Introduction to the 2020 TRI National Analysis

oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis

www .epa. gov/ trinationa lana Ivsis/
February 2022

Industries and businesses in the United States (U.S.) use many chemicals to make the products
we depend on, such as pharmaceuticals, computers, paints, clothing, and automobiles. While
most chemicals on the Toxics Release Inventory fTRP chemical list are managed by these
facilities in ways that minimize releases into the environment, releases still occur as part of
normal business operations.

It is your right to know what TRI chemicals are being used in
your community, how TRI chemical waste is managed-
including through environmental releases, and whether these
quantities are changing over time.

The TRI tracks how industry manages certain toxic chemicals.
Information reported each year to the EPA by facilities covering
activities such as manufacturing, metal mining, generation of
electric power, and hazardous waste management provides
insight over time as to chemical waste management changes.
The data reported to EPA are publicly available. For calendar
year 2020, more than 21,000 facilities reported to EPA's TRI
Program.

Each year, in support of its mission to protect human
health and the environment, EPA analyzes the most
recent TRI data, conducts comparative analyses with
TRI data reported for previous years, and publishes its
findings in the TRI National Analysis.

TRI Reporting

Under the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know
Act fEPCRA'i and the Pollution
Prevention Act (PPA1, facilities
that meet TRI reporting
requirements must report
details about their pollution
prevention and waste
management activities,
including releases, of TRI-listed
chemicals that occurred during
the prior calendar year to EPA's
TRI Program by July 1 of each
year.

Watch a short video about the TRI Program and your right to know.

Overview of the 2020 I Rl data

The two pie charts below summarize the most recent TRI data: the chart on the left shows the
total amount of production-related waste managed through recycling, energy recovery,
treatment, and disposal or other releases. The chart on the right shows the proportions of TRI
chemical waste released to air, water, and land.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI	February 2022	

Production-Related Waste Managed, 2020
28.33 billion pounds

Energy Recovery:
10%

Disposal or Other Releases, 2020
3.04 billion pounds

Off-site Disposal or
Other Releases: 11%

/~

On-site Air Releases:
18%

On-site Surface Water
Discharges: 6%

•	Facilities reported managing a total of 28.33 billion pounds of TRI-listed chemicals as
production-related waste during 2020. Production-related waste managed is the quantity of
TRI chemicals in waste resulting from routine operations at facilities. This includes TRI
chemicals in wastes that are recycled, combusted for energy recovery, treated, disposed of,
or otherwise released into the environment.

o Of this total, 89% was recycled, combusted for energy recovery, or treated, while
11% was disposed of or otherwise released into the environment.

•	For TRI chemicals in wastes that were disposed of or otherwise released, facilities report the
quantities of these releases, and whether the releases were to air, water, or land. Most
releases occur on site at facilities, but waste containing TRI chemicals may also be shipped
off site for disposal, such as to a landfill. As shown in the pie chart on the right, most TRI
chemical waste was disposed of to land, which includes landfills, underground injection, and
other land disposal practices.

2

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

^hLJV% www .epa. gov/ trinationa lana Ivsis/
\/LI # February 2022

Where are the Facilities that Reported to TRI for 2020 Located?

Calgary

Vancouver

¦ ^ Lake
Superior

Montreal

Toronto

Great PI&&:

:i^n
-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

TRI Data Considerations

As with any dataset, there are several factors to consider when reviewing results or using
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data. Key factors associated with the data presented in the TRI
National Analysis are summarized below; for more information see Factors to Consider When
Using Toxics Release Inventory Data.

• Covered chemicals and sectors. Many industry
sectors report information about the management of
certain toxic chemicals as waste to TRI. However,

TRI does not include information on every chemical,
nor does it collect information from all facilities or
industry sectors that may manage TRI chemical
wastes. A list of the chemicals reportable to the TRI
Program as well as a list of the sectors covered bv
the TRI Program is available on the TRI webpage.

Facilities in covered sectors that manufacture,
process, or otherwise use TRI-listed chemicals above
listed threshold quantities and employ at least ten
full-time equivalent employees are required to report
to the TRI Program. For most TRI chemicals, the
threshold quantities are 25,000 pounds of the
chemical manufactured or processed, or 10,000
pounds of the chemical otherwise used during a
calendar year.

• TRI trends. The TRI chemical list has changed over the years. To make sure year-to-
year data are optimized for comparison, trend graphs in the TRI National Analysis
include only chemicals that were reportable for the entire time period presented. Results
which focus only on the year 2020 include all chemicals reportable for 2020. Thus,
quantities mentioned in 2020-only analyses may differ slightly from the quantities shown
for the year 2020 in multi-year trend analyses.

• Data quality. Facilities use their best available data to determine the quantities of
chemicals they report to TRI. Each year. EPA conducts an extensive data Quality review
that includes contacting facilities about potential errors in reported information. This
data quality review process helps ensure that the TRI National Analysis is based on
accurate and complete information.

TRI Reporting is Required

TRI reporting is required for
facilities that meet the reporting
criteria under Section 313 of the
Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act
fEPCRAI. EPA investigates cases
of EPCRA non-compliance and
may issue civil penalties, including
monetary fines. Since the TRI
Program's creation, EPA has taken
more than 3,400 TRI-related
enforcement actions. For more
information, see the TRI
Compliance and Enforcement
webpage.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• Risk. TRI data can be a useful starting point to evaluate whether chemical releases may
pose potential risks to human health and the environment. However, the quantity of a
chemical release alone is not necessarily an indicator of exposure to the chemical, or the
potential health or environmental risks posed by the chemical. In particular, note that:

o TRI-listed chemicals vary in their toxicity; and

o The extent of exposure to a chemical depends on many factors such as where
the chemical is released, how it is released (i.e., to air, water, or land), the
chemical's properties, and what happens to the chemical in the environment.

For more information on the use of TRI data in exposure and risk evaluations, see the
TRI and Estimating Potential Risk webpaae and Hazard and Potential Risk of TRI
Chemicals in the Releases section.

• COVID-19. The most recent TRI data reflect chemical waste management activities,
including releases, that occurred during calendar year 2020. The COVID-19 public health
emergency began in the U.S. in early 2020 and may have affected industrial operations
throughout the year. Facilities may submit comments about their industrial activities,
and for 2020, many facilities chose to include information on how COVID-19 impacted
their operations. Some descriptions of such comments are provided below.

• Impacts on facility-wide operations. Many facilities noted COVID-19-related
shutdowns or reduced operations during 2020.

• Impacts on waste management activities. Facilities commented on how the

public health emergency changed their processes. For example, a food
manufacturer noted that they used more sanitizing chemical than in the past to
meet COVID-related industry requirements. An antibacterial wipe manufacturer
reported that increased demand for their product led to an increase in their
production and the associated amount of chemical waste generated.

• Impacts on pollution prevention activities. As an example, an abrasive
product manufacturer reported that COVID-19 resulted in less capital available
to pursue source reduction projects.

• Late submissions, revisions, and withdrawals. TRI reporting forms submitted to
EPA or revised after the July 1 reporting deadline may not be processed in time to be
included in the National Analysis. After EPA's data quality review, the TRI data are
frozen in October and this dataset is used to develop the National Analysis. Any revisions
or late submissions received after this date, or withdrawals made after this date, may not
be reflected in the National Analysis but are incorporated into the TRI dataset during

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

the spring data refresh and will be reflected in next year's National Analysis where the
data for that reporting year are referenced.

Impact of Late Submissions and Revisions on the National Analysis

To assess the impact of late submissions and revisions on the TRI National Analysis, the 2019
TRI data available in October 2021 were compared to the data that were available a year
earlier, which were used to develop the 2019 TRI National Analysis. The difference between
these two datasets is due to facilities that submitted late or revised TRI reporting forms. With
the updated data, waste managed quantities are slightly higher and release quantities are
slightly lower than originally reported: releases are 0.3% lower and waste managed is 0.2%
higher than was shown in the 2019 TRI National Analysis.

Quick Facts for 2020

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis

www .epa. gov/ trinationa lana Ivsis/
February 2022

2020 TRI Quick Facts

Production-Related Waste Managed: $ -

28.3 billion lb -.mi

Eiwrgy

ReeoiBiy;

2.86

billion lb

v., Treatment:

K 700

Di sposal or Other Releases:
3,09 billion lb

TRI Facilities:
21,022

Water:

0.10 billon lb

Total:

3.04 billon lb

fowl

Total Disposal
or Other
Releases

Air:

0.55 bllion l>

Land:

1.05 bilion lb

Off-site:
0.35 bilion lb

On-site:
2.60 bilion K>

In this figure, the value for "Disposal or Other Releases" in the production-related waste
managed pie chart (3.08 billion lb) is greater than the value for "Total Disposal or Other
Releases" (3.04 billion lb). There are several reasons that these quantities differ slightly,
including:

• Double counting. Total disposal or other releases (3.04 billion pound value in the figure)
removes "double counting" that occurs when a facility reports transfers of TRI chemicals in
waste to another TRI-reporting facility. For example, when Facility A transfers a chemical off
site for disposal to Facility B, Facility A reports the chemical as transferred off site for
disposal while Facility B reports the same chemical as disposed of on site. In processing the
data, the TRI Program recognizes that this is the same quantity of the chemical and

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

includes it only once in the total disposal or other releases metric. The production-related
waste managed metric in TRI, however, considers all instances where the TRI chemical in
waste is managed (first as a quantity sent off site for disposal and next as a quantity
disposed of on site), and reflects both the off-site transfer and the on-site disposal.
Typically, double counting accounts for most of the difference between the two release
quantities in the 2020 TRI Quick Facts figure.

• Non-production related waste. Non-production-related waste refers to TRI chemical
waste that result from one-time events, rather than standard production activities. These
events may include remedial actions, catastrophic events, or other events not associated
with normal production processes. Non-production-related waste is included in a facility's
total disposal or other releases but is not included in its production-related waste managed.

For more information on TRI, the chemicals and industry sectors it covers, the reporting
requirements, and to access TRI data, visit the TRI website.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Pollution Prevention and Waste Management

Each year, the EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program receives information from more
than 21,000 facilities on the quantities of TRI-listed chemicals they recycled, combusted for
energy recovery, treated for destruction, and disposed of or otherwise released both on and off
site as part of their normal operations. These quantities are collectively referred to as
production-related, waste .managed.

Looking at production-related waste managed over
time helps track facilities' progress in reducing the
amount of chemical waste generated and in
adopting waste management practices that are
preferable to disposing of or otherwise releasing
waste into the environment.

Pollution prevention (P2) is an essential component
of sustainable manufacturing practices. EPA
encourages facilities to first reduce or eliminate the
use of TRI-listed chemicals and the creation of
chemical waste through source reduction, or P2, activities such as material substitutions and
process modifications. For waste that is generated, the preferred management method is
recycling, followed by combustion for energy recovery, treatment, and, as a last resort, disposal
or other release of the chemical waste into the environment in a safe manner. This order of
preference is consistent with the national policy established by the Pollution Prevention Act of
1990. and is illustrated in the graphic above.

2020 Highlights

• TRI facilities implemented 2,779 new source reduction activities to reduce pollution at its source.

• Facilities managed 28.3 billion pounds of TRI chemical waste, 89% of which was not released
due to preferred waste management practices such as recycling.

• Production-related waste managed increased by 5.0 billion pounds (22%) since 2011, driven by
a 6.6-billion-pound (76%) increase in recycling.

TRI Data Considerations

As with any dataset, there are several factors to consider when using the TRI data. Key factors
associated with data used in the National Analysis are summarized in the Introduction. For more
information see Factors to Consider When Using Toxics Release Inventory Data.

Waste Management Hierarchy

Source Reduction

Recycling

Energy Recovery
Treatment

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Source Reduction Activities

Facilities are required to report new source reduction activities that they initiated or fully
implemented during the reporting year. Source reduction (P2) activities eliminate or reduce the
use of TRI-listed chemicals and the creation of chemical waste. Other waste management
practices, such as recycling and treatment, refer to how chemical waste is managed after it is
created and are not source reduction activities.

Source reduction information can help facilities learn from each other's best practices and
potentially lead to better environmental stewardship and implementation of more P2 actions.
For more information, see the TRI Source Reduction Reporting Fact Sheet.

Source Reduction Activities Reported, 2020

Good Operating Practices
Process Modifications

¦ Spill and Leak Prevention
Raw Material Modifications

¦ Product Modifications

¦ Inventory Control

¦ Cleaning and Degreasing

¦ Surface Preparation and
Finishing

Note: Facilities report their source reduction activities by selecting from a list of 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.

• In 2020, 1,188 facilities (6% of all facilities that reported to TRI) implemented a
combined 2,779 new source reduction activities for 176 chemicals and chemical
categories.

• For each chemical form submitted, facilities select from 49 types of source reduction
activities across the eight categories shown in the graph. The most reported source
reduction category is Good Operating Practices.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

o For example, a motor vehicle parts manufacturer reduced the amount of nickel
waste produced by implementing quality improvement procedures to reduce
manufacturing defects. I"Click to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• Facilities also report the methods by which they identified the source reduction
opportunities. In 2020, the most reported methods were participative team management
and internal pollution prevention audits.

Additional Resources

• See the TRI P2 Data Overview Factsheet for more information on source reduction
reporting in recent years.

• Note that facilities may have implemented source reduction activities in earlier years that
are ongoing or have been completed. To see details about these activities, use the TRI
P2 Search Tool.

• Facilities interested in exploring source reduction opportunities can reach out to their
EPA Regional P2 Coordinator to arrange a free or subsidized P2 assessment with a P2
expert. Visit the P2 Resources for Business webpaae for more information.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Source Reduction Activities by Chemical and industry
Source Reduction Activities by Chemical

This figure shows the chemicals with the highest source reduction reporting rates over the last
five years by the type of activity.

Source Reduction Activities by Chemical, 2016-2020

Good Operating Practices Process Modifications

¦ Spill and Leak Prevention ¦ Raw Material Modifications

¦ Inventory Control ¦ Product Modifications

¦ Surface Preparation and Finishing ¦ Cleaning and Degreasing

700

600

T3
0J

4->
1—

~ 500

o
<
c

~ 400

o
3
~G

0>
ai

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

• Chemicals with the highest source reduction reporting rates included styrene, /7-butyl
alcohol, antimony and antimony compounds, N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), and
dichloromethane (DCM, also known as methylene chloride).

• The type of source reduction activities implemented for these chemicals varied
depending on the chemicals' characteristics and how they are used. For example:

o Process Modifications, including optimizing reaction conditions and modifying
equipment, layout, or piping, can help reduce the amount of solvents such as
dichloromethane (DCM) and /7-butyl alcohol needed for a process.

o Raw Material Modifications include the use of alternative materials in the
manufacturing process, such as replacing styrene, a chemical used to make
plastics, and replacing antimony compounds, which are used in electronics,
batteries, and as a component of flame retardants.

o Inventory Control includes activities to reduce excess stores of chemicals,
reducing waste from disposal of expired materials. Chemicals such as styrene
may degrade over time, especially when exposed to heat, light, or air.

Facilities may also report additional details about their source reduction activities in an optional
text field of the TRI reporting form.

Examples of optional source reduction information for 2020:

• Styrene: A plastic products manufacturer reduced styrene waste by purchasing
materials from their vendor with lower styrene content than their previous product.

TCIick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• Antimony and antimony compounds: A plastic products manufacturer changed
production schedules to reduce the amount of antimony scrap produced during product
changeovers. I"Click to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• /7-Butyl alcohol: A kitchen cabinet manufacturer eliminated use of a solvent-based
stain which contained /7-butyl alcohol and switched to a water-based stain. I"Click to view
facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

You can compare facilities' waste management methods and trends for any TRI chemical bv
using the TRI P2 Search Tool.

-------
>—| j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

Source Reduction Activities by industry

This figure shows the industries with the highest source reduction reporting rates over the last
five years by the types of activities these sectors implemented.

1,400

1,200

Source Reduction Activities by Industry, 2016-2020

Good Operating Practices ¦ Process Modifications

I Spill and Leak Prevention ¦ Raw Material Modifications

I Inventory Control ¦ Product Modifications

I Surface Preparation and Finishing ¦ Cleaning and Degreasing

tj 1,000
<

'+J

u
3
T3
CD
DC

CD
U
&_
3
O

CD
-Q

£
3

800

600

400

200

Plastics and Rubber

Computers and
Electronic Products

Miscellaneous
Manufacturing

Furniture
Manufacturing

Printing

Note: 1) Limited to industries with at least 100 source reduction activities reported from 2016 to 2020. 2) Facilities report their
source reduction activities by selecting from a list of 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.

From 2016 to 2020:

• The five industry sectors with the highest source reduction reporting rates were plastics
and rubber products, computers and electronic products, miscellaneous manufacturing
(e.g., medical equipment), furniture manufacturing, and printing.

• For most sectors, Good Operating Practices was the most frequently reported type of
source reduction activity. Other commonly reported source reduction activities varied by
sector. For example, computers and electronic products manufacturers frequently

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

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 activities, as
shown in the following examples.

Examples of optional source reduction information for 2020:

• Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing: A plastic products manufacturer
reduced its ethylbenzene waste by replacing ethylbenzene in paints and solvents with a
more environmentally friendly option. I"Click to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search
Tool!

• Miscellaneous Manufacturing: A surgical and medical instrument manufacturer
reduced nitric acid waste by implementing software improvements to reduce downtime.
fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• Furniture Manufacturing: A wood cabinet manufacturer replaced a line of colors with
new colors which contain little to no xylene compared with the old line. fClick to view
facility details in the TRI P2 Search 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.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Green Chemistry Activities

Green chemistry is the design of chemical products that are safer and processes that use safer
inputs, minimal energy and are efficient (i.e., minimize the creation of waste). In the waste
management hierarchy, green chemistry is one way to achieve source reduction. Advancements
in green chemistry allow industry to prevent pollution at its source by, for example, designing or
modifying manufacturing processes to optimize use of resources and reduce the creation of TRI
chemical waste.

Six of the TRI source reduction codes facilities can choose from are specific to green chemistry
activities, although green chemistry practices may also fit under other codes. This figure shows
the chemicals where facilities implemented green chemistry practices at the highest rates over
the last five years by sector. Several examples follow the figure.

Green Chemistry Activities by Industry, 2016-2020

TS
0)

VI
0J

•| 60

'+¦»
u
<

£• 50
'£

J! 40

a> 30
15

4—

Methanol

Zinc

Lead

Toluene

Ammonia

Chemical Manufacturing
I Plastics and Rubber

Fabricated Metals
Food Manufacturing

I Transportation Equipment
All others

Note: In this figure, the metals (zinc and lead) are combined with their metal compounds, although metals and compounds of the
same metal are listed separately on the TRI list.

• Since 2016, facilities have reported 1,011 green chemistry activities for 109 TRI
chemicals and chemical categories.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

o Green chemistry activities were reported most frequently for methanol, zinc

and zinc compounds, lead and lead compounds, toluene, and ammonia,
o The chemical manufacturing and fabricated metals manufacturing sectors
reported the highest number of green chemistry activities.

• 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 An adhesives manufacturer removed methanol from most of its product
formulations by replacing it with another, not TRI-reportable, chemical. I"Click
to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• Fabricated metal producers and transportation equipment manufacturers applied green
chemistry techniques to reduce or eliminate their use of metals. For example:

o A metal anodizing, plating, and polishing facility installed an electronic Key
Performance Indicator board to monitor cycle time and reduce the amount of
zinc used per cycle. I"Click to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

Additional Resources

Source reduction activities such as green chemistry activities are the preferred way to reduce
the creation of chemical wastes. These resources have more information on green chemistry:

• EPA's TRI Toxics Tracker: green chemistry examples for a specific chemical and/or
industry.

• EPA's Green Chemistry program: information about green chemistry and EPA's efforts to
facilitate its adoption.

• EPA's Safer Choice program: 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 Toxics Release Inventory CTRI) in
Tracking Implementation and Environmental Impact of Industrial Green Chemistry
Practices in the United States.

