Prevention
TP21 Tool!
• Fabricated metal producers applied green chemistry techniques to reduce their usage of
metals including lead, copper, and chromium. For example:
o A metal coating and engraving facility increased their use of chromium-free
treatment chemicals. fClick to view facility details in the P2 Tooll
• Computer and electronic products manufacturers reduced or eliminated their use of
lead, such as lead found in solder. For example:
o To meet European restrictions on lead in electronics, an electronics
manufacturer redesigned its printed circuit assemblies to use lead-free
solder. fClick to view facility details in the P2 Tooll
vvEPA
Green Chemistry Resources
Source reduction activities such as green chemistry are the preferred way to reduce formation
of chemical wastes. Find more information on green chemistry using the following resources:
• EPA's TRI Pollution Prevention fP21 Search Tool to find green chemistry examples for a
specific chemical and/or industry.
• EPA's Green Chemistry program for information about green chemistry and EPA's efforts
to facilitate its adoption.
• EPA's Safer Choice program for information about consumer products with lower hazard.
• For more details on the types of green chemistry activities reported to TRI and trends in
green chemistry reporting, see The Utility of the Toxic Release Inventory CTRII in
Tracking Implementation and Environmental Impact of Industrial Green Chemistry
Practices in the United States. EXIT
11
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Reported Barriers to Source Reduction
Facilities that did not implement new source reduction activities for a TRI chemical have the
option to disclose any barriers that prevented them from implementing source reduction. Since
2014, TRI reporting forms include barrier codes, which enable reporting and analysis of
obstacles that facilities may be experiencing. This figure shows the types of barriers that
facilities reported for metals and for all other (non-metal) TRI chemicals.
vvEPA
Barriers to Source Reduction Reported for Metals and All Other
Chemicals, 2014-2017
T3
CD
+j
k_
O
Q.
CD
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Metals
I Source reduction unsuccessful
Regulatory barriers
I Product quality concerns
I Other barriers
Non-metals
I Technical information needed
I Insufficient capital
I Further source reduction not feasible
I No known substitutes
From 2014 to 2017:
• Facilities reported barriers to source reduction for 345 chemicals and chemical
categories.
• The most frequently reported barriers for both metals and non-metals were no known
substitutes or alternative technologies and further source reduction not feasible. This
excludes other barriers, a catch-all category available to facilities.
12
-------
v>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.Qov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
While no known substitutes was the most frequently reported barrier for both metals
and non-metals, it accounted for almost half (48%) of the barriers reported for metals
but made up a smaller portion (38%) of barriers reported for non-metals.
For the no known substitutes barrier for metals, many facilities reported the presence of
the TRI metal in their raw materials (e.g., metal alloys) as the reason they did not
implement source reduction activities. Examples include:
o An iron foundry reported that the premium grade scrap iron they purchase to
melt contains a trace amount of lead as an undesirable contaminant. \Click to
view facility details in the Pollution Prevention fP2) Tooll
o A steel tubing manufacturer noted that American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) standards require minimum acceptable quantities of chromium,
manganese, and nickel in stainless steel, so they are unable to reduce their use
of these chemicals. \Click to view facility details in the P2 Tooll
Further source reduction not feasible was another commonly reported barrier, especially
for non-metals. Facilities select this barrier code when additional reductions do not
appear technically or economically feasible. For example:
o A die and tooling manufacturing facility previously implemented monitoring and
periodic maintenance activities related to its methanol usage. Further reducing
waste and improving efficiency would require replacing all existing equipment,
which is currently not economically feasible for the facility. fClickto view facility
details in the P2 Tooll
Analyzing the source reduction barriers reported to TRI helps identify where more
research is needed, for example to address technological challenges or promote
development of viable alternatives.
You can view barriers reported for any TRI chemical bv using the TRI P2 Search Tool.
13
-------
oEPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Source Reduction Activities by Chemical
For the chemicals with the highest source reduction reporting rates over the last 5 years, this
figure shows the number and types of activities implemented.
