TRI National Training Conference

Public Data Release Process

Delving into TRI Data:

Facilities with smaller amounts of waste reported
and Pollution Prevention Reporting

Catherine Miller
Hampshire Research Institute
cmiller@hampshire.org

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
1
 TRI Data and the Waste Management Hierarchy
TRI was established under the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA, 1986, Sec. 313), which required certain Source reduction
industries to report annually on their disposal or Recycling
other releases. Energy Recovery
Treatment
The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA)
Disposal/
expanded TRI to require reporting on quantities
Releases
of waste managed and on source reduction
(pollution prevention) activities undertaken to
eliminate or reduce those quantities.

The act states that source reduction (pollution Waste Management Hierarchy
prevention) is considered the preferred
approach to managing waste. The waste
management hierarchy illustrates the preferred
order for waste management decision-making,
with disposal/release of waste the last resort.

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
2
Production-Related Waste Managed
Long-term Trends
Waste Management Hierarchy

Most Desirable Option Least Desirable Option

10,000 -7%
-3%
8,000
Millions of Pounds

-25%
6,000
? -15%
4,000

2,000

0
Source Reduction Recycled Energy Recovery Treated Disposed of or
Otherwise Released

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

• From 2001-2007, total decreased 11% (2.90 billion pounds) and, indeed,
disposal/releases decreased by the largest percentage (25%)
• However, looking in more detail, we see that
• while TRI does not collect data on the amount of source reduction
achieved, we can tell who is undertaking it and if they are reducing waste
generated.
• and not all facilities are achieving such reductions.
Hampshire Research Institute
TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
3
 Not all Facilities are Achieving Reductions
• Facilities grouped by the 140
120

Percent Change, 2001-2007

amount of total waste 100 Total
managed in 2001 80 Production-
related
60
Waste
• National summary data reflect 40
20 Total
facilities with largest total 0 Disposal or
-20 -5 Other
waste managed -40
-11
-25 -24 Releases
-60
• Very different changes among All Facilities Reporting, Facilities Reporting in

the groups 2001 and 2007 Both Years, 2001 and

2007

Facilities Reporting in Both 2001 and 2007

2,500 2,157 140 122

Percent Change, 2001-2007

120
Percent Change, 2001-2007

2,000
100 Total
1,500 80 Production-
57 related
60 Waste
1,000 695 30
40
15
500 20
0 Total
0 Disposal or
-20 -1 -7
-18 Other
-500 -40
-36 Releases
<=10,000 lbs -60
(6,761 facilities) <=100,000 lbs <=1,000,000 lbs <=10,000,000 lbs >10,000,000 lbs
(4,912 facilities) (3,642 facilities) (1,505 facilities) (465 facilities)
Total Reported Amount of Production-related Waste per Facility in 2001

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
4
 Compared by Pounds of Waste Managed in 2001
• National Percent Change, 2001-2007
summary data 2,500 2,157 140 122

Percent Change, 2001-2007

reflect facilities 120

Percent Change, 2001-2007

2,000
Total
with largest total 1,500
100
80 Production-
waste managed 60
57 related
Waste
1,000 695 30
40
15
500 20
• But they 0
0 Total
Disposal or
represent only -20 -1 -7
-18 Other
-500 -40
about 500 facilities <=10,000 lbs -60
-36 Releases

out of over 17,000 (6,761 facilities) <=100,000 lbs <=1,000,000 lbs <=10,000,000 lbs >10,000,000 lbs
reporting in both (4,912 facilities) (3,642 facilities) (1,505 facilities) (465 facilities)
Total Reported Amount of Production-related Waste per Facility in 2001
years
Number of Facilities
• The group with
8,000
the smallest 6,761
7,000
waste managed in
Number of Facilities

6,000
2001 has most 4,912
5,000
number of facilities 3,642
4,000
and largest
3,000
percentage 1,505
Number of
Facilities in
2,000
increase. 465
each group
1,000
0
<=10,000 lbs <=100,000 lbs <=1,000,000 lbs <=10,000,000 lbs >10,000,000 lbs
of Total Reported Amount of Production-related Waste, 2001

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
5
 Compared by Pounds of Waste Managed in 2001
2,500 2,157 140 122

Percent Change, 2001-2007

120

Percent Change, 2001-2007

2,000
100 Total
1,500 80 Production-
57 related
• The group 1,000 695
60
30
Waste
40
with the 500 20
15

smallest 0
0
-20 -1
Total
Disposal or
-7
waste -500 -40
-18
-36
Other
Releases
managed in <=10,000 lbs
(6,761 facilities)
-60
<=100,000 lbs <=1,000,000 lbs <=10,000,000 lbs >10,000,000 lbs
2001 has a (4,912 facilities) (3,642 facilities) (1,505 facilities) (465 facilities)

majority of Total Reported Amount of Production-related Waste per Facility in 2001

facilities
reporting Percent of Facilities in the
Group
increases 70

from 2001- 60 53 56
59 57 58

2007 50
40
44
41 43 42
40
30
• Other groups 20
have majority 10
7
0 0 0 0
reporting 0

decreases <=10,000 lbs

(5,632 facilities)
<=100,000 lbs
(4,912 facilities)
<=1,000,000 lbs
(3,642 facilities)
<=10,000,000 lbs
(1,505 facilities)
>10,000,000 lbs
(465 facilities)
Does not include facilities of Total Production-related Waste Managed per Facility in 2001
with only Form As in both
years. Increase No Change Decrease