-------
>—| j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

Reported Barriers to Source Reduction

Facilities also have the option to inform EPA of barriers that prevented them from implementing
new source reduction activities. Analyzing the barriers to source reduction reported by facilities
helps identify where more research is needed, for example, to address technological challenges
or develop viable alternatives. It may also allow for better communication between those that
have knowledge of source reduction practices and those that are seeking additional assistance.
This figure shows the types of barriers facilities reported for metals and for all other (non-
metal) TRI chemicals.

Barriers to Source Reduction Reported for Metals and All Other Chemicals,

2016-2020

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
£ 40%

Ol
(J

V 30%

4->
I—

20%
10%
0%

Metals

I Source Reduction Unsuccessful
Regulatory Barriers
I Reduction Not Technically Feasible
I Other Barriers
I No Known Substitutes

Non-metals

I Technical Information Needed
I Insufficient Capital
I Product Quality Concerns
I Further Source Reduction Not Feasible

Note: Facilities have the option to report barriers to source reduction by selecting from nine codes. These codes are defined in
the TRI Reporting Forms and Instructions.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

From 2016 to 2020:

• Facilities reported barriers to implementing source reduction for 329 chemicals and
chemical categories.

• The barrier no known substitutes was the most frequently reported barrier for both
metals and 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 why they could not
implement source reduction activities. Examples include:

o An iron and steel mill reported that mercury is contained in trace quantities in the
scrap used for steel production and no equivalent substitutes are available.[Click
to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

o An organic chemical manufacturer reported that chromium is a component of a
catalyst that does not currently have a viable alternative based on process
limitations. \Click to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• Further source reduction not feasible was the next most common barrier for both metals
and non-metals. Facilities select this barrier code when additional reductions do not
appear feasible. For example:

o A glass container manufacturer reported that it is already maximizing the use of
recycled glass, or cullet, to reduce lead-containing waste and lead emissions
from production, and that further reductions are not feasible. fClick to view
facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• You can view source reduction barriers for any TRI chemical bv using the TRI P2 Search
Tool.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management

Facilities report the quantities of TRI-listed chemicals they dispose of or otherwise release into
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 10-year
trend in these quantities, collectively referred to as production-related, waste .managed.

« 25

-o

O 20

M-

w 1 c

E 15
o

" 10
5
0

Production-Related Waste Managed

-I
3"
O

15 |

3
Q_

w
O

10 J

ami

mummuumuuu0

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

M Disposal or Other Releases Treatment Energy Recovery Recycling —•—Facilities

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Since 2011, production-related waste managed increased by 5.0 billion pounds (22%),
driven by increased recycling.

o Disposal and other releases decreased by 1.1 billion pounds (-27%).

o Treatment decreased by 793 million pounds (-11%).

o Energy recovery increased by 298 million pounds (12%).

o Recycling increased by 6.6 billion pounds (76%), a trend largely driven by

several facilities that each reported recycling one billion pounds or more annually
in recent years.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

• The number of facilities that report to TRI has declined by 4% since 2011. 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 to
below the reporting thresholds.

• Note that the 2020 TRI data reflect chemical waste management activities that occurred
during calendar year 2020, which may have been impacted by the COVID-19 public
health emergency, which began in the U.S. in early 2020.

Facilities report both on- and off-site waste management. The following chart shows the relative
quantities of on-site and off-site waste management methods for 2020.

On-site and Off-site Waste Managed, 2020

23%

10%

47%

I Off-site Recycling
I On-site Recycling
Off-site Energy Recovery
I On-site Energy Recovery
Off-site Treatment
On-site Treatment
Off-site Releases
I On-site Releases

For 2020, 88% of production-related waste was managed on site.

• Most production-related waste managed off site is recycled. Most of this recycling is
reported by the primary and fabricated metals sectors. Facilities in these sectors often
send scrap metal off site for recycling.

• The 2020 distribution of waste managed on site and off site is similar to previous years.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
^¦^ LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management by Chemical and Industry
Waste Managed by Chemical

This figure shows the TRI chemicals that were managed as waste in the greatest quantities
from 2011 to 2020.

Production-Related Waste Managed by Chemical

¦ Cumene

Dichloromethane

Methanol

¦ Toluene

¦ n-Hexane

Zinc

¦ Ethylene

¦ Hydrochloric Acid

¦ Lead

¦ All Others

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Note: 1) For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented. 2) In this
figure, the metals (lead and zinc) are combined with their metal compounds, although metals and compounds of the same metal
are listed separately on the TRI list.

From 2011 to 2020:

• Facilities reported production-related waste managed for more than 500 chemicals and
chemical categories from 2011 to 2020. The chart above shows the nine chemicals that
had the largest quantities of production related waste. Together, management of these
chemicals represents 53% of the total production-related waste quantities reported to
TRI.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

• Of the chemicals shown above, facilities reported increased quantities of waste managed
for: cumene, methanol, dichloromethane (methylene chloride), toluene, ethylene, and n-
hexane.

o Waste managed of ethylene increased by 471 million pounds (47%).

o Dichloromethane waste managed increased over 10-fold, due to 2 facilities that
started recycling large quantities of the chemical, one starting in 2013 and the
other starting in 2018.

o Cumene recycling increased over 20-fold, mostly driven by one facility reporting
recycling over 3.4 billion pounds of cumene annually from 2014 to 2020. fClick to
view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

o /7-Hexane waste managed increased by 630 million pounds (78%) mostly driven
by one soybean processing facility which has reported more than 750 million
pounds of /7-hexane recycling annually since 2012. fClick to view facility details in
the TRI P2 Search Tool

o Methanol waste managed increased by 12.6 million pounds (1%)

o Toluene waste managed increased by 51.8 million pounds (4%)

From 2019 to 2020:

• Quantities of TRI chemical waste decreased for numerous chemicals, including:

o Ethylene decreased by 305 million pounds (-17%)

o Lead and lead compounds decreased by 237 million pounds (-20%)

o Toluene decreased by 214 million pounds (-13%)

o Zinc and zinc compounds decreased by 144 million pounds (-11%)

o Hydrochloric acid decreased by 144 million pounds (-14%)

o Methanol decreased by 92 million pounds (-4%)

• Quantities of TRI chemical waste managed increased for other chemicals including:

o Dichloromethane waste increased by 130 million pounds (4%)
o /7-Hexane increased by 100 million pounds (8%)

• Quantities of cumene waste managed remained about the same (<1% change).

-------
>—| j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

Waste Managed by Industry

This figure shows the industry sectors that managed the most TRI chemical waste from 2011 to
2020.

Production-Related Waste Managed by Industry

Chemical Manufacturing
I Metal Mining
Electric Utilities

Petroleum Products Manufacturing

I Primary Metals
I Food Manufacturing
I Paper Manufacturing
I All Others

II III III II

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• The percent contribution of each of the top sectors to production-related waste
managed has remained relatively constant since 2011 with the exception of chemical
manufacturing, which accounted for 39% of all production-related waste managed in
2011 and increased to 57% in 2020.

• Three of the sectors shown in the graph increased their quantity of waste managed:

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

o Chemical manufacturing increased by 6.9 billion pounds (79%)
o Food manufacturing increased by 700 million pounds (58%)
o Petroleum products manufacturing increased by 260 million pounds (27%)

• 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
differences in the composition of waste rock.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Industry sectors that reported the greatest changes in waste management quantities
were:

o Chemical manufacturing decreased by 1.1 billion pounds (-7%)

o Petroleum products manufacturing decreased by 556 million pounds (-29%),
mostly driven by decreases in quantities of hydrogen sulfide treated. Note that
hydrogen sulfide was not reported prior to reporting year 2012 and is not
included in the chart above.

o Food manufacturing increased by 452 million pounds (31%)

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Non-Production-Related Waste

Non-production-related waste refers to quantities of Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) chemicals
disposed of or released, or transferred off site for disposal, treatment, energy recovery, or
recycling, as the result of one-time events rather than due to standard production activities.
These events may include remedial actions, catastrophic events such as natural disasters, or
other one-time events not associated with normal production processes. Non-production-related
waste is included in a facility's total disposal or other releases but is not included in its
production-related waste managed. The following graph shows the quantities of non-
production-related waste reported to TRI for 2020.

Non-Production-Related Waste Managed by Industry, 2020

5.33 million pounds

• For 2020, 479 facilities reported a total of 5.3 million pounds of one-time, non-
production-related releases of TRI chemicals. This represents 0.02% of total waste
managed in 2020.

• Non-production-related waste from all facilities has been below 20 million pounds every
year since 2011, except for 2013 when one facility reported a one-time release of 193
million pounds.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Waste Managed by Parent Company

Facilities that report to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) provide information about their
parent company. For TRI reporting purposes, the parent company is the highest-level company
located in the United States.

Waste Managed by Parent Company

This figure shows the parent companies whose facilities reported the most production-related
waste managed for 2020. Facilities outside of the manufacturing sector, such as electric utilities
and coal and metal mines, are not included in this chart because those facilities' activities do
not lend themselves to the same types or degree of source reduction opportunities as the
activities at manufacturing facilities.

Note that these manufacturing facilities manage most of their waste through EPA's preferred
waste management methods-recycling, energy recovery, or treatment-rather than releasing it
into the environment.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Production-Related Waste Managed by Parent Company, 2020

I I I

Advansix Inc

Sabic US Holdings LP

Incobrasa Industries Ltd

Dow Inc

¦II

Syngenta Corp

Westlake Chemical Corp
Koch Industries Inc

¦II
I HI

Ashland LLC

Honeywell International Inc

Marathon Petroleum Corp

!¦

0 12 3 4

Billions of Pounds

¦ Disposal or Other Releases Treatment

Energy Recovery ¦ Recycling

Notes: 1) This figure uses EPA's standardized parent company names. 2) To view facility counts by parent company, hover 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
reported a comparable quantity of production-related waste managed.

Four of these parent companies reported implementing new source reduction activities in 2020.
Some reported additional (optional) descriptive information about their source reduction
activities. For example, a Honeywell International Inc. facility trains and qualifies manufacturing
employees on manufacturing processes and chemical use to conserve chemicals and sustain
product quality. I"Click to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Source Reduction Activities by Parent Company

This figure shows the parent companies whose facilities implemented the most source reduction
activities for 2020. Facilities outside of the manufacturing sector, such as electric utilities and
coal and metal mines, are not included in this chart because those facilities' activities do not
lend themselves to the same source reduction opportunities as the activities at manufacturing
facilities.

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.

Source Reduction Activities for Top Parent Companies, 2020

Silgan Holdings Inc
Axalta Coating Systems LLC
Berkshire Hathaway Inc
PBF Energy Inc
Nucor Corp
Koch Industries Inc
Lyondellbasell Industries
Valmont Industries Inc
Superior Essex Inc
CCL Industries Corp
Dave Steel Co Inc
Ergon Inc

10 20 30 40 50 60

Number of Source Reduction Activities Reported

Good Operating Practices
I Spill and Leak Prevention
i Inventory Control
l Cleaning and Degreasing

Process Modifications
Raw Material Modifications
I Product Modifications
l Surface Preparation and Finishing

Notes: 1) This figure uses EPA's standardized parent company names. 2) To view facility counts by parent company, hover over the
bar graph.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

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 the facilities in these parent companies submitted additional optional text in their TRI
reporting forms that describes their pollution prevention activities. For example, a plastics
material and resin manufacturing facility owned by Berkshire Hathaway Inc. electropolished
thermowells to smooth the surfaces and prevent product build-up that would become waste.
fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool!

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.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Releases of Chemicals

Release or disposal of chemical waste into the environment occurs in several ways. Facilities
may release chemical waste directly into the air or water or dispose of it on land, or ship
(transfer) wastes that contain Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) chemicals to an off-site location
for disposal. Release and disposal practices are subject to a variety of regulatory requirements
and restrictions designed to minimize potential exposure or harm to human health and the
environment.

Facilities are required to report the quantities of TRI-listed
chemicals they release into the environment. Evaluating these
release data helps to:

• identify potential concerns in communities,

• better understand potential risks chemical releases may
pose, and

• identify opportunities for engagement or technical
assistance to mitigate potential associated risks.

It is important, however, to understand that the quantity of
releases is not necessarily an indicator of health impacts posed
by the chemicals. Potential risks to human health from releases
of TRI chemicals are determined by many factors, as discussed
in the section Hazard and Potential Risk of TRI Chemicals.

Use the interactive chart below to explore the 2020 TRI

chemical releases by industry sector, chemical, or state/territory. Visit the full TRI National
Analysis data visualization dashboard to explore even more information about releases of
chemicals.

Helpful Concepts

What is a release?

In the context of TRI, a "release"
of a chemical generally refers to a
chemical that is emitted to the air,
discharged to water, or disposed
of in some type of land disposal
unit. Most TRI releases happen
during routine production
operations at facilities. To learn
more about what EPA is doing to
help limit the release of toxic
chemicals into the environment,
see the EPA laws and regulations
webpaae.

-------
kvEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis

www .eoa, oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
February 2022

No selections applied

v; Industry

Chemical

State/Territory

Off-site Disposal
or Other
Releases:
12%

Total Disposal or Other Releases, 2020

3.0 billion pounds

On-site Land
Disposal:
64%

On-site Air
Releases:
18%

On-site Surface
Water
Discharges:
6%

2020 Highlights

• Facilities released 3.0 billion pounds of TRI chemicals, a 27% decrease since 2011.

• Air releases decreased 34% from 2011 to 2020, driven by reduced air emissions from electric
utilities.

• 2020 data include data on newly-added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Facilities
submitted data for 43 distinct PFAS.

Mote that the 2020 TRI data reflect chemical waste management activities that occurred during
calendar year 2020, which may have been impacted by the COVID-19 public health emergency
as discussed in the Introduction.

TRI Data Considerations

-------
>—| j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

Releases Trend

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in total disposal or other releases of TRI chemicals
(also referred to as "total releases"). Many factors can affect trends in releases at facilities,
including production rates, management practices, the composition of raw materials used, and
the installation of control technologies.

o 3

Total Disposal or Other Releases

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

On-site Air Releases
i On-site Land Disposal
•Reporting Facilities

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

20 2

10 =¦

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total disposal or other releases of TRI chemicals decreased by 27%.

o Reduced land disposal from metal mines and electric utilities, as well as reduced
air emissions from electric utilities were the most significant contributors to the
decline.

• Air releases decreased by 34%, on-site land disposal decreased by 27%, surface water
discharges decreased by 13%, and off-site disposal decreased by 16%.

• The number of facilities that reported to TRI declined by 4%.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Total disposal or other releases decreased by 10%, mainly driven by a 10% decrease in
land disposal.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

• Quantities released into the air decreased by 9%, quantities transferred off site for
disposal decreased by 18%, and quantities discharged into surface water decreased by
4%.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Releases by Chemical and Industry

Releases by Chemical

Release quantities of 8 chemicals made up 74% of total releases.

Total Disposal and Other Releases by Chemical, 2020
3.04 billion pounds

Zinc:

18%

All Others:
26%

Ammonia:
5%

Manganese:
6%

Arsenic:
10%

Nitrate Compounds:
10%

Note: 1) In this figure, metals are combined with their metal compounds, although metals and compounds of the same metal are
listed separately on the TRI list (e.g., lead is listed separately from lead compounds).

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Releases by Industry

The metal mining sector accounted for 45% of releases (1.37 billion pounds), which were
primarily in the form of on-site land disposal. Learn more about this sector in the Metal Mining
sector profile.

Total Disposal or Other Releases by Industry, 2020
3.04 billion pounds

All Others: 10%

Hazardous Waste
Management: 4%

Paper
Manufacturing: 5%

Food Manufacturing:

Electric Utilities: 7%

Primary Metals: 8%

Metal Mining: 45%

Chemical
Manufacturing: 16%

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis

www .eoa, oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
February 2022

Hazard and Potential Risk of TRI Chemicals

The chemical release data collected and made publicly available in the Toxics Release Inventory
(TRI) are reported in pounds, except for dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, which are reported
in grams. The quantity of releases is not necessarily an indicator of risk to humans or the
environment because TRI data generally cannot indicate the extent of exposure to chemicals.
However, TRI data can be used as a starting point to evaluate exposure and potential risks to
human health and the environment.

Human health risks that may result from exposure to chemicals are determined by many
factors, as shown in the figure below. The TRI database contains some of this information,
including what chemicals are released from reporting facilities; the amount of each chemical
released; and the environmental medium to which they are released.

Overview of Factors that Influence Risk

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

It is important to keep in mind that while the TRI database includes information on many toxic
chemicals used by industry, it does not cover all facilities, all chemicals, or all sources of
releases of TRI chemicals in communities. Other potential sources of TRI chemicals or other
chemicals, such as those in exhaust from cars and trucks, chemicals in consumer products, and
chemical residues in food and water, are not tracked by TRI.

To provide context on the relative hazards and potential for risks posed by releases of TRI
chemicals by facilities, the TRI Program uses EPA's Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
fRSED model.

The EPA developed the screening-level RSEI model to
characterize trends in the potential hazards and relative
potential risks of releases reported to TRI, and to
compare and help identify geographic areas, industry
sectors, and chemical releases that may be associated
with significant potential human health risks. RSEI
incorporates information from the TRI together with
factors such as the chemical's fate and transport
through the environment, each chemical's relative
toxicity, and potential human exposure. RSEI model
results can be used to help establish priorities for further
investigation and to look at changes in potential human
health impacts over time.

RSEI enables the comparision of relative risk-related results by calculating numerical values that
reflect the potential risk-related impacts of TRI chemicals. RSEI produces hazard estimates
(RSEI Hazard) and risk scores (RSEI Score) that represent potential harm and relative potential
risks to human health following exposure to a TRI chemical:

• RSEI Hazard estimates consist of the pounds released multiplied by the chemical's
toxicity weight. They do not include any exposure modeling or population estimates.

• A RSEI Score is an estimate of relative potential human health risk. It is a unitless
value that accounts for the magnitude of the release quantity of a chemical, the fate and
transport of the chemical throughout the environment, the size and locations of
potentially exposed populations, and the chemical's inherent toxicity.

Both RSEI Score and RSEI Hazard provide greater insight on potential impacts than
consideration of TRI release quantities alone. More information on RSEI and its applications are
available at EPA's RSEI website.

Helpful Concepts

The hazard of a chemical is its
inherent ability to cause an adverse
effect on health (e.g., cancer, birth
defects).

Exposure is how a person comes into
contact with a chemical (e.g.,
inhalation, ingestion) and can be
described in terms its magnitude (how
much), frequency (how often), and
duration (how long).

The likelihood that a toxic chemical
will cause an adverse health effect is
often referred to as risk. Risk is a
function of hazard and exposure.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Hazard Trend

RSEI Hazard estimates provide insight on the potential human health impacts of TRI chemicals
beyond consideration of release quantities alone. The following graph shows the 10-year trend
in calculated RSEI Hazard values compared to the trend in the corresponding pounds of TRI
chemicals released or transferred that are modeled using RSEI.

1 f>

RSEI Hazard and Corresponding Releases

1,600

1,400 .1

_LO

"l/P

c 14

Q. 12
¦a

£ 10

9^ Q

1,200 ii

i/T

1,000 1

800 S.

600 :§

400 o.

tn
-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Risk-Screening Trend

EPA's RSEI model also produces relative risk-related "scores". RSEI Score is a descriptor of
relative potential risks to human health from exposure to TRI chemicals following release of the
chemicals from facilities. RSEI Scores for a given year can be compared to other RSEI Scores
from other years. RSEI Scores are different from RSEI Hazard estimates in that they consider
the location of the chemical release or transfer, what happens to the chemical in the
environment, and the route and extent of potential human exposure. The following graph
shows the 10-year trend in calculated RSEI Score values compared to the trend in the
corresponding pounds of TRI chemicals released or transferred.

RSEI Score and Corresponding Releases

600

tn
c
o

- 500

~ 400

~ 300

2! 200

I >00

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015 2016
Year

2017

2018

2019

2020

1,600

' to

1,400 .2
1,200 1
1,000 "I

CuO
c

£
O
Q.

800
600
400
200

Air Releases (Score) I

Transfers to POTWs (Score) I

•Corresponding Pounds Released or Transferred

I Water Releases (Score)
I Transfers to Incineration (Score)

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented. RSEI Score
values and corresponding pounds include only on-site air releases (Air Releases), on-site water releases (Water Releases), transfers
to POTWs, and transfers to incineration.