Newly Implemented Source Reduction Activities by Chemical, 2013-2017
Good Operating Practices
I Spill and Leak Prevention
I Inventory Control
I Surface Preparation and Finishing
Process Modifications
Raw Material Modifications
I Product Modifications
I Cleaning and Degreasing
1,200
"g 1,000
t
o
a.
-------
v>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
• The type of source reduction activity implemented for these chemicals varies depending
on their use in industrial operations and the chemical's characteristics. For example:
o Raw material modifications is commonly reported as a source reduction
activity to reduce waste of di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), a plasticizer;
styrene, a chemical used to make plastics such as polystyrene; and antimony
compounds which are used in electronics, batteries, and as a component of fire
retardants.
o Cleaning and degreasing, including changing to aqueous cleaners, is
implemented for common industrial solvents such as trichloroethylene (TCE).
o Process modifications, including optimizing reaction conditions and modifying
equipment, layout, or piping, can help reduce the amount of solvents such as
dichloromethane (DCM) needed for a process.
Facilities may also report additional details to TRI about their source reduction, recycling, or
pollution control activities in an optional text field of the TRI reporting form.
Examples of optional source reduction information for 2017:
• Stvrene: A plastics product manufacturer reduced shutdown waste by placing orders
back to back to keep the line running. fClick to view facility details in the Pollution
Prevention rP21 Tooll
• Dichloromethane: A specialty chemical manufacturer was able to reduce their use of
dichloromethane by substituting a less hazardous solvent. fClick to view facility details in
the P2 Tooll
• Trichloroethylene: A precision turned parts manufacturer purchased a new parts
cleaning system not requiring the use of trichloroethylene. fClick to view facility details
in the P2 Tooll
• Dif2-ethvlhexvQphthalate: A plastic film manufacturer removed the raw material
containing DEHP from their product line in 2017, and they estimate this change will lead
to the elimination of all DEHP waste. fClick to view facility details in the P2 Tooll
• Antimony Compounds: A wire and cable manufacturer attempted to group like
compounds together, minimizing changeovers and helping to eliminate scrap. fClick to
view facility details in the P2 Tooll
You can compare facilities' waste management methods and trends for any TRI chemical bv
using the TRI P2 Search Tool.
15
-------
oEPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Source Reduction Activities by Industry
For the industries with the highest source reduction reporting rates over the last 5 years, this
figure shows the number and types of activities these sectors implemented.
Newly Implemented Source Reduction Activities by Industry, 2013-2017
Good Operating Practices
I Spill and Leak Prevention
I Inventory Control
I Surface Preparation and Finishing
Process Modifications
Raw Material Modifications
I Product Modifications
I Cleaning and Degreasing
2,800
2,400
u 2,000
<
£
O
Plastics and Rubber
Computers and
Electronic Products
Miscellaneous
Manufacturing
Printing
Textiles
Note: Facilities report their source reduction activities by selecting codes that describe their activities. These codes fall into one of eight categories
listed in the graph legend and are in the TRI Reporting Forms and Instructions.
From 2013 to 2017:
• The five industry sectors with the highest source reduction reporting rates are plastics
and rubber, computers and electronic products, miscellaneous manufacturing (e.g.,
medical equipment), printing, and textiles.
• For most sectors, "Good operating practices" is the most frequently reported type of
source reduction activity. Other commonly reported source reduction activities vary by
sector. For example, computers and electronic products manufacturers frequently
16
-------
v>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
reported modifications to their raw materials and products, often associated with the
elimination of lead-based solder.
• Facilities may also report additional details to TRI about their source reduction,
recycling, or pollution control activities, as shown in the following examples.
