Local Industrial Pollution by pnx67864


									Environmental Livability Index

                                      Local Industrial Pollution

    Grade: C -
    The trends for both toxic chemical releases and hazardous waste generated by local industries are not
    very good. Toxic chemical releases increased in 1998 (the most recent year that data is available) even
    after discounting the facilities that reported for the first time in 1998, meaning that the 54 facilities that
    reported for 1997 had more chemical releases in 1998. Likewise, the amount of hazardous waste
    created by local businesses shot up in 1993 and has remained high ever since. Compared to other
    industrialized counties, the total amounts for Dayton/Montgomery County are not bad, but the area is
    not doing as well as it could if it had a more aggressive and widespread pollution prevention program.
    For example, since 1992, Cincinnati has a program to actively work with local businesses to reduce
    pollution and has seen waste levels drop by more than 70% in recent years. To effectively reduce the
    amount of waste generated, both facilities and the government need to focus on pollution prevention.

The tremendous growth in industrial operations nationwide since WWII has been accompanied
by a substantial increase in hazardous and toxic industrial wastes. For example, the amount of
hazardous industrial waste generated in the U.S. increased from an estimated 4.5 million tons
annually after WWII to around 57 million tons by 1975 to 265 million tons by 1990. For many
citizens, an important question is –

Ø Are there dangerous pollutants in my community?

The map below shows locations of 83 facilities in the Dayton/Montgomery County area that
reported producing certain toxic chemicals1 in 1998 and/or hazardous waste2 in 1997.
Unfortunately, much locally-generated pollution is not reported—some estimate that as much as
80-90% of toxic chemical pollution is not covered by existing reporting rules.3 Moreover, for
many of these pollutants, we do not know if they are safe or not, or how serious the risks might
be. A 1997 Environmental Defense report, “Toxic Ignorance,” found that this information is
not publicly available for nearly 75% of the most important chemicals in commercial use. These
include chemicals that we may breathe or drink, and that build up in our bodies. Some of the
chemicals can be found in consumer products, and others are released from industrial facilities
into our air, water, or land. The chemicals can be toxic, ignitable, corrosive or reactive, and
could pose a danger to public health and the environment. (See the box entitled “Who Reports
and What is Reported”)

  Toxic chemicals are ones that the U.S. EPA has determined can cause acute, chronic or ecological effects, such as
cancer and ozone depletion. They are reported annually under the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). Examples of
toxic chemicals are carbon tetrachloride, arsenic, chloroform, copper, and lead compounds, which can be blood,
developmental, or respiratory toxicants, while others, such as benzene and dichloromethane, are known carcinogens.
  Hazardous wastes are industrial wastes that (1) are listed by the U.S. EPA as hazardous, or (2) exhibit one or more
of the following characteristics: ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, toxicity. There is some overlap with the list of
toxic chemicals. Every 2 years, businesses are required to report the amount of hazardous waste they produce to the
EPA. Handling and disposal of these wastes are regulated under the Resource, Conservation, and Recovery Act
  Congressional Office of Technological Assessment, Testimony of K. Oldenberg

Environmental Livability Index

With existing information, we can answer
the following questions:                            Who reports and what is reported?
1. What are the major sources of industrial         Until 1998, the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) was
                                                    limited to large manufacturing operations that
    pollution that are reported?
                                                    manufacture or process over 25,000 pounds of the
2. What types and amounts of pollutants             approximately 600 chemicals or 28 chemical
    are released and what do we know about          categories specified in the regulations, or use more
    their health impacts?                           than 10,000 pounds of any designated chemical or
3. Is pollution from local industries getting       category. Seven new industrial sectors were added in
    better or worse?                                1998: metal mining, coal mining, coal and oil-fired
4. What are the state and local governments         electric generating facilities, commercial hazardous
    doing to reduce industrial pollution?           waste treatment facilities, chemical and allied
5. Are state and local efforts enough to            products, petroleum bulk stations, and solvent
                                                    recovery services. Still not included are pollution
    reduce pollution? What is achievable?
                                                    releases from cars, small businesses (such as dry
                                                    cleaners), landfills, oil wells, some utilities, sewage
                                                    treatment plants, and farms using pesticides.
1. What are the major sources of                    Moreover, only about 650 of the more than 75,000
   industrial pollution that are reported?          chemicals manufactured in the U.S. are covered; this
                                                    number may be expanded in 2001. In addition,
The following map shows the locations of the        because the reporting thresholds are so high, many
83 facilities area that reported generating         dangerous chemicals are not reported.
toxic chemical and hazardous wastes in the
                                                    The Biennial Reporting System (BRS) records the
Dayton/Montgomery County. These
                                                    amount of hazardous waste generated in the US.
facilities break down as follows:                   BRS covers a larger number of facilities, including
Ø 20 facilities reported to both the Toxics         smaller companies than TRI. BRS covers facilities
    Release Inventory (TRI) and the                 that generate more than 2,200 pounds of RCRA
    hazardous waste Biennial Reporting              waste a month, more than 2.2 pounds of RCRA
    System (BRS). These are often the               acute hazardous waste in any month, or facilities that
    largest waste generators in the area.           require a RCRA permit. Many state programs have
Ø 35 facilities reported solely to the TRI in       lower thresholds for hazardous wastes than federal
    1998 (for complete listing of facilities,       programs mandate.
    check out Scorecard at
                                                    Even BRS, however, is limited by legal definitions of
                                                    what is a “hazardous waste.” There are a number of
Ø 28 reported solely to the hazardous waste
                                                    wastes that are harmful, but are exempt from the
    BRS in 1997 (for complete listing of            definition of hazardous wastes (and therefore not
    facilities, check out                           included in the data). These include domestic
    http://www.rtk.net/BRS)                         sewage, permitted industrial discharges to water,
                                                    certain nuclear materials, oil and gas exploration
                                                    wastes (some refining wastes may be included),
                                                    household hazardous wastes, and agricultural wastes.
                                                    Some estimate that these “exempt” wastes total about
                                                    13 billion tons of waste each year.