From 2011 to 2020:

• The overall calculated RSEI Score values decreased by 46%, while their corresponding
pounds decreased by 19%. This indicates that TRI reporting facilities are not only
releasing or transferring fewer pounds of TRI chemicals for these activities but are
releasing proportionately fewer quantities of the more toxic TRI chemicals, and that
exposure to the chemicals has decreased. While RSEI Score does not describe what the

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

actual risks from these chemicals are to human health, the overall decreases in RSEI
Score indicates the that the overall risks, whatever they may be, have declined from
2011 to 2020.

• Of the types of releases modeled by RSEI, on-site air releases, by far, contributed the
most to the RSEI Score values.

o The decrease in RSEI Score values for on-site air releases was driven in part by

RSEI Dashboard

• Use the EPA's Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators fRSED EasvRSEI Dashboard to
view the national trend in RSEI Hazard and RSEI Score, or use the Dashboard's filter
capabilities to view other RSEI information for a specific chemical or location of interest.

large decreases in ethylene oxide from two facilities.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Air Releases

Emissions of TRI chemicals into the air continue to decline, driving decreased total releases.
These releases include both fugitive ajr.emjssipns. and stack air emissions.

This graph shows the 10-year trend in the pounds of chemicals released into the air. EPA
regulates emissions of chemicals into air under the Clean Air Act, which requires facilities that
are major sources of air pollutants to obtain and comply with an operating permit.

"D
C
3
O
Q.

900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

2011

Air Releases (Pounds Released) (§) Pounds Released

Fugitive Air Emissions ¦ Stack Air Emissions ( j RSEI Score

¦ ¦¦¦

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Releases into the air decreased by 34% (-277 million pounds).

o Since 2011, air releases of hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, hydrogen fluoride,
toluene, and methanol decreased by the greatest quantities.

o This decrease was driven by electric utilities due to: decreased emissions of
hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid; a shift from coal to other fuel sources (e.g.,
natural gas); and the installation of pollution control technologies at coal-fired
power plants.

¦ Note that only those electric utilities that combust coal or oil to generate
power for distribution into commerce are covered under TRI reporting
requirements. Therefore, electric utilities that shift from combusting coal

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

or oil to entirely using other fuel sources (such as natural gas) are not
required to report to TRI.

• Air releases of chemicals classified as carcinogens by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) also decreased; see the Air Releases of OSHA Carcinogens figure.

• For trends in air releases of other chemicals of special concern, including lead
and mercury, see the Chemicals of Special Concern section.

In 2020:

• The TRI chemicals released into the air in the largest quantities were ammonia and
methanol.

• Air releases of TRI chemicals decreased by 9% since 2019.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

This graph shows the 10-year trend in RSEI Scores for TRI air releases.

Air Releases (RSEI Score) O Released

(§) RSEI Score

600

C 500
o

^ 400
"wT

l/>

_0J

300

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Air Releases by Chemical

This pie chart shows which TRI chemicals were released into the air in the greatest quantities
during 2020.

On-site Air Releases by Chemical, 2020
549.65 million pounds

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding.

• Ammonia: Facilities that manufacture nitrogen-based fertilizers accounted for 44% of
the ammonia released to air during 2020.

• Methanol: The paper manufacturing sector released the most methanol to air.

• /7-Hexane: Air releases were primarily from food manufacturing facilities.

• Sulfuric acid and hydrochloric acid: In 2020, 78% of sulfuric acid and 28% of
hydrochloric acid air emissions were reported by facilities in the electric utilities sector.

Air Releases by Industry

This pie chart shows the TRI-covered industry sectors that reported the largest quantities of
TRI chemicals released into the air during 2020.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Air Releases by Industry, 2020
549.65 million pounds

All Others: 15%

Primary Metals:
4%

Plastics and
Rubber: 5%

Petroleum
Products
Manufacturing:

Food
Manufacturing

Electric Utilities:
11%

Chemical
Manufacturing:
30%

Paper
Manufacturing:
21%

• Facilities in the chemical manufacturing, paper manufacturing, and electric utility
sectors accounted for the largest releases of TRI chemicals to air during 2020.

o Chemical manufacturing: Air releases were mostly of ammonia (46%) and
ethylene (10%).

o Paper manufacturing: Air releases were primarily methanol (65%).
o Electric utilities: Air releases were mostly of sulfuric acid aerosols (62%).

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Water Releases

TRI chemicals released into streams or other water bodies are referred to as "water releases" or
"surface water discharges." They are regulated under the Clean Water Act and often require
permits under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System rNRDESI.

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in the pounds of TRI chemicals discharged into
water bodies.

Surface Water Discharges (Pounds Released)

250

200

150

100

@Pounds Released

- oRSE| score

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015 2016
Year

2017

2018

2019

2020

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Discharges of TRI chemicals into surface water decreased by 29 million pounds (-13%).

Most of this decline was due to reduced releases of nitrate compounds.

o Nitrate compounds are often formed as byproducts during wastewater treatment
processes such as when nitric acid is neutralized, or when nitrification takes
place to meet standards under EPA's effluent guidelines. More nitrate compounds
are released into the water than any other TRI chemical.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

In 2020:

• Nitrate compounds alone accounted for 91% of total TRI water releases.

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in RSEI Scores for TRI chemicals directly released
into water bodies.

Surface Water Discharges (RSEI Score) ,", pOUnds Released

30 (§) RSEI Score

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

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

• The biggest chemical contributors to the RSEI Scores for water releases from 2011 to
2020 were arsenic compounds and nitroglycerin.

• The increase from 2011 to 2012 was driven in part by increases in discharges of
hexachlorobenzene and nitroglycerin.

• For a complete, step-by-step description of how EPA's RSEI model derives and models
RSEI Score values from surface water discharges of TRI chemicals, see "Section 5.4:
Modeling Surface Water Releases" in Chapter 5 ("Exposure and Population Modeling") of
EPA's Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators fRSED Methodology.

• For general information on how RSEI Scores are estimated, see Hazard and Potential
Risk of TRI Chemicals.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Water Releases by Chemical

This pie chart shows which TRI-listed chemicals were released into water bodies in the largest
quantities during 2020.

Note: 1) In this chart, metals are combined with their metal compounds, although metals and compounds of the same metal are
listed separately on the TRI list (e.g., manganese is listed separately from manganese compounds). 2) Percentages do not sum to
100% due to rounding.

• Nitrate compounds accounted for 91% of
the total quantity of TRI chemicals
released to water in 2020. Nitrate
compounds dissolve in water and are
commonly formed as part of facilities' on-
site wastewater treatment processes. The
food manufacturing sector contributed
44% of total nitrate compound releases to
water, due to the treatment required for
biological materials in wastewater, such as
from meat processing facilities.

Water Releases by Chemical, 2020

193.61 million pounds

All Others ¦ Methanol ¦ Manganese

Ammonia ¦ Sodium Nitrite ¦ Zinc

Barium

What Are Nitrate Compounds?

Nitrate compounds are a group of
chemicals with relatively low toxicity to
humans, but in nitrogen-limited waters,
nitrates have the potential to cause
increased algal growth leading to
eutrophication in the aquatic
environment. See EPA's Nutrient
Pollution webpaae for more information
about the issue of eutrophication.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

• Methanol, manganese compounds, and ammonia were released in the next-largest
quantities, and, in terms of combined mass, accounted for 6% of the chemicals released
into water.

Water Releases by Industry

This pie chart shows the TRI-covered industry sectors that reported the largest quantities of
TRI chemicals released into water bodies during 2020.

Water Releases by Industry, 2020
193.61 million pounds

All Others: 12%

Paper
Manufacturing: 8%.

Chemical
Manufacturing: 12%.

Primary Metals: 13%

Food Manufacturing:
40%

Petroleum Products
Manufacturing: 15%

Facilities in the food manufacturing sector accounted for 40% of water releases of TRI
chemicals for 2020 and approximately one-third of annual water releases over the past
ten years.

o Nitrate compounds accounted for 99% of the total quantity of water releases
from the food manufacturing sector. Nitrate compounds are relatively less toxic
to humans than many other TRI chemicals discharged into surface waters but
are formed in large quantities by this sector during wastewater treatment
processes due to the high biological content of wastewater.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Land Disposal

Land disposal includes disposal of TRI chemicals in landfills, underground injection wells,
surface impoundments, or other types of containment. Land disposal of chemicals is often
regulated by EPA under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act fRCRAl. RCRA design
standards for landfills and surface impoundments include a double liner, a leachate collection
and removal system, and a leak detection system. Operators of these disposal units must also
comply with RCRA inspection, monitoring, and release response requirements.

This graph shows the 10-year trend in TRI chemicals disposed of to land on site at facilities.
The metal mining sector accounts for most of this disposal.

(§) Land Disposal, All Sectors

Land Disposal, Excluding Metal Mining

On-site Land Disposal

llllllllli

1111111111

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

¦ Surface Impoundments "Landfills i Underground Injection i All Other Land Disposal
Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2011 to 2020:

• On-site land disposal has fluctuated over the last ten years.

• The decreases since 2017 were driven primarily by decreases in TRI chemical quantities
disposed of on site to land by metal mines.

3,000

¦0 2,000

3
O
Q.

= 1,000

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• "All Other Land Disposal" in the figure includes
disposal to soil (land treatment/application farming)
and any other land disposal including the disposal of
TRI chemicals contained in waste rock at metal
mines.

Land releases from metal mines:

Trends in land disposal were largely driven by the metal
mining sector, which accounted for 70% of land disposal
quantities for 2020. Select the "Land Disposal, Excluding
Metal Mining" button to view the land disposal trend without
data from metal mines.

• The TRI chemicals disposed to land by metal mines
in 2020 were primarily zinc compounds (29%), lead
compounds (29%), and arsenic compounds (22%).

Metal mining facilities typically handle large volumes of
material. Besides production volume, one factor 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 TRI chemicals in ore qualify
for a concentration-based exemption from TRI reporting in one year but not in the next year or
vice versa.

Regulations require that waste rock, which contains TRI chemicals, be placed in engineered
piles, and may also require that waste rock piles, tailings impoundments, and heap leach pads
be stabilized and re-vegetated to provide for productive post-mining land use.

For more information on the mining industry, see the Metal Mining sector profile.

This graph shows the 10-year trend in on-site land disposal, excluding quantities reported by
the metal mining sector. The metal mining sector accounts for about 70% of the quantities of
TRI chemicals disposed to land in most years.

Helpful Concepts

What is underground injection?

Underground injection involves placing fluids
underground in porous formations through
wells. EPA regulates underground injection
through its Underground Injection Control
Program under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

What is a surface
impoundment?

Surface impoundments are natural or artificial
depressions, excavations, or diked areas used
to hold liquid waste. Construction of surface
impoundments must follow criteria including
having a double liner and leak detection
system. Surface impoundments are
sometimes regulated through the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

On-site Land Disposal Excluding Metal Mines

O Land Disposal, All Sectors

(§) Land Disposal, Excluding Metal Mining

1,000

800

o 600

400

200

WMmuEmwm

¦ 11111111

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

i Surface Impoundments "Landfills ¦ Underground Injection ¦ All Other Land Disposal

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total on-site land disposal for all industries other than metal mining was relatively
steady for most of the time period presented except for reductions in 2019 and 2020.

• The recent decrease in land disposal for industries other than metal mining was driven
by reduced releases to land reported by electric utilities. Land releases from electric
utilities have been steadily decreasing since 2014, but the decreases were larger for
2019 and 2020 than in other recent years.

o For 2011, the first year on this chart, electric utilities reported disposing of 284
million pounds of chemical waste to land, more than any other sector except
metal mining. For 2020, the sector reported 118 million pounds of land disposal,
a 58% reduction.

o Note that only those electric utilities that combust coal or oil to generate power
for distribution into commerce are covered under TRI reporting requirements.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Electric utilities that shift from combusting coal or oil to entirely using other fuel
sources (such as natural gas) are not required to report to TRI. For more
information on this sector, see the Electric Utilities sector profile.

In 2020:

• Excluding the quantities of TRI chemicals disposed of to land by metal mines, the
chemicals disposed of on site to land in the largest quantities were: barium and barium
compounds (15%), manganese and manganese compounds (13%), and zinc and zinc
compounds (11%).

• Excluding metal mines, most on-site land disposal quantities were reported by the
chemical manufacturing, electric utilities, primary metals, and hazardous waste
management sectors.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Land Disposal by Chemical & Industry
Land Disposal by Chemical

This pie chart shows the chemicals disposed of to land on site in the greatest quantities during
2020. The metal mining sector accounts for most of this disposal. To view the chemicals
disposed of to land by sectors other than metal mining, toggle to the "Land Disposal, Excluding
Metal Mining" chart.

(•) Land Disposal, All Sectors

On-Site Land Disposal by Chemical, 2020 JLand Disposal, Excluding Metal Mining
1.95 billion pounds

Arsenic: 16%

Note: In this chart, metals are combined with their metal compounds, although metals and compounds of the same metal are listed
separately on the TRI list (e.g., lead is listed separately from lead compounds).

The metal mining sector alone was responsible for 91% of the zinc, lead, and arsenic disposed
of to land in 2020. These 3 chemicals comprised 62% of the total quantities of TRI chemicals
released to land. Toggle to the "Land Disposal, Excluding Metal Mining" chart to see the
chemicals released in the greatest quantities by other sectors, which shows a wider array of
chemicals.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

This pie chart shows the chemicals disposed of to land on site in the greatest quantities during
2020, excluding quantities disposed of by facilities in the metal mining sector.

O Land Disposal, All Sectors
(§) Land Disposal, Excluding Metal Mining

On-Site Land Disposal Excluding Metal Mining, by

Chemical
585 million pounds

Barium: 15%

All Others: 36%

Ammonia: 5%

.Manganese: 13%

Lead: 6%

Zinc: 11%

Copper: 8%

Nitrate

Compounds 7%

• When the metal mining sector is excluded, a wider variety of chemicals contribute to
most of the land releases. Seven different chemicals, for example, comprised 64% of
land releases, as opposed to three chemicals comprising a comparable 62% of releases
when metal mining is included (as shown on the "Land Disposal, All Sectors" chart).

• Barium: Most land releases were from the electric utilities sector.

• Manganese: Most land releases were from the chemical manufacturing and primary
metals sectors.

Zinc: Most land releases were from the primary metals sector.

Land Disposal by Industry

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

This pie chart shows the TRI-covered industry sectors that reported the greatest quantities of
on-site land disposal of TRI chemicals during 2020.

On-site Land Disposal by Industry, 2020
1.95 billion pounds

Chemical
Manufacturing

Metal Mining 70%

Electric Utilities

Primary Metals

Hazardous Waste
Management 5%

All Others: 3%

Metal mines accounted for most of the TRI chemicals disposed of to land in 2020.

The relative contribution by each industry sector to on-site land disposal has not
changed considerably in recent years.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Chemicals of Special Concern

In this section, we take a closer look at some of the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) chemicals
that are persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) and are classified as chemicals of special
concern, including lead and lead compounds, mercury and mercury compounds, dioxin and
dioxin-like compounds.

PBTs are toxic, break down very slowly in the environment, and tend to build up in the tissue of
organisms throughout the food web. These organisms serve as food sources for other
organisms, including humans, that are sensitive to the toxic effects of PBT chemicals.

Reporting thresholds for the 16 chemicals and 5 chemical categories designated as PBTs on the
TRI chemical list are lower than for other TRI chemicals. Thresholds vary by chemical but range
from 10 pounds to 100 pounds for most PBTs, or 0.1 grams for dioxin and dioxin-like
compounds.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Lead Releases Trend

This graph shows the 10-year trend in the pounds of lead and lead compounds disposed of or
otherwise released by facilities in all TRI reporting industry sectors including metal mines,
manufacturing facilities, hazardous waste management facilities and electric utilities.

1,250

1,000

750

<4-

IS)

500

250

Total Disposal or Other Releases of
Lead and Lead Compounds

(§) All Sectors
Q Excluding Metal Mining

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

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

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Releases of lead and lead compounds fluctuated
between 2011 and 2020.

• Land disposal by metal mines drives the annual
lead and lead compound releases. For 2020, for
example, metal mines reported 88% of all releases of
was almost all land disposal.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Total releases of lead and lead compounds decreased by 28% (180 million pounds),
driven by a decrease in releases of lead compounds from the metal mining sector.

Learn more about lead

Visit EPA's lead homepage for more
information about lead and EPA's actions
to reduce lead exposures.

lead and lead compounds, which

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

This graph shows the 10-year trend in lead and lead compounds disposed of or otherwise
released, but excludes quantities reported by the metal mining sector.

1 All Sectors

(§) Excluding Metal Mining

T3
C
3
O
O.

c
o

Total Disposal or Other Releases of
Lead and Lead Compounds, Excluding Metal Mining

n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

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

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• For sectors other than metal mining, releases of lead and lead compounds fluctuated
between 2011 and 2020.

• Among sectors other than metal mining, most releases of lead and lead compounds
were from the hazardous waste management and primary metals sectors.

-------
>—| j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

Lead Air Releases Trend

This graph shows the 10-year trend in the pounds of lead and lead compounds released to air.

Air Releases of Lead and Lead Compounds

1,000

750

500

250

lllllll

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Fugitive Air Emissions ¦ Stack Air Emissions

From 2011 to 2020:

• Air releases of lead and lead compounds decreased by 46%. The primary metals and
electric utilities industry sectors have driven this decrease.

• The primary metals sector, which includes copper smelting and iron and steel
manufacturing, reported the greatest quantities of releases of lead and lead compounds
to air.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Air releases of lead and lead compounds decreased by 13%. The largest decreases in air
releases of lead and lead compounds were from the primary metals and plastics and
rubber products manufacturing sectors.

• In 2020, 37% of air releases of lead were from the primary metals industry sector.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Mercury Air Releases Trend

This graph shows the 10-year trend in the pounds of mercury and mercury compounds released
to air by facilities that reported to TRI.

Air Releases of Mercury and Mercury Compounds

100,000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Fugitive Air Emissions ¦ Stack Air Emissions

Learn more about mercury

Visit EPA's mercury homepage for more
information about mercury and EPA's actions
to reduce mercury exposures.

From 2011 to 2020:

• Releases of mercury and mercury compounds to air
decreased by 64%.

• Electric utilities drove the decline in mercury air
emissions, with an 88% reduction (-51,000
pounds). The decrease was driven by a shift from
coal to other fuel sources (e.g., natural gas) and by

the installation of pollution control technologies at coal-fired power plants.

o Note that only those electric utilities that combust coal or oil to generate power
for distribution into commerce are covered under TRI reporting requirements.
Therefore, electric utilities that shift from combusting coal or oil to entirely using
other fuel sources (such as natural gas) are not required to report to TRI.

From 2019 to 2020:

Releases of mercury and mercury compounds to air decreased by 7%.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• The primary metals sector, which includes iron and steel manufacturers, accounted for
37% of the air emissions of mercury and mercury compounds reported to TRI for 2020.
The electric utilities sector, which released the second-most mercury and mercury
compounds to air, accounted for 21% of these air emissions for 2020.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Dioxins Releases Trend

Dioxin and dioxin-like compounds ("dioxins") are persistent bioaccumulative toxic (PBT)
chemicals characterized by EPA as probable human carcinogens. Dioxins are the byproducts of
many forms of combustion and several industrial chemical
processes.

TRI requires facilities to report data on the 17 individual
members (congeners) that make up the TRI dioxin and dioxin-
like compounds category. While each of the dioxin congeners
causes the same toxic effects, they do so at different levels of
exposure because of their varying toxic potencies. As a result,
the mix of dioxins from one source can have a very different
toxic potency than the same total amount of a different mix of
dioxins from another source.

EPA accounts for the differences in toxic potency of the dioxin
congeners using Toxic Equivalency (TEQ) values. TEQs help the
public better understand the toxicity of dioxin releases and are useful when comparing releases
of dioxins from different sources or different time periods, where the mix of congeners may
vary.

This graph shows the trend in the grams of dioxin releases from 2011 to 2020. Note that the
dioxins chemical category is reported in grams while all other TRI chemicals are reported in
pounds.