Examples of optional source reduction information for 2017
• Plastics and Rubber: By modifying the manufacturing process and conducting
engineering trials, quality testing and product qualifications, a plastics product
manufacturer was able to reformulate the raw materials for their polyester resin to low-
stvrene alternatives. fClick to view facility details in the Pollution Prevention fP21 Tooll
• Computers and Electronic Products: A printed circuit board manufacturing facility
changed their plating process to a chemistry that contains less formic acid and reduced
the amount of formic acid treated and released. fClick to view facility details in the P2
Tooll
• Miscellaneous Manufacturing: A powder processing facility reduced one clean out
per month by changing their processing order to reduce their nickel releases. fClick to
view facility details in the P2 Tooll
• Textiles: A fabric coating mill looked for alternative methods to produce products to
reduce their dependence on solvent chemicals and is engaging in new opportunities that
use water borne or 100% solids technologies. fClick to view facility details in the P2
Tooll
• Printing: A gravure printer reduced toluene use through an initiative with their ink
vendors to eliminate/reduce toluene. fClick to view facility details in the P2 Tooll
You can view all reported pollution prevention activities and compare facilities' waste
management methods and trends for any TRI chemical bv using the TRI P2 Search Tool.
17
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Waste Management Trends
Facilities report to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) the quantities of TRI-listed chemicals that
they dispose of or otherwise release to the environment as a result of normal industrial
operations. In addition, facilities report the quantities of these chemicals that they manage
through preferred methods including recycling, combusting for energy recovery, and treating
for destruction. This figure shows the trend in these quantities, collectively referred to as
production-related waste managed.
vvEPA
Production-Related Waste Managed
25
20
15 ai
U
(0
10
5
¦ ¦¦¦¦¦¦MM
~i— —r
t— —r
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Year
Disposed of or Otherwise Released Treated
Energy Recovery Recycled
< Facilities
From 2007 to 2017:
• Production-related waste decreased during the recession. Since 2009, production-related
waste managed has generally been increasing as the U.S. economy has improved.
• Since 2007, production-related waste managed increased by 5.3 billion pounds (22%).
o Disposal and other releases decreased by 354 million pounds (-8%).
o Treatment decreased by 38 million pounds (-0.5%).
18
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
o Energy recovery increased by 76 million pounds (3%).
o Recycling increased by 5.6 billion pounds (62%), a trend mostly driven by one
facility reporting over 3.4 billion pounds of cumene recycled each year from
2014-2017 fClick to view facility details in the Pollution Prevention fP21 Tooll and
another facility reporting 1.5 billion pounds of dichloromethane recycled in 2017
fClick to view facility details in the P2 Tooll.
• The number of facilities that report to TRI has declined by 8% since 2007. Reasons for
this decrease include facility closures, outsourcing of operations to other countries, and
facilities reducing their manufacture, processing, or other use of TRI-listed chemicals
below the reporting thresholds.
vvEPA
19
-------
oEPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Production-Related Waste Managed by Chemical
This figure shows the chemicals that were managed as waste in the greatest quantities from
2007 to 2017.
Production-Related Waste Managed by Chemical
METHANOL
TOLUENE
I COPPER AND COPPER COMPOUNDS
HYDROCHLORIC ACID
ETHYLENE
ICUMENE
I ZINC AND ZINC COMPOUNDS
I LEAD AND LEAD COMPOUNDS
I AMMONIA
I All Others
30,000
o
Q.
15,000
10,000
5,000
.¦¦¦HI
-I
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Year
From 2007 to 2017:
• Facilities reported production-related waste for 563 chemicals and chemical categories.
The nine chemicals for which facilities reported the most production-related waste,
shown above, represent 50% of all production-related waste reported.
• The reported quantities of most of the top chemicals contributing to production-related
waste managed have remained relatively constant since 2007.
• Of the chemicals shown above, facilities reported increased quantities of waste managed
for five: zinc and zinc compounds, lead and lead compounds, cumene. ethylene, and
ammonia.
o Production-related waste of lead and lead compounds increased by 30%.
20
-------
v>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
o Cumene waste managed increased eight-fold, mostly driven by one facility
reporting over 3.4 billion pounds of cumene recycled annually during 2014-2017.