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
6
Geographic Distribution
Only facilities with smaller waste
All TRI Facilities, waste managed reported in 2001, waste
in Texas, Louisiana and
managed in Texas, Missouri,
Midwest
Illinois and West Coast
All TRI facilities Facilities with 10,000 pounds or less in 2001

Maps show states with one-quarter of total production-related waste in 2007 per color.
Black is quartile with states reporting largest amount, white is quartile with smallest amount.

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
7
 Pollution Prevention and TRI Data
• Changes in production-related waste managed
can be due to
– source reduction through pollution prevention
(P2) activities
• But also due to
– change in production levels (production
index)
– change in pollution controls, recycling, etc.
– change in estimation methods

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
8
 Small Group of Facilities with Large Changes
All Facilities Does not include 31 Facilities with Large
Increases/Decreases
Total Production-related Waste Managed
Total Production-related Waste Managed
30,000
30,000 Percent Change 2001-2007: -0.3%
Percent Change 2001-2007: -11% 25,000
25,000
Millions of pounds

20,000
20,000
Without P2
15,000 15,000
With P2 Without P2
10,000 10,000 With P2
5,000 5,000
With P2: 30% of Total With P2: 30% of Total
0 0
2001 2007 2001 2007

Data from TRI Form R, Section 8. Data from TRI Form R, Section 8. Includes only facilities reporting in both years.
Facilities submitting only Form As in both years and facilities with change greater
than 100,000,000 pounds not included.

• Decrease of 11% reflects a few facilities with large changes.

• Without those facilities, almost no change reported (-0.3%).

• Only 30% of waste managed in both 2001 and 2007 was reported as
having pollution prevention (P2) activities during those years.

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
9
Pollution Prevention Reporting
Percent
Change Production-related Waste Managed, 2001-

10
2007
• Looking at facilities reporting in both years
5
1
and excluding the 31 facilities with a large
0
-1
change, it appears pollution prevention
-5 activities have not achieved reductions in
-10
Facilities Reporting in Both Years
waste managed.

• However, facilities grouped by amount of waste managed show

– those implementing pollution prevention reported smaller increases
– except, those with largest waste managed (which showed smaller
decreases).
2,833 Percent Change in Total Production-related Waste Managed
3,000
2001-2007
150 120 123
2,500
100
2,000 33 33
50 6 14
1,500 0
-6 -15
1,000 -50
498 <=100,000 <=1,000,000 <=10,000,000 >10,000,000
500 lbs lbs lbs lbs
of Total Production-related Waste Managed per Facility in 2001
0
<=10,000 lbs With P2 Without P2

Data from TRI Form R, Section 8. Includes only facilities reporting in both years. Facilities submitting only Form As in both years and
facilities w ith change greater than 100,000,000 pounds not included.

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
10
 Compare Industry Sectors
Total Production-related Waste Managed, 2001-2007
Percent Change Industries with Largest Amounts • Comparing by Industry Sector can
20
16
1
8 indicate
0 – changes in general estimation
-5
-20 -11 -9
methods (metal mining large
-40
-46
decrease due to cessation of
-60
Chemicals Primary Metal Electric Paper Petroleum Food reporting of some chemicals in
Metals Mining Utilities mine tailings).

Percent Change Change in Production-related Waste Managed and Production Index, 2001-2007
100
77
75
- Influence of production
50
22 17 16 12
34
level changes
25 11 13 9
0
2 3 -0.2 1
- Pollution Prevention
-3
-25
-19
-27
-12 -9
-29
Activity
-50
-44 -44
-75
Chemicals Primary Metals Electric Utilities Paper Petroleum Food Computers/
Electronics
With P2 Without P2 Production Index

Data from TRI Form R, Section 8. Production Index: http://www.federalreserve.gov/datadownload/Choose.aspx?rel=G17 (25 February 2009)

Hampshire Research Institute

TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
11
TRI's Future
• Presentation of TRI Data
– Add analyses to Public Data Release report
– Improve TRI Explorer (expand ability to look at trends, add data on
transfer sites, add pollution prevention data)

• Expansions
– Rollback 2006 changes to Form A (already done)
– Complete Metals Framework document (lower thresholds for arsenic,
cadmium, hexavalent chromium)
– Add Industry sectors (e.g., oil and gas extraction and distribution,
sewage treatment plants)
– Add criteria air contaminants
– Incorporate TRI ID in greenhouse gases inventory
– Add amount of toxic chemicals in products

Catherine Miller, cmiller@hampshire.org

Hampshire Research Institute
TRI National Training Conference
March 30 – April 2, 2009
12