Helpful Concepts

Toxic Equivalent Factor (TEF)

Each dioxin congener is assigned a TEF that
compares that compound's toxicity to the
most toxic dioxin in the category.

Toxic Equivalency (TEQ)

A TEQ is calculated by multiplying the
reported grams of each congener by its
corresponding TEF and summing the results,
referred to as grams-TEQ.

Learn more about dioxins.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Total Disposal or Other Releases, Dioxin
and Dioxin-like Compounds

120,000

80,000

to
UJ

40,000

llll|||lll

11 Si 1111

1,200

800

400 -

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

On-site Air Releases On-site Surface Water Discharges

i On-site Land Disposal Total Off-site Disposal or Other Releases

¦Grams-TEQ

From 2011 to 2020:

• Dioxin releases increased by 81%. Most of the overall increase can be attributed to
increased releases from two organic chemical manufacturing facilities and one
hazardous waste management facility.

o Toxicity equivalents (grams-TEQ) decreased by 12%, indicating that the overall
toxicity of dioxin releases decreased despite an increase in the quantity released.
This is due to changes in which dioxin congeners were released.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Releases of dioxins decreased by 5%, driven by decreased releases reported by a
smelting and refining facility and an organic chemical manufacturing facility.

o Toxicity equivalents (grams-TEQ) decreased by 31%. This is largely due to one
primary metal manufacturing facility reporting more dioxin toxicity-equivalents
than any other facility for 2019, but reported a 96% reduction in grams and 90%
reduction in grams-TEQ released for 2020.

• In 2020, most of the dioxin releases were disposed of on site to land (50%) or disposed
or otherwise released off site (48%).

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Dioxins Releases by Industry

The following two pie charts compare the TRI-covered industry sectors that reported the
greatest releases of dioxins in grams to those that reported the greatest releases of grams in
toxicity equivalents (grams-TEQ). Note that only data from those reporting forms that provided
the congener detail for calculating grams-TEQ are included in these charts.

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

Releases of Dioxin and Dioxin-like Compounds
by Industry, 2020

Grams

Grams-TEQ

All Others:

Hazardous Waste
Management:
27%

• Various industry sectors may dispose of or otherwise release very different mixes
of dioxin congeners.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• The chemical manufacturing industry accounted for 60% and the primary metals sector
for 13% of total grams of dioxins released.

• In terms of toxicity equivalents, however, the primary metals sector accounted for 46%
and the chemical manufacturing sector for 20% of the total grams-TEQ.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Carcinogens
Air Releases

Some chemicals that are reportable to the TRI Program are included on OSHA's list of
carcinogens. EPA refers to these chemicals as TRI OSHA carcinogens. These chemicals are
either known or believed to cause cancer in humans. A list of the TRI carcinogens can be found
in the TRI basis of OSHA carcinogens technical document. This graph shows the 10-year trend
in air releases of TRI OSHA carcinogens.

Air Releases of TRI OSHA Carcinogens

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

¦ Fugitive Air Emissions ¦ Stack Air Emissions

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Air releases of these carcinogens decreased by 9%.

• Air releases of many OSHA carcinogens decreased, with reductions in most sectors.
However, decreases were partially offset by increases in releases of styrene from the
plastics and rubber products manufacturing sector and the transportation equipment
manufacturing sector.

• In 2020, air releases of OSHA carcinogens consisted primarily of styrene (47% of the air
releases of all OSHA carcinogens), acetaldehyde (13%) and formaldehyde (8%).

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Ethylene Oxide Releases Trend

This section focuses on one of the TRI OSHA carcinogens, ethylene oxide. The figure below
presents the 10-year trend in releases of ethylene oxide as reported to TRI by about 115
facilities per year.

Releases of Ethylene Oxide

350,000
300,000

T3 250,000

2 200,000

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• From 2019 to 2020, releases of ethylene oxide
decreased across most sectors. Most individual
facilities also reported lower releases of ethylene
oxide from 2019 to 2020.

• Two chemical manufacturers in Texas reported
that they had large one-time (non-production-
related) releases of ethylene oxide to air in 2018
and 2019, driving the increase from 2017 to 2018
and the decrease from 2018 through 2020.

Learn More About
Ethylene Oxide

Ethylene oxide is a human carcinogen,
meaning that it is known to cause cancer
in humans. In 2021, EPA extended TRI
reporting requirements to certain contract
sterilization facilities that use ethylene
oxide. This action became effective for the
2022 reporting year with the first reports
for these particular facilities due on July 1,
2023.

Learn More about Ethylene Oxide.

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)

Recently, 172 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) were added to the list of chemicals
covered by TRI, Facilities reported their releases and waste management practices for these
PFAS for the first time for 2020. The TRI reporting threshold for these PFAS is 100 pounds,
which is lower than the thresholds for most TRI chemicals. PFAS have been manufactured and
used in a variety of industries in the United States and around the globe since the 1940s, and
they are still being used today. Harmful PFAS are an urgent public health and environmental
issue facing communities across the United States because current scientific research suggests
that exposure to certain PFAS may lead to adverse health effects. PFAS on the TRI chemical list
include compounds such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
(PFOS). Note that definitions of which chemicals are considered PFAS vary, and the 172
substances required to be reported to TRI do not include all PFAS. See EPA's PFAS Explained
page for more information about these chemicals and EPA actions related to PFAS.

This map shows the locations of the facilities that reported a PFAS to TRI for 2020, sized by
their relative releases. Click on a facility for details on the facility location and its TRI PFAS

Vancouver -a

Seattle

_ San Francisco

^os Angeles

Great Plains

UNITED
STATES

Lake
Superior

Chicago

Montreal

Toronto

„ Detroit

LolJR

Dallas

Atlanta

„ Boston

Mew York

• 0

ouston

Monterrey

m£xico

Gulf of
Mexico

Miami

Havana

Note: One facility in the food manufacturing sector erroneously reported for a PFAS instead of another chemical and has withdrawn
the PFAS form. That facility is not included in this map.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

This chart shows the number of facilities in each sector reporting for any of the 172 PFAS for
2020.

Note: One facility in the food manufacturing sector erroneously reported for a PFAS instead of another chemical and has withdrawn
the PFAS form. That facility is not included in this chart.

• Most facilities reporting for PFAS were in the chemical manufacturing sector or the
hazardous waste management sector.

o No reports for PFAS were received from any federal facilities, although some
Department of Defense facilities have used PFAS in the past. Discontinuing
certain uses of PFAS may be a factor since the 2019 National Defense
Authorization Act, which added PFAS to the TRI chemical list, also included
provisions to phase out the use of PFAS in certain circumstances by the
Department of Defense.

• Facilities reported for 43 different PFAS. The most commonly reported PFAS were
perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and its potassium
salt, and hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA) and its ammonium salt.

Number of Facilities Reporting PFAS by Sector

Computers and

Chemical
Manufacturing:
19

Hazardous
Waste: 11

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

PFAS Waste Management

This chart shows how PFAS waste was managed. Hover over the chart to see the pounds of
waste managed by each method. For more details on quantities released, toggle to the
"Releases only" figure.

@ All Waste Managed
O Releases Only

PFAS Production-Related Waste Managed
794,287 pounds

Note: 1) Note: This analysis excludes PFAS releases reported from one facility that has withdrawn its report. 2)
Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding.

• Most PFAS waste was treated or recycled.

• The hazardous waste management and chemical manufacturing sectors managed the most
PFAS waste.

o Hazardous waste management facilities reported the most treatment,
o Recycling was reported almost exclusively by chemical manufacturing facilities.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

This chart shows PFAS releases by medium. Hover over the chart to see the pounds released to
each medium.

PFAS Releases
9,133 pounds

O All Waste Managed
© Releases Only

On-site Land
Disposal: 55%

Off-site
Disposal or
Other Releases:
36%

Air Emissions:
4%

Water Discharges:
5%

Note: This analysis excludes PFAS releases reported from one facility that has withdrawn its report.

Of the quantities of PFAS released, most were disposed of on site to land or transferred
off site for disposal.

The chemical manufacturing sector reported the most releases (78%).

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Comparing Industry Sectors

This section examines how industry sectors manage Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) chemical
waste. Looking at data from individual sectors can highlight progress made in improving
environmental performance and reveal opportunities for better waste management practices.

Industries 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 across industrial sectors often differ. For facilities in the same sector, however, the
processes, products, and regulatory requirements are often similar, resulting in similar use,
manufacture or processing of TRI chemicals.

This section presents trends in key sectors'production-related.waste.man.aged, including TRI
chemical releases into the environment. For analytical purposes, the TRI Program has combined
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 quantities of TRI chemical waste managed through recycling,
energy recovery, treatment, and disposal or other releases. For more details on quantities
released, toggle to the "Releases only" figure. @ AN Waste Managecj

O Releases Only

Production-Related Waste Managed by Industry, 2020
28.3 billion pounds

All others:

Electric Utilities:

Chemical
Manufacturing:
56%

Primary Metals:

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Seven industry sectors reported 89% of the TRI production-related waste managed in 2020.
Most of this waste originated from the chemical manufacturing sector (56%).

The following pie chart shows the industry sectors that reported the most release An Wa5te Managed

@ Releases Only

Total Disposal or Other Releases by Industry, 2020
3.04 billion pounds

All Others: 10%
Hazardous Waste
Management: 4%

Paper Manufacturing: 5%

Food Manufacturing: 5%

Metal Mining:
45%

Electric Utilities: 7%_/

Primary Metals: 8%

Chemical Manufacturing: 16%

This pie chart shows that 4 of the 29 TRI sectors accounted for 76% of the quantities of TRI
chemicals disposed of or otherwise released: metal mining (45%), chemical manufacturing
(16%), primary metals (8%), and electric utilities (7%).

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.

TRI Data Considerations

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Manufacturing Sectors

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the manufacturing sectors
(defined as facilities reporting their primary NAICS codes as 31-33).

THE SECTOR £#•

EMPLOYS Mi||

11.5 MILLION VP

PEOPLE

U.S. Census Annual Survey of Manufactures
2019 data

THE SECTOR

CONTRIBUTES BP
2.3 TRILLION ZBS)

TO U.S. GDP

In value-added. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Year 2020 data.

¦ 18#863 facilities in the sector report to TRI

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

This map shows the locations of the manufacturing facilities that reported to TRI for 2020, sized
by their relative releases. Click on a facility for details on its TRI reporting.

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.

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

Guatemala Tegucigalpa

Sources: Esri, HERE, Gfer/riin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase,
IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Su'rv^y^Esfi ifa'pan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap
contributors, and the GIS User Corrmittfii'ty1

NORfl

-fte

V NEVADA^ « /

« i*:

' ». ,ir.'C *

JAMAICA HAm Santo rui^Hfc I

Kingston Domingo

Manufacturing Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2020
View Larger Map

For 2020, nearly 90% of the facilities that reported to TRI were in a manufacturing sector.
Manufacturing sectors accounted for most (89%) of the 28.3 billion pounds of production-
related waste managed for 2020. Two subsectors of manufacturing, chemical manufacturing
and cement 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.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Manufacturing Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in TRI chemical waste managed through
recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and disposal or other releases by the manufacturing
sectors. For more details on quantities released, toggle to the "Releases only" graph.

Production-Related Waste Managed: # am waste Managed

Manufacturing Sectors

2,500

<
£U

2,000 £
1,500
1,000

500

N>
O
N>
O
1A

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment

Energy Recovery Recycling

< Value Added (2020 Dollars)

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Quantities of production-related waste managed by the manufacturing sectors increased
through 2018. Since then, quantities of waste managed have decreased.

• From 2011 to 2020, releases and treatment of chemical waste decreased, while
recycling and combustion for energy recovery increased.

• It is important to consider the influence the economy has on wastes generated. 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).
Since 2011, value added by the manufacturing sectors increased by 11%.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

o Waste managed by the manufacturing
sectors increased by 35% since 2011,
driven by increased recycling. The large
increase in recycled chemical waste

An industry's value added is the market
value it adds in production; it is the
difference between the price at which it
sells its products and the cost of its
inputs. Value added for all U.S. industries
combined is equal to the nation's gross
domestic product.

starting in 2014 was driven by several
facilities that each reported recycling
one billion pounds or more annually in
recent years.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Production-related waste managed decreased by 1.9 billion pounds (-7%), while value
added decreased slightly (-3%). Annual changes in waste managed are driven by a few
facilities.

• In 2020, only 5% of the manufacturing sectors' production-related waste generated was
released into the environment, while the rest was managed through treatment, energy
recovery, and recycling.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Manufacturing Releases Trend

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in annual quantities of TRI chemicals released by
facilities in the manufacturing sectors.

Total Disposal or Other Releases:
Manufacturing Sectors

2,000

¦£ 1,500

o
a.

h—

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Source Reduction in the Manufacturing Sectors:

In 2020, 6% of manufacturing facilities initiated over 2,600 source reduction activities to reduce
TRI chemical use and waste creation. The most commonly reported types of source reduction
activities were Good Operating Practices and Process Modifications. For example:

• A kitchen cabinet manufacturing facility reduced its use of xylene by switching to high
solid coatings which require less material to coat parts. I"Click to view facility details in
the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• A motor vehicle parts manufacturer adjusted the air pressure on paint regulators to
reduce paint usage, which resulted in a reduction in ethylbenzene waste. fClick to view
facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll.

You can learn more about pollution prevention opportunities in this sector bv using the TRI P2
Search Tool. Facilities interested in exploring pollution prevention opportunities at their site can
contact their Regional P2 Coordinator to arrange a free onsite P2 assessment.

-------
kvEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis

www .eoa, oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
February 2022

Chemical Manufacturing

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the chemical manufacturing
sector (defined as facilities reporting their primary NAICS code as 325).

Ul-

LU LL

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),
pesticides, and
cosmetics, to
name a few.

THE SECTOR

EMPLOYS

751,000

PEOPLE

U.S. Census Annual Survey of Manufactures
2019 data

•••
Iff

THE SECTOR

CONTRIBUTES
$395 BILLION

TO U.S. GDP

In value-added. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Year 2020 data

3,411 facilities in the sector report to TRI

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

This map shows the locations of the chemical manufacturing facilities that reported to TRI for
2020, sized by their relative releases. Click on a facility for details on its TRI reporting.

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

% ° >
. % f-

Regina

^HINGTON •

t >

1,JF_ •

NORfM DAKOTA
• • • •• MINNESOTA m •

m % • * tSOtigtm

V2 • *,•

Tofon(oo^a*a.On<«^o c, •

. «»?v«* -i. . ii

.. t

»™*« &Tde

Mexico1 City- opuftbla

Port-au __

Prince Rtrunuc
JAMAICA HAITI Santo rUT%^bi I

Guatemala legucigaipa

Sources: Esri, HERE, (Sjarpiin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase,
IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Su'rvfey) Esri Ife'pan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap
contributors, and the GIS User CortwitthTty1

Chemical Manufacturing Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2020
View Larger Map

For 2020, more facilities reported to TRI from the chemical manufacturing sector than any other
industry sector (3,411; 16% of facilities that reported for 2020). This sector reported 56% of all
waste managed reported to TRI, more than any other sector.

This large and diverse sector includes facilities producing basic chemicals and those that
manufacture products through further processing of chemicals. The chart below shows the
number of facilities by chemical manufacturing subsectors that reported to TRI for 2020.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Chemical Manufacturing Facilities by Subsector, 2020
3,411 total facilities

Pesticides and

Pharmaceuticals: 5%

Resins anc
rubbei

adhesives: 15% products: 20%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding.

Operations in the chemical manufacturing sector include:

• Basic chemicals facilities produce chemicals by basic processes, such as thermal cracking
and distillation. Products include petrochemicals, industrial gases, synthetic dyes and
pigments, and many other organic and inorganic chemicals.

• Coatings and adhesives facilities mix pigments, solvents, and binders into architectural and
industrial paints; manufacture paint products such as paint removers and thinners; and
manufacture adhesives, glues, and caulking compounds.

• Resins and synthetic rubber facilities manufacture resins, plastic materials, synthetic rubber,
and fibers and filaments.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Chemical Manufacturing Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemical waste managed through
recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and disposal or other releases by the chemical
manufacturing sector. For more details on quantities released, toggle to the "Releases only"
graph.

Production-Related Waste Managed:
Chemical Manufacturing

@ All Waste Managed
Releases <

; Only

..illfflfl

Mil Hi ii'

—^—i—^—i—^—i—^—i—^—i—^—i—^—i—^—i—^—i—^—

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

400

350

300

250 °-

200 2^

150 «

100 o

Year

i Disposal or Other Releases
Energy Recovery
•Value Added

Treatment
i Recycling

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Quantities of production-related waste managed by the chemical manufacturing sector
increased by 79%, while the sector's value added (represented by the black line as
reported by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Value Added bv Industry1) increased by
1%.

o Trends in waste recycled by chemical manufacturers are driven by a few
facilities. For example, the large increase in chemical waste recycled starting in
2014 compared to previous years was primarily due to increased quantities of
recycling reported by chemical manufacturers, with an increase in the quantity of

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

cumene recycled by one facility and dichloromethane (methylene chloride)
recycled by two other facilities.

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

From 2019 to 2020:

• Production-related waste managed at chemical manufacturing facilities decreased by 1.1
billion pounds (-7%), driven by a reduction in quantities recycled by two facilities in the
sector.

• In 2020, 3% of this sector's waste was released into the environment, while the rest
was managed through treatment, energy recovery, and recycling.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Chemical Manufacturing Releases Trend

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities
in the chemical manufacturing sector.

All Waste Managed

Total Disposal or Other Releases: ® Releases °nly

600

500

400

3
O
a.

o 300

= 200

100

Chemical Manufacturing

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases reported by facilities in the chemical manufacturing sector decreased by 2%.

• The proportion of off-site releases increased during this time, while on-site land disposal
and on-site water releases now make up a smaller fraction of total releases. Proportions
of on-site air releases remained the same.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Releases decreased by 21 million pounds (-4%). This trend is driven by large decreases
in land disposal at numerous facilities.

• For 2020, the basic chemicals manufacturing subsector accounted for 51% of chemical
manufacturing releases. This subsector includes facilities manufacturing products such
as organic and inorganic chemicals, industrial gases, and petrochemicals.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Chemical Manufacturing Sector Releases by Subsector, 2020

, 487.8 million pounds

Cleaning and personal care r

products: 0.4%

Pharmaceuticals: 1-
Coatingsand adhesives

Other chemii
products: 7%

Resins and synthetic rubber: 14%

Basic chemicals: 51%

Pesticides and _
fertilizers: 25%

Source Reduction in the Chemical Manufacturing Sector:

Although the chemical manufacturing sector has consistently managed the most production-
related waste of any TRI-covered sector, 263 facilities (8% of facilities) in this sector initiated
source reduction activities in 2020. The most common types of source reduction activities were
Good Operating Practices and Process Modifications. For example:

• An in-vitro diagnostic substance manufacturer purchased new equipment to allow for
larger batch sizes, reducing dichloromethane waste. fClick to view facility details in the
TRI P2 Search Tooll

• A polish and other sanitation goods manufacturing facility replaced a dry blender which
resulted in more efficient washouts and generation of less wastewater that contains
formaldehyde. fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll

• Several chemical manufacturing facilities reported source reduction activities that
resulted in reducing both TRI chemical wastes and greenhouse gas emissions. For
example, one facility replaced boilers to eliminate the use of coal as a fuel for on-site
steam generation and reduce releases of dioxin and dioxin-like compounds as well as
greenhouse gasses fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tooll. Another
facility was able to use styrene/ethylbenzene waste as an alternative fuel source,

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

reducing the amount of natural gas utilized for the heater fClick to view facility details in
the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

Additional Resources

• To find more examples of chemical manufacturers' source reduction activities and the
source reduction barriers they reported, visit TRI's P2 Search Tool.

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

• For more information on how this and other industry sectors can choose safer
chemicals, visit EPA's Safer Choice Program.

• EPA supports the adoption of Green Chemistry practices that reduce the environmental
impacts from this sector, including reductions in the use of toxic chemicals, water, and
electricity.