TCIick to view facility details in the Pollution Prevention fP21 Tooll
From 2016 to 2017:
• Facilities reported decreases in overall waste quantities for these chemicals:
o Ammonia decreased by 43.5 million pounds (-4%)
o Hydrochloric acid decreased by 9.85 million pounds (-1%)
• The quantities of lead and lead compounds managed as waste increased by 332 million
pounds (29%).
21
-------
oEPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Production-Related Waste Managed by Industry
This figure shows the industry sectors that managed the most waste from 2007 to 2017.
Production-Related Waste Managed by Sector
I All Others
I Food
I Primary Metals
Petroleum
I Paper
Chemical Manufacturing
Electric Utilities
I Metal Mining
30,000
25,000
20,000
o 15,000
10,000
5,000
m ¦ ¦ ¦ i ¦ ¦ ¦ i ¦
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
From 2007 to 2017:
• The percent contribution of each of the top sectors to production-related waste
managed has remained relatively constant since 2007.
• Of the sectors shown in the graph, five increased their quantity of waste managed:
o Chemical manufacturing increased by 5 billion pounds (51%)
o Metal mining increased by 738 million pounds (58%)
o Paper manufacturing increased by 431 million pounds (28%)
o Food manufacturing increased by 440 million pounds (44%)
o Petroleum products manufacturing increased by 47 million pounds (4%)
22
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
• The quantity of waste generated in some industries fluctuates considerably from year to
year, due to changes in production or other factors. For example, quantities of waste
managed reported by metal mining facilities can change significantly based on changes
in the composition of waste rock.
From 2016 to 2017:
• Industry sectors with the greatest reported changes in overall waste quantities are:
o Chemical manufacturing increased by 2.5 billion pounds (20%)
o Metal mining increased by 388 million pounds (24%)
vvEPA
23
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Waste Management by Parent Company
Facilities that report to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) provide information on their parent
company. For TRI reporting purposes, the parent company is the highest-level company located
in the United States. This figure shows the parent companies whose facilities reported the most
production-related waste for 2017. Facilities outside of the manufacturing sector, such as
electric utilities and coal and metal mines, are not included in this chart because the nature of
the activities conducted by those sectors do not lend themselves to the same types or degree of
source reduction and waste management activities as manufacturing facilities. Note that almost
all of these companies are largely managing their waste through EPA's preferred waste
management methods-recycling, energy recovery, or treatment-rather than releasing it to the
environment.
Production-Related Waste Managed by Parent Company
Advansix Inc
2017
2016
Sabic US Holdings LP
2017
2016
International Paper Co
2017
2016
DowDuPont
2017
2016
Incobrasa Industries Ltd
2017
2016
PBF Energy Inc
2017
2016
Koch Industries Inc
2017
2016
Syngenta Corp
2017
2016
BASF Corp
2017
2016
Honeywell International Inc
2017
2016
0 12 3 4
Billions of Pounds
¦ Releases ¦ Treated ¦ Energy Recovery ¦ Recycled
Notes: 1) For TRI reporting, the parent company is the highest-level U.S. company which directly owns at least 50% of the voting stock of the company. This figure uses
EPA's standardized parent name. 2) To view facility counts by parent in 2016 or 2017, mouse over the bar graph. 3) One facility, Incobrasa Industries Ltd, does not report a
parent company but it is included in this figure because it has a comparable quantity of production-related waste managed. 4) Graphic Packaging Holding Co. acquired
several International Paper facilities as of January 2018. One of these facilities listed its parent company for reporting year 2017 as Graphic Packaging Holding Co. and was
changed to the 2017 parent, International Paper Co., for this figure. 5) The increases by Sabic Holdings are driven by one facility which reported almost 1.5 billion pounds of 24
dichloromethane recycling in 2017 as well as greatly increased recycling quantities of several other chemicals.
vvEPA
-------
v>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
These parent companies' TRI-reporting facilities operate in the following industry sectors:
• Chemical manufacturing: Advansix Inc, DowDuPont, BASF, Syngenta, Honeywell
International, Sabic US Holdings LP
• Paper: International Paper
• Soybean processing: Incobrasa
• Multiple sectors, e.g. pulp and paper, petroleum refining, and chemicals: Koch Industries
• Petroleum refining: PBF Energy
Half of these top parent companies reported implementing new source reduction activities in
2017. Some of these companies reported additional (optional) information to TRI about their
pollution prevention or waste management activities.