• Facilities interested in exploring P2 opportunities or getting technical assistance can
contact their regional P2 coordinator. Find the P2 coordinators for vour state and region.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Greenhouse Gas Reporting in the Chemical Manufacturing Sector

While many chemical releases are reported to the TRI, the TRI Program does not cover all
chemicals released by industry. Notably, most greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are not
reported to the TRI. Greenhouse gas emissions increase the concentration of these gases in the
atmosphere, which alter the amount of heat trapped by the Earth's atmosphere and contribute
to climate change. These elevated concentrations and their effect on climate are reasonably
anticipated to endanger the public health and welfare of current and future generations.

EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) tracks facility-level emissions from the
largest U.S. sources of GHGs. The chart below shows GHG emissions reported to the GHGRP by
facilities in the chemical manufacturing sector from 2011 to 2020.

Chemical Manufacturing Greenhouse Gas Emissions

200

-------
What are carbon dioxide
equivalents (C02e)?

j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• Note that while TRI typically collects chemical
release data in units of pounds, the GHGRP collects
GHG emissions data in units of metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalents (MTC02e). This chart
shows GHG emissions in MTCCke.

• The chemical manufacturing sector reported
emissions of over 184 million MTCC^e for 2020, a
2% increase since 2011.

• For 2020, 3,411 facilities in this sector reported to
the TRI and 453 facilities in the sector reported to
the GHGRP. Some facilities report to only one of
these programs due to different applicability
requirements and reporting thresholds; while most facilities in this sector that report to
the TRI Program do not report to the GHGRP, most of the facilities in this sector that
report to the GHGRP also report to TRI.

Additional Resources

• To view and explore the data reported to EPA on GHG emissions, see the Facility Level
Information on GreenHouse gases Tool (FLIGHT).

• EPA's Understanding Global Warming Potentials webpage provides further information
on GWPs, how they are used, and how they different by GHG.

• For more details on the chemical manufacturing sector's GHG emissions, visit GHGRP
Chemicals.

Different GHGs can have different effects
on the Earth's warming; Global Warming
Potential (GWP) values allow for
comparisons of the global warming
impacts of different gases. MTCC^e is a
weighted measurement that considers the
tonnes of the gases and their associated
global warming potentials.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Cement Manufacturing

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed within the cement manufacturing
sector (defined as facilities reporting their primary NAICS code as 327310).

Ill (J

Ml U.

What the Sector Does

Facilities in the cement manufacturing sector
produce cement, a binding agent that when
mixed with water, sand, and gravel or crushed
stone forms the rock-like mass known as
concrete. Concrete, in turn, is used in
highway, commercial, and
residential construction

p,ojecB*

THE SECTOR

EMPLOYS Mii

16,000 If

PEOPLE

U.S. Census Annual Survey of Manufactures
2019 data

THE SECTOR _IA1-

PRODUCES OVER jUNI

89 MILLIONTH!

METRIC TONS OF CEMENT^^^^Jm

U.S. Geological Survey 2020 data

113 facilities in the sector report to TRI

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

Although relatively few facilities in the cement manufacturing sector report to TRI, the
operations of these facilities result in substantial quantities of TRI waste managed and released,
as well as being a notable contributor to the country's greenhouse gas emissions. The cement
manufacturing sector is unique among TRI sectors because of its high volume of waste
combusted for energy recovery. Cement manufacturers often use waste from other facilities,
such as spent solvents, as fuel to produce heat needed for the manufacture of cement.

This map shows the locations of the cement manufacturing facilities that reported to TRI for
2020, sized by their relative releases. Click on a facility for details on its TRI reporting.

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

¦ V \
Vancouver

° " %

Seattle

"-vioAe
Superior

•
• '

• •

Montreal

•

Toronto

Great Plains •

Detroit
Chicago ^

•

_ Boston

f °

{. '¦[

San Francisco

'\;

•

UNITED

• Denver

STATES #
•

• • .

•

• •

St Louis
•

• •

New York

• •

* ® Washington

•

?\$ •

••

# Lcft^ngeles
* •

• •

•

Dallas

• .

•

*•

Atlanta •

•• ®

•

• •

\ %

m Houston

J °

)*•

^Monterrey

MEXICO

Miami

Gulf of
Mexico

Havana

^Guadalajara

Mexico City

CUBA

Esri, USGS, Esri, Garmin. FAO, NOAA, EPA
Pnrt-a.i-PrinrP

Cement Manufacturing Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2020
View Larger Map

For 2020, 113 facilities in the cement manufacturing sector reported to TRI. Cement
manufacturing is an energy-intensive process in which limestone and other ingredients are
heated in a kiln. To maintain the high temperatures required to produce cement, facilities use a
variety of fuels, including chemical wastes. This sector manages a greater portion of its
chemical waste by burning it for energy recovery than any other TRI-covered sector.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Cement Manufacturing Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemical waste managed
through recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and disposal or other releases by facilities in the
cement manufacturing sector. For more details on quantities released, toggle to the "Releases
only" graph.

@ All Waste Managed

Production-Related Waste Managed: Releases only

Cement Manufacturing

100

500

450

400

U)
T3

350

300

4—

250

200

150

100

O
Q.

40 i.
o'

20 %
o

o w

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment

Energy Recovery Recycling

^^•Production (million metric tons)

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Quantities of production-related waste managed by the cement manufacturing sector
have fluctuated since 2011, while production (represented by the black line as reported
by the U.S. Geological Survey) increased by 31%.

• More than 92% of this sector's waste is managed through energy recovery; this is a
higher proportion of waste managed through energy recovery than any other sector.
Since 2011, quantities of TRI chemical waste managed through recycling and disposal or
other releases decreased, while quantities of waste managed through energy recovery
and treatment increased.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

• US cement production increased by 3% from 2018 to 2020, but production-related
waste managed decreased by 15% during the same period.

o Facilities in this sector frequently combust wastes from other facilities to make
use of the wastes' heating value. This is considered preferable to disposing of
that waste. Decreased waste management in this sector may be due operational
changes, such as replacing fuel containing TRI-reportable chemicals with other
fuels that contain lower levels of TRI chemicals.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Total production-related waste managed at cement manufacturing facilities increased by
19 million pounds (6%), driven by increases in energy recovery and treatment.
Meanwhile, cement production levels increased by 1%.

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Cement Manufacturing Releases Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities in the
cement manufacturing industry.

Total Disposal or Other Releases:
Cement Manufacturing

O All Waste Managed
(j>) Releases Only

o
a.

M— 6

2011

2012

2013

2014

2017

2018

2019

On-site Air Releases
On-site Land Disposal

2015 2016

Year

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

2020

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Since 2011, TRI chemical releases by the cement manufacturing sector have fluctuated,
with an overall decrease of 548,000 pounds (-9%).

o Air releases decreased by 571,000 pounds (-12%). On-site land disposal
decreased by 92,000 pounds (10%) and off-site disposal increased by 90,000
pounds (31%). Releases to water made up less than 1% of the sector's releases.

o Releases increased between 2011 and 2015 but have decreased by 27% since
2015, driven by several facilities that reported large reductions in air releases.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

From 2019 to 2020:

• Releases decreased by 172,000 pounds (3%).

• In 2020, releases to air accounted for 78% of all releases reported by the cement
manufacturing sector.

Source Reduction in the Cement Manufacturing Sector:

Since 2011, 15 facilities have reported source reduction activities, including a facility that
switched to a new clay material which contained less mercury. fClick to view facility details in
the TRI P2 Search Tool"!. To find other examples of the sector's source reduction activities and
the source reduction barriers they face, visit TRI's P2 Search Tool.

Additional Resources

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

• See the USGS Cement Statistics and Information webpaae for annual reports on the
worldwide supply of and demand for cement.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Greenhouse Gas Reporting in the Gement Manufacturing Sector:

Cement Manufacturing Greenhouse Gas Emissions

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

100

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• Note that while TRI typically collects chemical release quantities in units of pounds, the
GHGRP collects GHG emissions data expressed in units of metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalents (MTCOze). This chart shows GHG releases in MTCCke.

• The cement manufacturing sector reported
emissions of over 66 million MTCC^e for 2020, an
increase of 20% since 2011.

• Although 113 facilities in this sector reported to the
TRI for 2020, 92 reported to the GHGRP under the
cement production sector in 2020. Some facilities
report to only one of these two programs due to
different regulatory requirements between the
programs.

Additional Resources

• To view and explore the data reported to EPA on GHG emissions, see the Facility Level
Information on GreenHouse gases Tool fFLIGHT)

• EPA's Understanding Global Warming Potentials webpaae provides further information
on GWPs, how they are used, and how they different by GHG.

• For more details on the cement manufacturing sector's GHG emissions, visit GHGRP
Minerals.

What are carbon dioxide
equivalents (CC^e)?

101

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Metal Mining

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed by facilities in the metal mining
sector (defined as facilities reporting their primary NAICS code as 2122).

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

38,000 1

PEOPLE

U.S. Census County Business Patterns
2019 data

•
1

VALUE OF MINE

PRODUCTION Kg
$28 BILLION dN

USGS Mineral Commodities Summary 2020 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 2020

Although the number of metal mines reporting to TRI makes up only a small portion of the total
number of facilities that report to TRI, the sector accounted for 45% of all releases reported to
TRI for 2020.

This map shows the locations of the metal mining facilities that reported to TRI for 2020, sized
by their relative releases. Click on a facility for details on its TRI reporting.

Note: 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.

102

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

CANADA

GREAT PLAINS

Chicago oDetooM

UNITED
WP STATES Si Lous

C*tav.a Montreal

o o

Tc*orto0 A "

^ Bos to
O New> Vort

Philadelphia
Washington

tos Angel

Dallas
Houston

Q Atlanta

Sources Esri HERE. GanWrf ThMrri&p. increment P Corp GEBCO. USGS.fAtl^NPS. NRCAN, GeoBase,
IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan. METI, Esri China (Hong KongJ.^^^OpenStreetMap
contributors and the GIsHliSi?1 eWfaVnunity

Metal Mines Reporting to TRI, 2020
View Larger Map

For 2020, 86 metal mining facilities reported to the 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. U.S. mining operations generate metals that 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 disposal, primarily of metal-
bearing rock (called ore) and waste rock. To learn more
about metal mining operations and their TRI reporting,
explore the interactive metal mining diagram.

103

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Metal Mining Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemical waste managed by the metal
mining industry from 2011 to 2020, mainly in the form of on-site land disposal. The nature of
metal mining operations limits the feasibility of other methods of waste management. For more
details on quantities released, toggle to the "Releases only" graph.

@) All Waste Managed

Production-Related Waste Managed: Releases only

Metal Mining

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment

Energy Recovery Recycling

< Mine Production

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• The quantity of waste managed by the metal mining sector fluctuated year to year and
does not closely follow the sector's production (as reported in the United States
Geological Survey).

• 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 TRI chemicals in ore qualify for a concentration-based TRI reporting
exemption in one year but not in the next year or vice versa.

104

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

From 2019 to 2020:

• The quantity of TRI chemical waste managed by this sector decreased by 126 million
pounds (-8%).

• During 2020, 95% of the metal mining sector's production-related waste generated was
disposed of or otherwise released. Most of this waste consisted of metals, which were
primarily disposed of to land on site at the mine.

105

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Metal Mining Releases Trend

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by the
metal mining industry, primarily through on-site land disposal.

2500

2000

3
O
CL

1500

M-

c
o

1000

500

Total Disposal or Other Releases:
Metal Mining

O All Waste Managed
@ Releases Only

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

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

¦ On-site Land Disposal i 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 2011 to 2020:

• More than 99% of the metal mining sector's releases of TRI chemicals were on site and
to land. Quantities of on-site land disposal by metal mines have fluctuated from year to
year.

o Optionally, facilities can indicate whether reported land releases represent

disposal of waste rock. For 2020, at least 44% of the on-site land disposal of TRI
chemicals at metal mines was in the form of waste rock.

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

106

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

In 2020:

• Among the sectors reporting to TRI, the metal mining sector reported the largest
quantity of waste disposed of or otherwise released, accounting for 45% of total TRI
releases and 70% of on-site land disposal for all industries.

Source Reduction in the Metal Mining Sector:

Unlike manufacturing, the nature of mining—the necessary movement and disposal of large
volumes of rock to access the target ore—does not lend itself to source reduction. To find
examples of metal mining source reduction activities and the source reduction barriers mining
facilities face, visit the TRI P2 Search Tool.

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

107

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Electric Utilities

This section examines how TRI chemical wastes are managed in the electric utilities sector
(defined as facilities reporting their primary NAICS code as 2211).

CO
UJ

What the Sector Does

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

THE SECTOR £#•

EMPLOYS Mil

503,000 Vf

PEOPLE

electricity; however, only those electricity
generating facilities that combust ^

U.S. Census County Business Patterns 2019 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

GENERATES W
596 MILLION /B»

111

requirements.

U.S. Department of Energy 2020 data by electric utilities that
combust coal or oil for electricity generation

111

408 facilities in the sector report to TRI

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

This map shows the locations of the electric utilities that reported to TRI for 2020, sized by their
relative releases. Click on a facility for details on its TRI reporting.

108

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

¦^'WASHINGTON
*' •

< DAKOTA

i •

UTH DAKOTA

^ Awaukee Orand R^^ls

Sacramento

Salt

Lake City

GREAT

B- A S 1 N.

• < fk*

N EVAOA

F res'iff Las Ve9as
°»

Los Angeles
San Diegoq

Den^

1°

GREAT PLAINS •

fDRASKA Jl » •

UNIT PD " "

kChicago0 ^ MICH

l^lar#o

® ^Rochester ^

Phoenix
Tucson '

»n.v

STATES - Ay',*., Sn^naL,^-, Jtf ik . J ff»

, „ %o •jri**"

• & #L^.ni. uRajidr

• # . ^ ^pvENTULK'. ^ (^| ri* l«HorloH

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Electric Utilities Waste Management Trend

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemical waste that electric
utility facilities managed, primarily through treatment or release. For more details on quantities
released, toggle to the "Releases only" graph.

@ All Waste Managed
Releases Only

Production-Related Waste Managed:
Electric Utilities

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment

Energy Recovery
¦Electricity Generation

Recycling

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Quantities of waste managed decreased by 888 million pounds (-50%) since 2011,
driven by reduced releases.

• Net electricity generation by electric utilities from coal and oil fuels decreased by 55%
(as reported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration1).
Note that only facilities that combust coal or oil to generate electricity are covered under
TRI reporting requirements.

o Data from the Energy Information Administration indicate that the mix of energy
sources for U.S. electricity generation has changed over time. Natural gas and
renewable energy sources account for an increasing share of U.S. electricity
generation, while coal-fired electricity generation has declined. Use of oil for

110

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

electric power generation continues to contribute a small percentage of total U.S.
electricity generation.

In 2020:

• Nearly three-quarters of the sector's production-related waste generated was treated,
while approximately one-quarter was released to the environment.

o This contrasts with 2011, when over one-third of the waste from this sector was
released into the environment. This trend is due in part to increased installation
of air pollution control devices that destroy TRI-reportable chemicals.

Ill

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

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

O All Waste Managed
(#) Releases Only

750

500

o
a.

= 250

Mill,.,

11111

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

On-site Air Releases
On-site Land Disposal

Year

i 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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases from the electric utilities sector decreased by 392 million pounds (-63%). This
decrease was driven by a 199-million pound (-77%) decrease in air releases and a 166-
million pound (-58%) decrease in on-site land disposal. Surface water discharges and
off-site disposal also decreased, but to a lesser extent.

From 2019 to 2020:

• Releases by electric utilities decreased by 62 million pounds (-22%), driven by
reductions in on-site land disposal of barium compounds and reduced air releases of
sulfuric acid and hydrochloric acid.

112

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Source Reduction in the Electric Utilities Sector:

In the electric utilities sector, 7 facilities (2% of the electric utility facilities reporting to TRI)
initiated source reduction activities in 2020 to reduce their use of TRI chemicals and creation of
wastes containing TRI chemicals. Some facilities reported process improvements to increase
their efficiency, which may lead to reduced greenhouse gas emissions as well as reduced TRI
chemical wastes.

To find more examples of electric utilities' source reduction activities and the source reduction
barriers they face, visit TRI's P2 Search Tool.

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

113

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Greenhouse Gas Reporting in the Electric Utilities Sector

EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) tracks facility-level emissions from the
largest U.S. sources of GHGs. Under the GHGRP, the Power Plants Sector consists
predominantly of facilities that produce electricity by combusting fossil fuels, such as coal, oil,
and natural gas, or biomass. The sector also includes facilities that produce steam, heated air,
or cooled air by combusting fuels. The chart below shows GHG emissions reported to the
GHGRP by facilities in the Power Plants sector from 2011 to 2020.

Electric Utilities (Power Plants) Greenhouse Gas Emissions

2,500

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

What are carbon dioxide
equivalents (C02e)?

• Note that while TRI typically collects chemical
release data in units of pounds, the GHGRP
collects GHG emissions expressed in quantities
expressed as metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalents (MTCOze). This chart shows GHG
emissions in MTCCke.

• Total reported emissions from the sector were
1,494.9 million MTCC^e in 2020, which
represented nearly 58% of total direct emissions
reported to the GHGRP.

• From 2011 to 2020, GHG emissions from this
sector have decreased by 33%. According to data
from the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration, increased
utilization of renewables such as wind and solar and a corresponding decrease in the
use of coal from 2011 to 2020 continues to contribute to decreased emissions from this
sector across the time series.

• Although 408 facilities in this sector reported to TRI, 1,339 facilities in the Power Plants
Sector submitted GHG reports in 2020. Some facilities report to only one of these
programs due to different applicability requirements. In particular, TRI covers only
electric utilities that combust fuel or oil to generate electricity (i.e., natural gas power
plants are not covered by TRI) while the GHGRP covers all power plants that meet the
applicability requirements, including natural gas-fueled power plants.

Additional Resources

• To view and explore the data reported to EPA on GHG emissions, see the Facility Level
Information on GreenHouse gases Tool fFLIGHT)

• EPA's Understanding Global Warming Potentials webpage provides further information
on GWPs, how they are used, and how they different by GHG.

• For more details on the cement manufacturing sector's GHG emissions, visit GHGRP
Power Plants.

115

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

Federal Facilities

All federal facilities, including facilities operated by the EPA, the Department of Defense, and
the Department of the Treasury, are subject to TRI reporting requirements, regardless of the
type of operations at the facility (as described by its NAICS code).

This map shows the locations of 458 federal facilities that reported to TRI for 2020, sized by
their relative releases. Click on a facility for details on its TRI reporting.

Seolt^

NORTH DAKO

SOUTH DAKOTA

MINNESOTA
• •

Minneapolis

¦¦

• •
n V. • p •; C

^Phoenix
Tucson •

NEW dlEXK

ei Emm

Milwaukee Gland Rapids
Chicago0

MICHIGAN Lj
Cleveland

Torontoo/jse -Oula^lo <¦

\ o Rochester ^

Buffalo . \ •

, ^ Albany

«7 •# •

U N I T fc*D
STATES

LfNO

•-II y a

ndianapolis ^oiumous

JND$NA anciwiati ^ y .Philadelphia

•** # * 0 • •V" • j t. frngt on

ffi ^Loulbille # IRGINI^

Memphis. 1 TENNE^-li* ^Charlotte *

* Greenville0 ? % **

• _ • , ® ^Allanla
• Cirininglfam •• .

ICl^^K^oi-

LlftllSIANA^ • *0
°Norton ®Ne«v Orleans

.. •

- FLORIDA

^Jacksonville

Orlando

o •

STa^pa

Gueielaro ^epec de

Mexj.co City- opuebla

Port-au Dominican

Prince RErunilc San

Jamaica hah? santo ruri(T<*?!Hi

Kingston Domingo

CUATfiMAlA

Sources: Esri, HERE, Ga^min, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase,
IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance SurV6y)Esfi il'a'pan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap
contributors, and the GIS User CorrWriCtftity'1

Federal Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2020
View Larger Map

116

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Federal Facilities by Industry

The following chart shows the number of federal facilities reporting to TRI by sector for 2020.

For 2020, 458 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. Since all
federal facilities are subject to TRI reporting requirements regardless of industry sector, for
some sectors, the TRI database only includes data from federal facilities. Most federal facilities
are in such sectors, including military bases; correctional institutions; and police protection,
such as training sites for border patrol stations.

As with non-federal facilities, the type of activities occuring at federal facilities determines the
amount of chemical waste managed and the management methods used. Some activities
occurring at federal facilities are similar to those at non-federal facilities, such as electricity
production. In other cases, federal facilities may report waste managed from specialized
activities. For example, the federal facilities included under police protection and correctional
institutions almost exclusively reported for lead and lead compounds, likely due to the use of
lead ammunition on their firing ranges.

Federal Facilities by Sector, 2020
458 facilities

Electric Utilities:

Police Protection
(e.g., firing
range): 5%

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

117

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Waste Management by Federal Facilities

The following pie chart shows the percentages of TRI chemical waste managed through
recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and disposal or other releases by federal government
organizations in 2020. For more details on quantities released, toggle to the "Releases only"
graph.

_ . . .... .. .. (8) All Waste Managed

Production-Related Waste Managed by ( Reieasesoniy
Government Organization, 2020
139.3 million pounds

All Others:

5% \

Department of the
Treasury:

Tennessee Valley
Authority:
26%

Department of
Defense:
62%

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

o The Tennessee Valley Authority, a government-owned electric utility, provides
power to southeastern states. 85% of its 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
nickel) to TRI. Almost all of their metal waste was recycled off site.

118

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Releases by Federal Facilities

The following graph shows the percentages of TRI chemicals released by federal government
organizations in 2020.

Total Disposal or Other Releases by
Government Organization, 2020
36.3 million pounds

Department of
Energy:

All Others:

Tennessee Valley
Authority:
18%

O All Waste Managed
@ Releases Only

Department of
Defense:
77%

• Most of the Department of Defense's releases were on-site releases of nitrate
compounds to water and on-site land disposal of metals and metal compounds.

• The chemicals released by the Tennessee Valley Authority are similar to the chemicals
released by other electric utilities that report to TRI. On-site land disposal of barium
compounds and air releases of sulfuric acid make up a large portion of releases from the
Tennessee Valley Authority and other electric utilities.

Source Reduction at Federal Facilities:

Federal facilities' operations are diverse and few focus on manufacturing processes. Due to this
variety of functions, operations at some federal facilities are better suited to source reduction
strategies than others. For the 2020 reporting year, 21 federal facilities (5%) reported
implementing source reduction activities.

119

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Federal facilities have often reported difficulties when trying to reduce their use of lead because
it is contained in ammunition used at National Security and Park Service facilities. For 2020,
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 source reduction barriers they face, visit TRI's P2
Search Tool and select industry sectors such as National Security, Correctional Institutions or
Police Protection from the dropdown menu under "search criteria."

120

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

EPA Regional Profiles

This section of the National Analysis looks at releases and other production-related, waste
lli.ana.gement activities of Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) chemicals at the EPA regional level
during 2020. EPA has 10 regional offices, each of which is responsible for multiple states and in
some cases, territories and tribes.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Production-Related Waste
Managed by Region, 2020

Region 2

Releases by Region, 2020

Region 4

Region 1
Region 6

Region 5

Region 8

Region 7

Region 3
Region 2

Region 10

Region 3

Region 5

Region 7
Region
10

Region 8

Region 6

Region 4

Region

The relative amounts of production-related waste managed compared to releases in each region
is largely explained by the types of industry located in each region. For example:

• Quantities of production-related waste managed in Regions 3, 4 and 5 were mostly
from the chemical manufacturing sector. Each of these regions include one chemical
manufacturing facility that reported large quantities of chemicals recycled on site. For example,
in Region 3, one facility reported recycling 3.6 billion pounds of cumene. In Region 4, one
facility reported recycling almost 2 billion pounds of dichloromethane (methylene chloride).

• Region 6 had the largest quantity of production-related waste managed, driven by
chemical manufacturing facilities treating chemicals on site, such as ethylene, propylene, and
hydrochloric acid.

• In Regions 8, 9 and 10, metal mines accounted for more releases than any other
sector. Metal mines usually report large quantities of on-site land disposals, primarily of TRI
chemicals in metal-bearing rock (called ore) and waste rock. This sector also ranks lower than
almost all others for quantities of waste managed through treatment, energy recovery, and
recycling, resulting in lower quantities of waste managed in regions with more metal mines.

TRI Data Considerations

122

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 1

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 1. Region 1 includes Connecticut, Maine,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, and 10 tribes.

Region 1 serves 6 states
and 10 tribes

• • ••
m

REGION 1'S
POPULATION IS

14.8 million

PEOPLE
4% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The S6CtOrS with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Paper manufacturing

• Food manufacturing

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Nitrate compounds

• Zinc compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

927 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 4% of all TRI facilities

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

123

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 1.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 1,

2020

Fabricated Metals:
18%

All Other Sectors:
28%

Petroleum
Products
Manufacturing

Plastics and
Rubber: 5%

Electrical
Equipment: 5%

Chemical
Manufacturing:
14%

Transportation! Nonmetallic
Equipment: 6% Mineral Products:
6%

\_Computers and
Electronic
Products: 7%

Primary Metals: 6%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

In 2020:

• 927 facilities in Region 1 reported to TRI, which is slightly fewer than reported for 2019.
The sectors with the most facilities were the fabricated metals (i.e., manufacture of
metal products) and chemical manufacturing sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the sectors
that reported the largest TRI releases in Region 1 were the paper manufacturing, food
manufacturing, fabricated metals, and chemical manufacturing sectors. Note that
relatively few facilities in the paper manufacturing and food manufacturing sectors
reported to TRI in this region and those sectors are included in "All Other Sectors" in the
pie chart above.

124

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 1

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production;related waste by facilities located in Region 1.

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 1

sen 1 /inn

300

-g 250

a. 200

<4—

£ 150
o

H 100
50
n

1 '

III

lll|||

1,200

1,000 g
o

800 g-

600 a?

400

200
n

2011 2012 2013 :

>01^

\ 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment Energy Recovery
Recycling > Reporting Facilities

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Waste managed increased by 45.7 million pounds (21%) in Region 1, driven by increased
recycling. Nationally, quantities of waste managed increased by 22%, also driven by
increased recycling.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 1 managed 267 million pounds of production-related waste, 95% of
which was recycled, combusted for energy recovery, or treated. Only 5% was disposed of or
otherwise released into the environment in Region 1, compared to 11% nationally.

• Since 2019, quantities of waste managed in the region decreased by 14%, driven by
decreases in recycling and treatment.

Source Reduction

In 2020, 8% of facilities in Region 1 (71 facilities) reported implementing new source reduction
activities. Source reduction reporting rates were highest in the plastics and rubber products

125

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

manufacturing sector. For example, a laminated plastics manufacturer eliminated methanol
usage by using a modified resin to manufacture laminates. I"Click to view facility details in the
TRI P2 Search Tool!.

126

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Release Trend Region 1

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities

located in Region 1.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 1

1 ¦ 11111111

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 1 decreased by 5.9 million pounds (-30%),
driven by reduced air releases from paper manufacturing and
electric utilities. Nationally, releases decreased by 26%.

• Quantities of chemicals released to air, water, and land
decreased, while quantities of chemicals transferred off site
for disposal increased.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 1 reported releasing 14.3 million pounds of TRI chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases in Region 1 decreased by 2.4 million pounds (-14%). On-site releases
to air, water, and land, and off-site transfers for disposal all decreased. Nationally, releases
decreased by 10%.

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste management practices
for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances fPFASl to TRI. Two facilities in Region 1

127

Regional Highlight

Since 2011, releases in
Region 1 have decreased
by 30%, driven by
reductions in air releases
reported by paper
manufacturing facilities
and electric utilities.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

reported for PFAS; neither facility reported any production-related waste or releases of
PFAS.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release
quantities for 2020.

2020 Releases by State, Region 1

To consider the potential health risk from chronic exposure to these releases, EPA uses a risk-
screenina score from the RSEI model. The following pie chart shows each state's contribution to
the region's total RSEI Score for 2020.

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 1

VT: <1%

• The RSEI model accounts for factors such as a chemical's toxicity, its movement in
environment, and population density, in addition to the pounds of TRI chemicals

the
128

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

released. RSEI models releases to the air and water but does not model land disposal
quantities. These factors can lead to significant differences between a state's
contribution to regional releases and its contribution to the regional RSEI Score.

For information on the Region 1 facilities with the largest releases, see the Region 1 TRI
factsheet.

129

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 2

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 2. Region 2 includes New Jersey, New York,
Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, and 8 tribes.

• * ••
m

REGION 2'S
POPULATION IS

31.4 million

PEOPLE
9% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The S6CtOrS with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Chemical manufacturing

• Electric utilities

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Nitrate compounds

• Zinc and compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

1,016 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 5% of all TRI facilities

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

USVI

«=0 C3

Region 2 serves ^states,
2 territories,
and 8 tribes

130

-------
>—| j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 2.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 2,

2020

Chemical
Manufacturing:

All Other Sectors
31%

Electric Utilities:
4%

Petroleum Bulk
Terminals: 4%

Fabricated Metals:
12%

Computers and
Electronic
Products: 5%

Primary Metals: 7%

Nonmetallic
\_Mineral Products:
8%

Food
Manufacturing: 8%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

In 2020:

• 1,016 facilities in Region 2 reported to TRI, which is slightly fewer than reported for
2019. The sectors with the most facilities were the chemical manufacturing and
fabricated metals (i.e., manufacture of metal products) sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the sectors
that reported the largest TRI releases in Region 2 were the chemical manufacturing,
electric utilities, petroleum products manufacturing, primary metals (including iron and
steel manufacturing, and foundries), and hazardous waste management sectors. Note
that relatively few facilities in the petroleum products and hazardous waste management
sectors reported to TRI in this region and those sectors are included in "All Other
Sectors" in the pie chart above.

131

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 2

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production;related waste by facilities located in Region 2.

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 2

800 2,000

70° _ H ¦ 1,750

600 I ¦ ¦ ¦ M M

li H+H+H+l rj

100 250

0 ™ ™ 0

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment Energy Recovery

Recycling ¦ Reporting Facilities

Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented. Total
production-related waste managed reported for 2020 in Region 2 was higher than shown here due to large treatment quantities of
hydrogen sulfide, which was not TRI-reportable until 2012.

From 2011 to 2020:

• Production-related waste managed decreased by 159 million pounds (-23%). Quantities of
waste treated, combusted for energy recovery, recycled, and disposed of or otherwise
released all decreased. Nationally, quantities of waste managed increased by 22%, driven
by increased recycling.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 2 managed 631 million pounds of production-related waste, 95% of
which was recycled, combusted for energy recovery, or treated. Only 5% was disposed of or
otherwise released into the environment in Region 2, compared to 11% nationally.

• The 631 million pounds of waste managed includes all chemicals reported for 2020, while
for comparability over time, the trend chart excludes chemicals that were added to the TRI
list after 2011.

132

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

o For Region 2, the difference for 2020 is primarily due to the quantity of hydrogen
sulfide treated, which is included in the 631-million-pound total for 2020 but is
excluded from the trend chart. TRI reporting of hydrogen sulfide began in 2012.

Source Reduction

In 2020, 6% of facilities in Region 2 (66 facilities) reported implementing new source reduction
activities. Source reduction reporting rates in the region were among the highest in the
electrical equipment manufacturing sector. For example, a wiring device manufacturer in Region
2 reduced its use of lead compounds by switching to lead-free solder. fClick to view facility
details in the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

133

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Release Trend Region 2

The following graph shows the annual quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities located
in Region 2.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 2

90
80
70
-S 60
S. 50

40
30
20
10
0

Mil Mill

2011

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

On-site Air Releases
I On-site Land Disposal

I 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 2011 to 2020:

Releases in Region 2 decreased by 8.70 million pounds (-22%),

driven by reduced releases from chemical manufacturing.

petroleum product manufacturing, and electric utilities.

Nationally, releases decreased by 26%.

Quantities of chemicals released to air and water decreased,

while releases to land and off-site transfers for disposal

increased.

The increased releases for 2015 shown in the graph were caused
by transfers of several chemicals from a hazardous waste

Regional Highlight

Variability in TRI
chemical releases in
Region 2 is due to
changes in releases from
hazardous waste
management facilities,
where release quantities
can vary widely year to
year.

134

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

management facility in Kearny, New Jersey, to an off-site disposal facility. I"Click to view
facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 2 reported releasing 31.4 million pounds of TRI chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases decreased by 7.25 million pounds (-19%). Releases to air, water, land
and off-site transfers for disposal all decreased. Nationally, releases decreased by 10%.

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste management practices
for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances fPFASl to TRI. Four facilities in Region 2
reported for PFAS. Facilities in the region managed 3,781 pounds of PFAS as waste of which
1,825 pounds was released.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release
quantities for 2020.

To consider the potential health risk from chronic exposure to these releases, EPA uses a risk-
screening score from the RSEI model. The following pie chart shows each state's contribution to
the region's total RSEI Score for 2020.

135

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 2

• The RSEI model accounts for factors such as a chemical's toxicity, its movement in the
environment, and population density, in addition to the pounds of TRI chemicals
released. RSEI models releases to the air and water but does not model land disposal
quantities. These factors can lead to significant differences between a state's
contribution to regional releases and its contribution to the regional RSEI Score.

For information on the Region 2 facilities with the largest releases, see the TRI Region 2 TRI
factsheet.

136

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 3

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 3. Region 3 includes Delaware, the District
of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and 7 tribes.

Region 3 serves 5 states.
District of Columbia, and 7
tribes

• • ••
m

REGION 3'S
POPULATION IS

30.9 million

PEOPLE
9% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The sectors with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Electric utilities

• Primary metals

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Nitrate compounds

• Lead compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

1,850 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 9% of all TRI facilities

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

137

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 3.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 3,

2020

All Other Sectors:
27%

Transportation 1

Equipment: 3%

Wood Products: 4%

Machinery:

:4% J

Plastics and
Rubber: 6%

Food
Manufacturing: 7%

Fabricated Metals:
15%

Chemical
Manufacturing:
14%

V Primary Metals:
10%

NonmetallicMineral
Products: 9%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

In 2020:

• 1,850 facilities in Region 3 reported to TRI, which is slightly fewer than reported for
2019. The sectors with the most facilities were the fabricated metals (i.e., manufacture
of metal products) and chemical manufacturing sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the sectors
that reported the largest TRI releases in Region 3 were the electric utilities, primary
metals (including iron and steel manufacturing, and foundries), hazardous waste
management, and petroleum products manufacturing sectors. Note that relatively few
facilities in the electric utilities, hazardous waste management, and petroleum products
manufacturing sectors reported to TRI in this region and those sectors are included in
"All Other Sectors" in the pie chart above.

138

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 3

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production;related waste by facilities located in Region 3.

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 3

2,500

co 2

111

2,000

1,500

1,000 n

500

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

I Disposal or Other Releases ^¦Treatment
I Recycling > Reporting Facilities

Energy Recovery

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total waste managed increased by 3.1 billion pounds (134%), driven by one facility that
recycled over 3 billion pounds of cumene each year from 2014 to 2020. fClick to view
facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool!.

o Excluding this facility, waste managed in the region decreased by 412 million
pounds (-19%).

o Nationally, quantities of waste managed increased by 22%, driven by increased
recycling.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 3 managed 5.4 billion pounds of waste, 88% of which was recycled,
compared to 54% nationally.

• Since 2019, waste managed decreased by 521 million pounds (-9%), driven by
reductions in the quantities of waste treated and recycled.

139

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Source Reduction

In 2020, 6% of facilities in Region 3 (118 facilities) reported implementing new source
reduction activities. Source reduction reporting rates in the region were among the highest in
the plastics and rubber products manufacturing sector. For example, a plastics product
manufacturer made product modifications that utilized lower styrene level resin systems. fClick
to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

140

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Release Trend Region 3

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities
located in Region 3.

250

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 3

200

I 150

° 100

¦ Mill

2011 2012 2013 2014

On-site Air Releases
¦ On-site Land Disposal

2015 2016
Year

2017 2018 2019 2020

I 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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 3 decreased by 89 million pounds (-43%),
compared to a 26% decrease nationally.

• Quantities of chemicals released into the air and surface waters,
and transfers off-site for disposal all decreased. Releases to land
increased.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 3 reported releasing 120 million pounds of TRI
chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases decreased by 4.9 million pounds (-4%), primarily driven by decreased
air releases and off-site transfers for disposal, which were somewhat offset by increased
releases to water and land. Nationally, releases decreased by 10%.

141

Regional Highlight

From 2011 to 2020,
releases in Region 3
decreased by 89.4 million
pounds (-43%). The
decrease in total releases
was driven by reduced air
releases from electric
utilities and fewer pounds
of off-site transfers for
disposal from the primary
metals sector.

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste management practices
for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances fPFASl to TRI. One facility in Region 3
reported managing 249,812 pounds of PFAS as waste, 630 pounds of which was released.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release
quantities for 2020.

To consider the potential health risk from chronic exposure to these releases, EPA uses a risk-
screening score from the RSEI model for 2020. The following pie chart shows each state's
contribution to the region's total RSEI Score for 2020.

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 3

DC: <1%

VA: 32%

142

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

For information on the facilities with the largest releases in the region, see the Region 3 TRI

factsheet.

143

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 4

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 4. Region 4 includes Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and 6 tribes.

Region 4 serves 8 states and
6 tribes

• • ••
m

REGION 4'S
POPULATION IS

67.5 million

PEOPLE
20% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The sectors with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Chemical manufacturing

• Paper manufacturing

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Nitrate compounds

• Zinc compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

4,539 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 22% of all TRI facilities and includes 2 facilities on tribal lands

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

144

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 4.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 4,

2020

Chemical
Manufacturing:
16%

All Other Sectors:
25%

Primary Metals: 6%

Wood Products: 6%

Nonmetallic
Mineral Products:

r 15%

Fabricated Metals:
10%

Plastics and
Rubber: 7%

Transportation

Equipment: 8%
Manufacturing: 8%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

In 2020:

• 4,539 facilities in Region 4 reported to TRI, similar to reporting for 2019. The sectors
with the most facilities were the chemical manufacturing and nonmetallic mineral
products (including cement manufacturing') sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the sectors
that reported the largest TRI releases in Region 4 were the chemical manufacturing,
paper manufacturing, primary metals (including iron and steel mills), and electric utilities
sectors. Note that relatively few facilities in the paper manufacturing and electric utilities
sectors reported to TRI in this region and those sectors are included in "All Other
Sectors" in the pie chart above.

145

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 4

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production;related waste by facilities located in Region 4.

~o
c

co 2

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 4

1111 111

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

5,000

4,000

73
n>
"a
o

3,000

era

2,000 n

1,000

I Disposal or Other Releases
I Recycling

Treatment
¦ Reporting Facilities

Energy Recovery

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total production-related waste managed increased by 1.9 billion pounds (49%), driven
by one facility that reported recycling over 1.5 billion pounds of dichloromethane
(methylene chloride) each year from 2018 through 2020. fClick to view facility details in
the TRI P2 Search Tool!. Excluding this facility, waste managed decreased by 55.8
million pounds (-1%), and quantities of waste managed by every method other than
recycling (i.e., treatment, energy recovery, and disposal and releases) decreased while
recycling increased by 278 million pounds (19%).

o Nationally, quantities of waste managed increased by 22%, driven by increased
recycling.

In 2020:

146

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

• Facilities in Region 4 managed 6.03 billion pounds of production-related waste, 93% of
which was recycled, combusted for energy recovery, or treated. Only 7% was disposed
of or otherwise released into the environment, compared to 11% nationally.

• Since 2019, quantities of waste managed increased by 5%, largely driven by increased
recycling.

Source Reduction

In 2020, 6% of facilities in Region 4 (250 facilities) reported implementing new source
reduction activities. Source reduction reporting rates in the region were among the highest in
the transportation equipment manufacturing sector. For example, a truck trailer manufacturer in
Region 4 produced less manganese-containing waste by auditing raw material sizes to reduce
the amount of scrap metal produced. fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

147

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Release Trend Region 4

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities
located in Region 4.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 4

700

600

« 500
¦a
c

S. 400

<4—

J 300

^ 200
100
0

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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 4 decreased by 152 million pounds (-26%). Nationally, the decrease in
releases was also 26%.