Examples of additional pollution prevention-related information for 2017:
• A BASF facility installed more accurate feed control valves which reduced excess
ammonia usage. fClick to view facility details in the Pollution Prevention fP21 Tooll
• A paperboard mill owned by Koch Industries upgraded a boiler to eliminate bark
burning. fClick to view facility details in the P2 Tooll
To conduct a similar type of parent company comparison for a given sector, chemical, or
geographic location, use the TRI P2 Search Tool.
25
-------
v>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Source Reduction Activities by Parent Company
This figure shows the parent companies whose facilities implemented the most source reduction
activities during 2017. Facilities outside of the manufacturing sector, such as electric utilities
and coal and metal mines, are not included in this chart because those sectors' activities (e.g.,
the release of TRI chemicals present in large volumes of earth moved from below ground or
metal mining pit to the surface, to get to the target ore) do not lend themselves to the same
source reduction opportunities as the activities at manufacturing facilities.
26
-------
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
Source Reduction Activities for Top Parent Companies
Berkshire Hathaway Inc
2017
2016
Silgan Holdings Inc
2017
2016
Nucor Corp
2017
2016
3M Co
2017
2016
Axalta Coating Systems..
2017
2016
Resinall Corp
2017
2016
Superior Essex Inc
2017
2016
Saint-Gobain Corp
2017
2016
Lyondellbasell Industries
2017
2016
CCL Industries Corp.
2017
2016
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Number of Source Reduction Activities Reported
Good Operating Practices ¦ Process Modifications
¦ Spill and Leak Prevention ¦ Raw Material Modifications
¦ Inventory Control ¦ Product Modifications
¦ Cleaning and Degreasing ¦ Surface Preparation and Finishing
vvEPA
Notes: 1) For TRI reporting, the parent company is the highest-level U.S. company which 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 codes that describe their activities. These codes fall into one of eight
categories listed in the graph legend and are defined in the TRI Reporting Forms and Instructions. 3) One CCL
Industries facility reported no US parent company and was assigned to CCL Industries Corp. 4) To view facility counts
by parent in 2016 or 2017, mouse over the bar graph.
These parent companies' facilities primarily operate in the following industries:
• Chemical manufacturing sector: 3M, Resinall, Lyondellbasell, Axalta
• Multiple sectors: Saint-Gobain Corp, Berkshire Hathaway
• Steel manufacturing: Nucor
27
-------
v>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2017
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
March 2019
• Wire and cable manufacturing: Superior Essex
• Metal containers: Silgan Holdings, CCL Industries
Good operating practices, such as improving maintenance scheduling and installation of quality
monitoring systems, are the most commonly reported types of source reduction activities for
these parent companies. Spill and leak prevention and process modifications are also commonly
reported.
Some of these parent companies submitted additional optional text on their TRI reporting forms
describing their pollution prevention or waste management activities.
Examples of additional pollution prevention-related information for 2017:
• A 3M facility reduced its use of formaldehyde and phenol by organizing scheduling to
minimize changeovers as much as possible. fClick to view facility details in the Pollution
Prevention rP21 Tooll
• A Berkshire Hathaway facility reduced chromium waste by using pre-manufactured
components that eliminate most of the scrap metal. fClick to view facility details in the
P2 Tooll
You can find P2 activities reported bv a specific parent company and compare facilities' waste
management methods and trends for any TRI chemical bv using the TRI P2 Search Tool.
28
------- |