• Quantities of chemicals released to air, water, and land all decreased, with the largest
reduction in releases to air. The quantity of chemicals transferred off site for disposal
increased.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 4 reported releasing 433 million pounds of TRI chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases decreased by 31.2 million pounds (-7%), driven by decreased releases
to land and air. Nationally, releases decreased by 10%.

148

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste
management practices for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl
substances fPFASl to TRI. Three facilities in Region 4 reported for
PFAS. Facilities in the region managed 121,229 pounds of PFAS as
waste of which 4,145 pounds was released.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI
chemical release quantities for 2020.

2020 Releases by State, Region 4

SC: 8%

TN: 17%

KY: 11%

GA: 11%

FL: 11%

AL: 17%

NC: 13%

MS: 12%

Regional Highlight

Since 2011, on-site
releases to air in Region 4
decreased by 43%. The
largest decrease was
reported by electric
utilities, which have
reported decreased air
releases almost every year
since 2011. Decreased air
releases in this sector are
due to fewer facilities
required to report to TRI
and reduced releases of
hydrochloric acid.

149

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 4

AL: 30%

GA: 14%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

For information on the Region 4 facilities with the largest releases, see the Region 4 TRI
factsheet.

150

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 5

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 5. Region 5 includes Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin, and 35 tribes.

REGION 5'S

POPULATION IS £

52.5 million

PEOPLE l| |l
16% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The sectors with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Primary metals

• Electric utilities

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Zinc compounds

• Nitrate compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

5,245 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 25% of all TRI facilities and includes 5 facilities on tribal lands

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

Region 5 serves 6 states

151

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 5.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 5, 2020

All Other Sectors:
20%

Nonmetallic Mineral
Products: 6%

Machinery: 6%

Plasticsand Rubber:_/
7%

Food
Manufacturing: 8%

Fabricated Metals:
19%

Chemical
^Manufacturing: 16%

Primary Metals:
10%

Transportation
Equipment: 9%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

In 2020:

• 5,245 facilities in Region 5 reported to TRI, slightly fewer than reported for 2019. The
sectors with the most facilities were the fabricated metals (i.e., manufacture of metal
products) and chemical manufacturing sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the sectors
that reported the largest TRI releases in Region 5 were the primary metals (including
iron and steel manufacturing and foundries), electric utilities, chemical manufacturing,
food manufacturing, and hazardous waste management sectors. Note that relatively few
facilities in the electric utilities and hazardous waste management sectors reported to
TRI in this region and those sectors are included in "All Other Sectors" in the pie chart
above.

152

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 5

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production;related waste by facilities located in Region 5.

~o 6
c

o 5

<4—

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 5

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

6,000
5,000

73
n>

4,000 o

rt"

3,000

Tl
QJ

2,000

rt"
tl)'

1,000 00
0

I Disposal or Other Releases
I Recycling

Treatment
¦Reporting Facilities

Energy Recovery

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total production-related waste managed increased by 1.01 billion pounds (23%), driven
by one plastics manufacturing facility that reported recycling more than a billion pounds
of waste, mostly dichloromethane (methylene chloride), annually from 2013 to 2020,
and one food manufacturer that reported a 600-million-pound increase in /7-hexane
recycling from 2011 to 2020. Excluding these facilities, waste managed decreased by
660 million pounds (-18%).

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 5 managed 5.50 billion pounds of production-related waste, 66% of
which was managed through recycling, compared to 54% nationally.

• Since 2019, quantities of waste managed in the region decreased by 7%. Quantities of
waste managed by all methods (i.e., recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and disposal
or other release) all decreased.

153

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Source Reduction

In 2020, 6% of facilities in Region 5 (307 facilities) reported implementing new source
reduction activities. Source reduction reporting rates in the region were highest in the
computers and electronic products manufacturing sector. For example, a printed circuit
assembly manufacturer purchased and installed a new wave soldering machine which reduced
the amount of lead waste generated. fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

154

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Release Trend Region 5

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities
located in Region 5.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 5

600

500

-S 400

C
3
O
Q_

o 300

LO
£

200

100

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015 2016
Year

2017

2018

2019

2020

On-site Air Releases
I On-site Land Disposal

I 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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 5 decreased by 186 million pounds (-33%), driven by reduced releases
from electric utilities and the primary metals sector. Nationally, releases decreased by 26%.

• Releases to air, water, land, and transferred off site for disposal all decreased.

155

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 5 reported releasing 374 million pounds of TRI
chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases decreased by 90.7 million pounds (-20%).

Decreases occurred across many sectors, with the largest decreases in
the primary metals, electric utilities, and hazardous waste
management sectors. Releases decreased to all environmental media.

Nationally, releases decreased by 10%.

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste
management practices for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances
fPFASl to TRI. 10 facilities in Region 5 reported for PFAS. Facilities in
the region managed 31,057 pounds of PFAS as waste of which 1,808 pounds was released.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release

quantities for 2020.

Regional Highlight

From 2019 to 2020, total
releases in Region 5
decreased by 90.7 million
pounds. The decrease
was driven by decreased
quantities transferred off
site for disposal by
facilities in the primary
metals and hazardous
waste sectors and
reduced on-site land
releases by electric
utilities.

2020 Releases by State, Region 5

MN: 5%

Wl: 8%

IL: 16%

Ml: 17%

IN: 28%

OH: 25%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

156

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 5

MN: 2%

OH: 31%

Wl: 13%

IL: 28%

For information on the Region 5 facilities with the largest releases, see the Region 5 TRI

factsheet.

157

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 6

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 6. Region 6 includes Arkansas, Louisiana,

REGION 6'S #0

POPULATION IS f M £

43.1 million

PEOPLE V| ft
13% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The sectors with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Chemical manufacturing

• Paper manufacturing

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Ammonia

• Methanol

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

2,865 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 14% of all TRI facilities and includes 6 facilities on tribal lands

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and 66 tribes.

Region 6 serves 5 states
and 66 tribes

158

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 6.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 6,

2020

Chemical

Petroleum-/ I n%

Products Food Manufacturing:

Manufacturing: 6% 7%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

In 2020:

• 2,865 facilities in Region 6 reported to TRI, slightly fewer than reported for 2019. The
sectors with the most facilities were the chemical manufacturing and nonmetallic mineral
products (including cement manufacturing') sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the sectors
that reported the largest TRI releases in Region 6 were the chemical manufacturing,
paper manufacturing, petroleum products manufacturing, and electric utilities sectors.
Note that relatively few facilities in the paper manufacturing and electric utilities sectors
reported to TRI in this region and those sectors are included in "All Other Sectors" in the
pie chart above.

159

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 6

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production;related waste by facilities located in Region 6.

i 6

a- 5

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 6

1111111111

3,200
2,800
2,400

2,000 S

1,600 <»

Tl
CD

1,200 g;

r-h

800 S'

= 3
^ 2

1 400

0 ¦ L 0

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatments* Energy Recovery Recycling • Reporting Facilities

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total production-related waste managed decreased by 216 million pounds (-3%), driven by
reduced recycling and treatment.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 6 managed 6.72 billion pounds of production-related waste, 44% of
which was treated and 28% of which was recycled. Nationally, 25% of waste was managed
through treatment and 54% was recycled.

• Since 2019, quantities of waste managed decreased by 16%, primarily driven by decreased
quantities of waste recycled and treated.

Source Reduction

In 2020, 5% of facilities in Region 6 (154 facilities) reported implementing new source
reduction activities. As one example, a specialty chemical manufacturer formulated a new line
of formaldehyde-free resins to meet industry's evolving regulatory and environmental demands.
fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool!.

160

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Releases Trend Region 6

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities

located in Region 6.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 6

600

500

!i 1111111111

100
0

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 6 decreased by 74.0 million pounds (-
16%), compared to a 26% decrease nationally.

• Quantities of chemicals released to air, land, and off-site
transfers for disposal decreased, while quantities of
chemicals released to water increased.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 6 reported releasing 390 million pounds of TRI chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases decreased by 23.3 million pounds (-6%). Releases to air, land, water,
and off-site transfers for disposal all decreased. Nationally, releases decreased by 10%.

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste management practices
for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances fPFASl to TRI. Seven facilities in Region 6
reported for PFAS. Facilities in the region managed 382,628 pounds of PFAS as waste of
which 3,951 pounds was released.

Regional Highlight

Since 2019, releases in
Region 6 decreased by
23.3 million pounds, driven
by reductions in the
chemical manufacturing,
electric utilities, and
petroleum product
manufacturing sectors.

161

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release
quantities for 2020.

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

To consider the potential health risk from chronic exposure to these releases, EPA uses a risk-
screening score from the RSEI model. The following chart shows each state's contribution to
the region's TRI chemical release quantities for 2020.

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 6

• The RSEI model accounts for factors such as a chemical's toxicity, its movement in
the environment, and population density, in addition to the pounds of TRI chemicals

162

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

released. RSEI models releases to the air and water but does not model land
disposal quantities. These factors can lead to significant differences between a
state's contribution to regional releases and its contribution to the regional RSEI
Score.

For information on Region 6 facilities with the largest releases, see the Region 6 TRI factsheet.

163

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 7

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 7. Region 7 includes Iowa, Kansas, Missouri,
Nebraska, and 9 tribes.

Region 7 serves 4 states
and 9 tribes

• • ••
m

REGION 7'S
POPULATION IS

14.2 million

PEOPLE
4% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The sectors with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Food manufacturing

• Metal mining

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Nitrate compounds

• Lead compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

1,506 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 7% of all TRI facilities

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

164

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 7.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 7,

2020

All Other Sectors:
18%

Primary Metals: 4%

Plastics and.
Rubber: 6%

Transportation _/
Equipment: 8%

Machinery: 8%

Chemical
Manufacturing:
18%

Food
Manufacturing:
15%

Nonmetallic
Mineral Products:
11%

Fabricated Metals:
11%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding.

In 2020:

• 1,506 facilities in Region 7 reported to TRI, similar to reporting for 2019. The sectors
with the most facilities were the chemical manufacturing and food manufacturing
sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the sectors
that reported the largest TRI releases in Region 7 were the food manufacturing, metal
mining, chemical manufacturing, and electric utilities sectors. Note that relatively few
facilities in the electric utilities and metal mining sectors reported to TRI in this region
and those sectors are included in "All Other Sectors" in the pie chart above.

165

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 7

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production-related.waste by facilities located in Region 7.

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 7

1,200 1,600

1,000

1,200 ^3

T3 I n>

£ 800 "5

1,400

1,000 °

H H H H H H ™

¦ ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦

= 400
200

400

¦ ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment Energy Recovery

Recycling —•—Reporting Facilities

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total production-related waste managed decreased by 16.8 million pounds (-2%).
Quantities of waste recycled, treated, and disposed of or otherwise released all
decreased, while quantities of waste combusted for energy recovery increased.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 7 managed 980 million pounds of production-related waste, 87% of
which was recycled, combusted for energy recovery, or treated. 13% was disposed of or
otherwise released into the environment, compared to 11% nationally.

• Since 2019, quantities of waste managed decreased by 4%, driven by decreased
quantities of waste recycled and treated.

166

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Source Reduction

In 2020, 5% of facilities in Region 7 (70 facilities) reported implementing new source reduction
activities. Source reduction reporting rates in the region were among the highest in the food
product manufacturing sector. For example, a pet food manufacturer changed ingredients and
reformulated products to reduce the use of zinc. fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2
Search Tool"!.

167

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Releases Trend Region 7

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities
located in Region 7.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 7

180
160
140

120

a- 100

4—

£ 80
o

H 60

40
20
0

Year

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

¦ On-site Land Disposal I 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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 7 decreased by 35.7 million pounds (-
21%). This decrease was driven by reduced releases from
the electric utilities, metal mining, and primary metals
sectors. Nationally, releases decreased by 26%.

• Quantities of chemicals released to air, water, and land
decreased while quantities transferred off site for disposal
increased.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 7 reported releasing 132 million pounds of TRI chemicals.

Regional Highlight

Releases in Region 7
decreased from 2019 to
2020 primarily due to
reduced land releases
from electric utilities.

168

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• Since 2019, releases decreased by 11.5 million pounds (-8%). Releases decreased to all
media except water. Nationally, releases decreased by 10%.

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste management practices
for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances fPFASl to TRI. Six facilities in Region 7
reported for PFAS. Facilities in the region managed 1,489 pounds of PFAS as waste and
released 543 pounds of PFAS.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release

quantities for 2020.

2020 Releases by State, Region 7

NE: 12%

IA: 29%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

169

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 7

NE: 11%

MO:

KS: 60%

For information on the Region 7 facilities with the largest releases, see the Region 7 TRI

factsheet.

170

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 8

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 8. Region 8 includes Colorado, Montana,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 28 tribes.

REGION 8'S 0# #0

POPULATION IS £

12.4 million lVA}

PEOPLE V| |V
4% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The sectors with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Metal mining

• Electric utilities

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Lead compounds

• Copper compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

724 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 3% of all TRI facilities and includes 2 facilities on tribal lands

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

Region 8 serves 6 states

171

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 8.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 8,

2020

Nonmetallic
Mineral Products:

Products Metals: 9%

Manufacturing: 7%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding.

In 2020:

• 724 facilities in Region 8 reported to TRI, similar to reporting for 2019. The sectors with
the most facilities were the nonmetallic mineral products (including cement
manufacturing'), chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the sector
that reported the largest TRI releases in Region 8 was the metal mining sector, which
accounted for 56% of releases reported in the region. After metal mining, the electric
utilities, primary metals (including smelters), and chemical manufacturing sectors
reported the largest releases. Note that relatively few facilities in the metal mining and
primary metals sectors reported to TRI in this region and those sectors are included in
"All Other Sectors" in the pie chart above.

172

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 8

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production-related.waste by facilities located in Region 8.

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 8

1,400 800
1,200 • _ ¦ ' * ^ *

600 2

^ 1,000
2 800

<4—

£ 600
o

= 400
200

ill Milli

500 3

400

-n

300 2.

200 jjf

100

I ¦ 1111111 ¦

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases Treatment Energy Recovery

Recycling ¦ Reporting Facilities

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

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 8 managed 917 million pounds of production-related waste, 37% of
which was disposed of or otherwise released, compared to 11% nationally. Primary
metal manufacturers and metal mines drive the quantity of waste released in Region 8.

• Since 2019, quantities of waste managed in the region decreased by 3%.

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total production-related waste managed increased by 48.4 million pounds (6%).
Quantities of waste combusted for energy recovery, treated, and disposed of or
otherwise released increased, while quantities recycled decreased. Nationally, quantities
of waste managed increased by 22%, driven by increased recycling.

Source Reduction

173

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

In 2020, 5% of facilities in Region 8 (33 facilities) reported implementing new source reduction
activities. For example, to reduce xylene waste, a structural metal products manufacturer
assigned dedicated day and night shift paint technicians to operate pumps effectively and
prevent leaks. fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

174

-------
>—| j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/

\/LI February 2022

Release Trend Region 8

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities
located in Region 8.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 8

700
600
500

tn
¦a
c

o 400

<4—

| 300

5» I I

100
0

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 8 have fluctuated since 2011, largely driven by
changes in the quantities of metal waste disposed of to land by
metal mines. Changes in production volumes and in the chemical
composition of the extracted ore can vary substantially from year
to year at metal mines, impacting waste quantities reported to
TRI. The 2013 spike in land disposal was driven by two metal
mines in Utah.

o Excluding the metal mining sector, releases decreased by
20.4 million pounds (-16%).

Regional Highlight

For 2020, 56% of total
disposal or other releases
reported in Region 8 were
from the metal mining
sector, largely driven by
one copper mine in Utah
Tview facility details!.

175

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 8 reported releasing 335 million pounds of TRI chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases decreased by 28.3 million pounds (-8%), driven by reduced releases to
land. Nationally, releases decreased by 10%.

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste management practices
for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances fPFASl to TRI. Three facilities in Region 8
reported for PFAS. Facilities in the region managed 3,328 pounds of PFAS as waste of which
less than a pound was released.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release

quantities for 2020.

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

176

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 8

WY: <1%

ND:;
SD: 3%

UT: 60%

CO: 33%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

• The RSEI model accounts for factors such as a chemical's toxicity, its movement in the
environment, and population density, in addition to the pounds of TRI chemicals
released. RSEI models releases to the air and water but does not model land disposal
quantities, which drive the high release quantities for Utah. These factors can lead to
significant differences between a state's contribution to regional releases and its
contribution to the regional RSEI Score.

For information on the Region 8 facilities with the largest releases, see the Region 8 TRI
factsheet.

177

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 9

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 9. Region 9 includes Arizona, California,
Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands (American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana
Islands), and 148 tribes.

REGION 9'S A I

POPULATION IS A

51.3 million

PEOPLE | ¦ ¦ V
15% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The sectors with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Metal mining

• Primary metals

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Arsenic compounds

• Lead compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

1,606 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 8% of all TRI facilities and includes 11 facilities on tribal lands

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

Region 9 serves 4 states.
Pacific Islands, and 148 tribes

178

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 9.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 9,

2020

Nonmetallic
Mineral Products:

16%

All Other Sectors:
35%

Petroleum Bulk
Terminals: 4%

Petroleum Product:
Manufacturing: 5%

Chemical
Manufacturing:
14%

Manufacturing: 6%

Fabricated Metals:
11%

Computers and
Electronic Products: 7%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding

In 2020:

• 1,606 facilities in Region 9 reported to TRI, slightly fewer than reported for 2019. The
sectors with the most facilities were the nonmetallic mineral products (including cement
manufacturing') and chemical manufacturing sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the most
TRI releases in Region 9 were from the metal mining sector, which accounted for 86%
of the region's releases for 2020. After metal mining, the primary metals (including
smelting), hazardous waste management, and petroleum products manufacturing
sectors reported the largest releases. Note that relatively few facilities in the metal
mining, primary metals, and hazardous waste management sectors reported to TRI in
this region and those sectors are included in "All Other Sectors" in the pie chart above.

179

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 9

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production-related.waste by facilities located in Region 9.

Millions of Pounds

sJ—* J-*

NJ ^ (J) CO o w V

o o o o o o o

DOOOOOOO

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 9

2,000

1,600 ^
n>
¦a
o

1,200 5.

era

800 S

id"

400 "
n

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Disposal or Other Releases

Treatment

Energy Recovery

—

Recycling

> Reporting Facilities

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total production-related waste managed decreased by 258 million pounds (-22%), driven
by decreased recycling by the primary metals sector and decreased quantities disposed of
by metal mines.

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 9 managed 916 million pounds of production-related waste, 61% of
which was disposed of or otherwise released, compared to 11% nationally. Metal mines
drive the quantity of waste managed in the region, due to large quantities of metal-
containing waste disposed to land; for 2020, metal mines managed 55% of all production-
related waste managed in the region.

• Since 2019, quantities of production-related waste managed in Region 9 decreased by less
than 1%. While the quantities of waste that were recycled, combusted for energy recovery,
or treated all decreased, an increase in waste disposed of or otherwise released diminished
the overall reduction.

180

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Source Reduction

In 2020, 6% of facilities in Region 9 (91 facilities) reported implementing new source reduction
activities. Source reduction reporting rates in the region were among the highest in the
fabricated metals sector. For example, a sheet metal products manufacturer enacted a
preventative maintenance program to run machines more efficiently and reduce manganese
waste. fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

181

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Release Trend Region 9

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities
located in Region 9.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 9

800
700
600

l/>

= 500

¦llll

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Note: For comparability, trend graphs include only those chemicals that were reportable to TRI for all years presented.

From 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 9 have fluctuated since 2011, largely
driven by changes in the quantities of metal waste disposed
of to land by metal mines. Changes in production volumes
and in the chemical composition of the extracted ore can vary
substantially from year to year, impacting waste quantities
reported to TRI.

o Excluding the metal mining sector, releases in Region 9
decreased by 26.8 million pounds (-25%).

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 9 released 555 million pounds of TRI chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases increased by 91.9 million pounds (20%), while nationally, releases
decreased by 10%.

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste management practices
for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances fPFASl to TRI. One facility in Region 9

Regional Highlight

43 metal mines in Region
9 reported to TRI for
2020, more than in any
other region, accounting
for 86% of the region's
releases. Most of the
mining releases were
reported by gold mines in
Nevada.

182

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

reported managing 20 pounds of PFAS as waste, all of which was released. A second facility
in the region reported for a PFAS in error and subsequently withdrew the report.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release
quantities for 2020.

2020 Releases by State, Region 9

To consider the potential health risk from chronic exposure to these releases, EPA uses a risk-
screenina score from the RSEI model. The following chart shows each state's contribution to
the region's TRI chemical release quantities for 2020.

2020 RSEI Score by State, Region 9

Pacific Islands:

183

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

• The RSEI model accounts for factors such as a chemical's toxicity, its movement in the
environment, and population density, in addition to the pounds of TRI chemicals
released. RSEI models releases to the air and water but does not model land disposal
quantities, which drive the high release quantities for Nevada. These factors can lead to
significant differences between a state's contribution to regional releases and its
contribution to the regional RSEI Score.

For information on the Region 9 facilities with the largest releases, see the TRI Region 9
factsheet.

184

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Regional Profile for EPA Region 10

This section examines TRI reporting in EPA Region 10. Region 10 includes Alaska, Idaho,
Oregon, Washington, and 271 tribes.

Region 10 serves 4 states
and 271 tribes

REGION 10'S
POPULATION IS

14.5 million

PEOPLE
4% of the U.S. population

U.S. Census Annual Estimates of the Resident Population: July 1, 2020

The sectors with the greatest TRI releases are:

• Metal mining

• Chemical manufacturing

The tri chemicals released in the greatest
quantities are:

• Zinc compounds

• Lead compounds

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

744 facilities in the region report to TRI

which is 4% of all TRI facilities and includes 16 facilities on tribal lands

U.S. EPA TRI, Reporting Year 2020

For state- and tribe-specific TRI data, see the Where You Live section and the Tribal
Communities section.

185

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Industry Sectors

This chart shows the industry sectors with the most TRI-reporting facilities in Region 10.

Facilities Reporting to TRI by Industry in Region 10,

2020

All Other Sectors:
20%

Computers and
Electronic
Products: 5%

Plastics and
Rubber: 5%

Petroleum
Products
Manufacturing

Primary Metals: 6%

Transportation
Equipment: 6%

Nonmetallic
Mineral Products:
12%

Wood Products:
11%

Food
Manufacturing:
10%

Fabricated Metals:

Chemical
Manufacturing: 10%

Note: Percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding.

In 2020:

• 744 facilities in Region 10 reported to TRI, similar to reporting for 2019. The sectors
with the most facilities were the nonmetallic mineral products (including cement
manufacturing') and wood product manufacturing sectors.

• While the figure shows the sectors with the most TRI facilities in the region, the most
TRI releases in Region 10 were from the metal mining sector, which accounted for 92%
of the region's releases for 2020. After metal mining, the chemical manufacturing, food
manufacturing, and paper manufacturing sectors reported the largest releases. Note
that relatively few facilities in the metal mining sector or paper manufacturing sectors
reported to TRI in this region and those sectors are included in "All Other Sectors" in the
pie chart above.

186

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Waste Management Trend Region 10

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals managed as
production;related waste by facilities in Region 10.

900.00

800.00

700.00 ¦*>
n>

600.00 o
500.00 5'

400.00 J
300.00 =

rt"

200.00 K
100.00

Recycling > Reporting Facilities

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

From 2011 to 2020:

• Total production-related waste managed decreased by 457 million pounds (-33%), driven
by decreased releases reported by metal mines. Excluding metal mines, waste managed
decreased by 26.7 million pounds (-8%).

In 2020:

• Facilities in Region 10 managed 978 million pounds of production-related waste, 72% of
which was disposed of or otherwise released, compared to 11% nationally. Metal mines
drive the quantity of waste managed in the region, due to large quantities of metal-
containing waste disposed to land; for 2020, metal mines managed 66% of all production-
related waste managed in the region.

• Since 2019, quantities of production-related waste managed in the region decreased by
22%, driven by decreased disposal quantities from metal mines. Excluding metal mines,
waste managed in Region 10 decreased by 48.6 million pounds (-13%).

1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0

Production-Related Waste Managed, EPA Region 10

2011 2012 2013

2014 2015 2016 2017
Year

2018 2019 2020

I Disposal or Other Releases

Treatment

Energy Recovery

187

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Source Reduction

In 2020, 4% of facilities in Region 10 (28 facilities) reported implementing new source
reduction activities. As one example of source reduction in Region 10, an agricultural chemical
manufacturer began using a liquid raw material with fewer impurities which generated less filter
cake waste containing zinc. fClick to view facility details in the TRI P2 Search Tool"!.

188

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Releases Trend Region 10

The following graph shows the 10-year trend in quantities of TRI chemicals released by facilities
located in Region 10.

Total Disposal or Other Releases, EPA Region 10

1,400

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

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 2011 to 2020:

• Releases in Region 10 have fluctuated since 2011, largely
driven by changes in the quantities of waste disposed of to
land by metal mines. Changes in production volumes and in
the chemical composition of the extracted ore can vary
substantially from year to year, impacting waste quantities
reported to TRI.
o Excluding the metal mining sector, releases decreased
by 19.3 million pounds (-25%).

In 2020:

Regional Highlight

TRI chemical releases in
Region 10 are dominated
by one metal mine. For
2020, the Red Dog mine
in Alaska reported 78%
of the region's releases
rview facility details!.

189

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

• Facilities in Region 10 reported releasing 701 million pounds of TRI chemicals.

• Since 2019, releases decreased by 230 million pounds (-25%), compared to a 10%
decrease nationally. The decrease in Region 10 releases was driven by the metal mining
sector.

o Excluding metal mining, releases decreased by 6.9 million pounds (-10%) since 2019.

• 2020 was the first year facilities reported their releases and waste management practices
for certain per- and polvfluoroalkvl substances fPFASl to TRI.

Releases by State

The following chart shows each state's contribution to the region's TRI chemical release

quantities for 2020.

2020 Releases by State, Region 10

WA: 2%

190

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

RSEI Score by State, 2020 RSEI Score
by State, 10

AK: <1%

ID: 4%

WA: 56%

OR: 40%

• The RSEI model accounts for factors such as a chemical's toxicity, its movement in the
environment, and population density, in addition to the pounds of TRI chemicals
released. RSEI models releases to the air and water but does not model land disposal
quantities, which drive the high release quantities for Alaska. These factors can lead to
significant differences between a state's contribution to regional releases and its
contribution to the regional RSEI Score.

For information on the Region 10 facilities with the largest releases, see the Region 10 TRI
factsheet.

191

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

Where You Live

Use the geographical selections bar above the map to show the releases of Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) chemicals that occurred throughout the United States during 2020. Use the
Data to Display dropdown to select the metric to display.

Show map by: <$ States C'Metropolitan Areas 0 Watersheds O Tribal

Search: Slate Select... v | or Zip Code

j City: (Optional)

| County. |(Optional)

IE9

Legend Data to Display:

* 5 Basemap ~

mcxico,

Click on any location on the map to see detailed information.

View Larger Map

In addition to viewing maps based on release quantities, you can also view maps based on risk-
screening scores, which are estimates of relative potential risks to human health following
exposure to TRI chemicals. These unitless risk-screening scores (RSEI Score) are generated by
EPA's Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model and allow you to compare the
relative potential for human health impacts across various locations. For more on RSEI, see the
Hazard and Potential Risk of TRI Chemicals section.

192

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

TRI Data Considerations

193

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

States and Metropolitan Areas

For TRI purposes, "states" includes all U.S. territories. For 2020, facilities located in all 56 states
and territories reported to the TRI Program. Texas, Ohio, and California had the most facilities
that reported to TRI, and together accounted for 20% of the total number of facilities that
reported for 2020.

More than 80% of the U.S. population and many of the industrial and federal facilities that
report to the TRI Program are in urban areas. "Metropolitan Statistical Areas" (MSAs) and
"micropolitan statistical areas" in the United States are defined by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) and consist of one or more socially and economically integrated adjacent
counties, cities, or towns.

Total Disposal or Other Releases in the 10 Most Populous

Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Alpharetta, GA
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV

Pounds perSq. Mile

MSAs, 2020

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000

194

-------
oEPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

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 by water flowing through the land area above them.

Large aquatic ecosystems comprise multiple small watersheds and water resources within a
large geographic area. The Where You Live map displays 10 aquatic ecosystems.

The chart below shows the proportion of TRI chemical releases within each of the aquatic
ecosystems that were released to air, water, or land, or transferred for disposal off site.
Discharges of any type, including to air or land, can all affect living resources within an aquatic
ecosystem. For example, some chemicals can persist in the environment and accumulate in the
tissues of fish and other wildlife. A few chemicals can become more concentrated as predators
farther up the food chain eat these organisms, which may ultimately cause health problems for
wildlife and humans.

TRI Disposal or Other Releases within Large Aquatic
Ecosystems, 2020

Air "Water "Land i Total Off-site Disposal or Other Releases

Gulf of Mexico (300 million pounds)
Great Lakes (169 million pounds)
Columbia River Basin (103 million pounds)
Chesapeake Bay (35.1 million pounds)
San Francisco Bay Delta (20.6 million pounds)
Puget Sound - Georgia Basin (6.89 million pounds)
Long Island Sound (3.62 million pounds)
South Florida (2.42 million pounds)
Lake Champlain Basin (601,000 pounds)
Pacific Islands (495,000 pounds)

0% 20% 40% 60%

Percent of Total

80%

100%

The chart below shows TRI chemical releases per square mile for each of the 10 large aquatic
ecosystems. Releases per square mile are greatest in the Gulf of Mexico watershed, where

195

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

many chemical manufacturing facilities are located. In fact, almost half of the TRI releases from
the chemical manufacturing sector are from these facilities.

Total Disposal or Other Releases within Large Aquatic
Ecosystems per Square Mile, 2020

Pounds perSq. Mile

196

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

Tribal Communities

Under EPA policy, the agency works with federally recognized tribes on a government-to-
government basis to protect the land, air, and water in Indian..countiy. and Alaska Native
villages and to support tribal assumption of program authority. Facilities located in Indian
country that meet TRI reporting requirements must indicate the appropriate three-digit Bureau
of Indian Affairs fBIAl tribal code on annual TRI reporting forms. These codes tell the EPA on
which tribal land the facility is located.

In 2020, there were 42 facilities located in the Indian country of 19 different federally
recognized tribes that reported to TRI. These facilities collectively managed over 16 million
pounds of production-related waste, 5.3 million pounds of which was disposed of or otherwise
released. Of these releases, 89% were released on site; 87% of these on-site releases were
disposal to land from electric utilities and metal mining facilities. These facilities primarily
disposed of metal compounds such as lead, barium, and copper compounds. Lead and copper
are often present in the mineral ore disposed of by metal mines, and barium is present in coal
and oil combusted at electric utilities.

Many more facilities are located on or within a 10-mile radius of Indian country. 1,934 such
facilities reported to TRI for 2020, representing 241 different federally recognized tribes. These
facilities collectively managed over 980 million pounds of production-related waste, 180 million
pounds of which were disposed of or otherwise released. Of the releases reported, 83% were
released on site; 69% of these on-site releases were from chemical manufacturing, metal
mining, and primary metals manufacturing facilities.

The table below provides more details about various types of releases and other waste
management reported by facilities on federally recognized tribal lands.

197

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Quick Facts for 2020: Facilities on Tribal Lands

Measure

Facilities on Tribal
Land

Facilities on or
within 10 miles of
tribal land

Number of Facilities that Reported to TRI

1,934

Number of Tribes with TRI Facilities on Their Lands

241

Production-Related Waste Managed

16.04 million lb

987 million lb

Recycling

2.85 million lb

301 million lb

Energy Recovery

2.54 million lb

109 million lb

Treatment

5.34 million lb

397 million lb

Disposal or Other Releases

5.32 million lb

180 million lb

Total Disposal or Other Releases

5.34 million lb

181 million lb

On-site

4.75 million lb

150 million lb

Air

0.51 million lb

56.3 million lb

Water

1,600 lb

13.8 million lb

Land

4.24 million lb

79.4 million lb

Off-site

0.59 million lb

31.4 million lb

In this table, the values for "Disposal or Other Releases" in the production-related waste managed section is lower than the value
for "Total Disposal or Other Releases." This is primarily because some facilities reported managing non-production-related waste.
Non-production-related waste is not included in production-related waste managed values but is included in the Total Disposal or
Other Releases.

The Tribal Communities Dashboard makes it easy to explore information about releases of TRI
chemicals from facilities on or near tribal lands. An example of the type of TRI information in
the Tribal Communities Dashboard is shown in the interactive chart below. Use the buttons in
the top row to filter the data by industry sector, chemical, and/or tribe.

198

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Select an Industry Sector

Select a Chemical

Select charts from this menu '

Clear Selections

Total Releases on Tribal Lands, 2026

Total Releases for 19 Tribes: 5,337,594 lb

Ute Indian Tribe of the...

Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico...

40.2% 1

I 16.7X

Tohono O'odham Natio...

I Coeur D'Alene Tribe
I Navajo Nation, Arizon...
I Puyallup Tribe of the P...
I Tohono O'odham Nati...
I Ute Indian Tribe of the...
I Others

The interactive table below lists the federally recognized tribes that had at least one TRI-
reporting facility on their lands, along with the total releases reported by facilities and the
number of facilities. Click on a column header to change how the table is sorted.

199

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

Total Disposal or Other Releases on Tribal Lands by Tribe, 2020

Tribe ^

Total Releases
(lb)

Number of
Facilities

Fact
Sheet

Totals

5,337,594

Tohono O'odbam Nation of Arizona

2,147,985

Link

Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah

1,207,221

Link

Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation, Utah

890,520

Link

Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation

749,426

Link

Coeur D'Aiene Tribe

127,051

Link

Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation

98,419

Link

The Choctaw Nation of OMahoma

78,771

Link

Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians

27,283

Link

Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma

4,400

Link

Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan

2,731

Link

Oneida Nation

1,851

Link

Northern Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation,
Wyoming

1,553

Link

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River
Reservation, Arizona

256

Link

Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian
Reservation, Arizona

111

Link

Tulaiip Tribes of Washington

Link

Nez Perce Tribe

Link

Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, Arizona

Link

Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of Rincon
Reservation, California

Link

Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port Madison Reservation

Link

Additional resources for tribes are available on the TRI for Tribal Communities weboaae,
including more detailed analyses of TRI data, links to other online tools, and contact
information for EPA's Tribal Program Managers.

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022

TRI and Beyond

The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) serves as a model for pollutant release and transfer
inventories worldwide and how TRI relates to other EPA environmental and chemical
management programs and laws.

The TRI is a powerful resource that provides the public with information about how TRI
chemical wastes are managed by facilities in the United States. Beyond the TRI, there are many
programs at EPA that also collect various types of information about TRI-listed chemicals and
other regulated chemicals. The next figure is an overview of some of the laws that EPA
implements, and the industrial activities or processes EPA regulates under these laws.

While many programs at EPA focus on one environmental medium, the TRI Program is unique
in that it covers all environmental media by tracking chemical releases to air, water, and land,
as well as chemical waste transfers. In addition, facilities submit TRI reports annually. As a
result, TRI data provide some of the most up-to-date, comprehensive information available and
can be used with other datasets to provide a more complete picture of national trends in
chemical waste management practices.

201

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

Pollution
Prevention Act
(PPA)

Underground
Injection

• Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA)

• Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)

Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA)

• Clean Air Act (CAA)

Chemical
Manufacturing
and Processing

Air Emissions

Products

Water
Discharges

1 Clean Water Act (CWA)

1 Ocean Dumping Act
(ODA)

Waste
Transfers

Land
Disposal

1 Resource
Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA)

• Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA)

• Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and
Liabilty Act (CERCLA)

• Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA)

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
the quantities of chemicals on site, the type and location of storage of those chemicals,
and their use. The TRI Program was established by EPCRA and covers the reporting of
information pertaining to toxic chemicals; see the EPCRA section below for details.

Offices throughout EPA use TRI data to support their respective programmatic missions to
protect human health and the environment. These uses include technical analysis for regulation,
informing program priorities and projects, providing information to internal and external
stakeholders, and many other applications.

202

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

TRI Around the World

In 1986, with the enactment of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA), the TRI was established as the first national Pollutant Release and Transfer Register
(PRTR) in the world. Since then, environmental agencies in other countries have implemented
their own PRTR programs modeled after the TRI Program. Currently, at least 50 countries have
fully established PRTRs or have implemented pilot programs, as shown in the map below. More
countries are expected to develop PRTRs in the future, particularly in Asia, South America, and
Africa.

Source: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe PRTR Global Map

As global PRTR implementation continues to grow, the TRI Program will continue to work with
international organizations to:

• Assist in the development of new PRTR programs,

• Promote data standards and core data elements to improve PRTR comparability and
harmonization and allow global scale analyses, and

• Showcase the utility of PRTR data for assessing progress towards sustainability.

203

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

LUtfl www .eoa. oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
X#LI M February 2022

International Project Spotlight: Using PRTR Data to
Assess Progress toward the U.N. Sustainable
Development Goals

Background. The TRI Program collaborates with the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
on PRTR projects, including a project to use global PRTR data to
assess progress toward the United Nations' QJJMJ Sustainable
Development Goals fSDGsV These goals are designed to "shift
the world on to a sustainable and resilient path" by setting targets
that encompass the economic, environmental, and social dimensions of sustainability. As
stakeholders act toward achieving the SDGs, the U.N. will measure progress toward the Goals
using existing data where possible. One such existing data source for some of the SDGs may be
found in countries' PRTR data.

Project Focus. The U.N. SPG Target 12.4 EXIT was identified as the target most directly
relevant to PRTR data and focuses on reducing chemical releases to the environment.

Project Status. OECD recently published the prolect report EpHli based on aggregated data
for multiple chemicals from multiple countries to provide insight into progress toward achieving
SDG Target 12.4. The figure below from the report shows a comparison of 2008 and 2017 air
and water releases of 14 pollutants from manufacturing facilities as reported to the 7 PRTRs
analyzed in the project.

Next steps., EPA is working with OECD to define the next steps for building on the work
completed to date. The findings may be included in the next update of the U.N. Sustainable
Development Goals Report EXIT.

204

-------
j 2020 TRI National Analysis
LI#/\ www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
\/LI February 2022

Change in releases of 14 pollutants, 2008 to 2017 (kg)

¦ 2008 ¦ 2017

Australia

Canada

Chile

E-PRTR

Japan

Mexico

United
States

500.000,000

1,000,000,000

1,500,000,000

2,000,000,000

Note: PRTRs included in the analyses-. Australia - National Pollutant Inventory (NPI), Canada - National Pollutant
Release Inventory (NPRI), Chile - Registro de Emisiones y Transferencia de Contaminantes (RETC), European Union
- European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR), Japan Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (PRTR),
Mexico - Registro de Emisiones y Transferencia de Contaminantes (RETC), United States - Toxics Release Inventory
(TRI). Chemicals included in the analyses. 1,2-Dichloroethane, Benzene, Cadmium, Chromium, Di-(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate, Dichloromethane, Ethylbenzene, Mercury, Nickel, Particulate matter, Styrene, Sulfur oxides,
Tetrachloroethylene, Trichloroethylene.

205

-------
2020 TRI National Analysis

www .eoa, oov/trinationa lana Ivsis/
February 2022

Mapping Cross-Border Transfers

Facilities must report on the TRI chemicals in wastes they transfer off site for management.
Facilities report how the waste was managed off site and the name and address of the receiving
facility.

This interactive map shows states with TRI facilities that shipped waste containing TRI
chemicals outside of the US. Click on a state to view sending facility locations in that state and
countries receiving waste from facilities in that state. Explore this data in more depth in the full

TRI National Analysis Dashboard.

206

-------
v>EPA

2020 TRI National Analysis
www.epa.aov/trinationalanalysis/
February 2022