    Environmental Livability Index

An important word about the 1998 TRI data
The 1998 TRI, released in Spring 2000, for the first time includes toxic releases for seven new industry sectors: metal
mining, coal mining, electric utilities, commercial hazardous waste treatment, chemical and allied plants, petroleum
bulk storage plants, and solvent recovery processors. Until now, electric utilities were not regulated for toxic air
pollution under the 1990 Clean Air Act – it was the only other major industry to be exempted. They were also
allowed to dispose of over 100 million tons of toxic combustion waste annually without restrictions under RCRA.
Some of the chemicals that electric utilities are likely to report include acutely toxic gases such as hydrochloric acid,
sulfuric acid and hydrogen fluoride. In addition, metals such as zinc, copper, lead, chromium, arsenic and barium are
likely to be reported. For some important chemicals, such as mercury, dioxin, and other persistent bio-accumulative
toxics, the reporting thresholds are so high that utilities will not report on releases of these chemicals. This will
change in 2002, however, when the U.S. EPA’s new reporting thresholds for these chemicals goes into effect. This
information is important for public health reasons, as 21 million Americans live within five miles of a coal plant (6
million are children) and 836,000 live within one mile from one, according to a 1998 EPA study. (For more
information, check out the Clean Air Network's fact sheet "Electric Utilities and the Toxics Release Inventory:
Opportunities for 2000." at http://www.cleanair.net/Toxics/tri.htm)

The U.S. EPA is expected to release the complete 1998 data for all states this year. OEPA has already released
limited data for 1998, which we include in this report. However, because the 1998 data is limited we sometimes had
to use 1997 data (see charts below).

Compounding this year’s data problems is that OEPA tallies TRI results differently than the U.S. EPA does.
Specifically, OEPA does not include transfers to recycling and energy recovery in its total “transfers” numbers. In
1997, shipments to recycling facilities amounted to 189 million pounds. To get the complete picture in Ohio, you
must add “releases” + “transfers” + “transfers to recycling and energy recovery.”

Environmental Livability Index

The new industrial sectors (utilities, hazardous waste treatment, etc.) account for over 50% of the
releases and transfers reported in Ohio in 1998. Electric services make up 30.1% of Ohio’s total
TRI. The next biggest industrial sector in Ohio was hazardous waste treatment facilities – also
one of the “new” sectors – with 20.9% of the total TRI for 1998. It is expected that electric
facilities will be the biggest source of releases and transfers throughout the United States.

Ø Top 5 Facilities in Montgomery County – Total Releases and Transfers for 1998
Only five facilities accounted for nearly 70% of the total TRI releases and transfers in
Montgomery County in 1998. As noted in the box “An important word about the 1998 TRI
data,” this data is from Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) which tallies TRI
totals differently than the U.S. EPA does. Specifically, the data in the following table does not
include off-site recycling and off-site energy recovery in the calculation of total releases and
transfers. In 1997, off-site transfers to recycling and energy recovery operations amounted to
189 million pounds.

             Facility                                               Total Releases and
                                                                    Transfers (lbs) (1998)
             CWM Resource Recovery, Inc.                                  1,432,224
             Dayton Power & Light Co. O.H. Hutchings                       996, 308
             GMTG Moraine Assembly                                         566,673
             Appleton Papers, Inc.                                         408, 160
             Delphi Chassis Systems – Vandalia                             391,933
           (Source: Ohio EPA, www.epa.ohio.gov/dapc/tri/tri.html)

Ø Top facilities in Dayton/Montgomery County for TRI and Hazardous Waste releases
The most recent year for which information is available for facility-specific toxic chemical
releases and hazardous waste is 1997. Similar to the 1998 TRI data above, a few facilities
account for an overwhelming percent of the industrial pollution reported in the
Dayton/Montgomery County area. The information for these top tier facilities, as reported in
1997, is listed below. The transfer figures include off-site recycling and energy recovery efforts,
in addition to POTW, off-site disposal and off-site treatment.

     Environmental Livability Index

 Top facilities for TRI and Hazardous Waste Releases (1997)
Facility                         Address                    TRI           TRI            Total TRI         Hazardous Waste
                                                            Releases4     Transfer5      ProductionWastes6 Generated (lbs)
                                                            (1997)        (1997)         (lbs) (1997)      (1997)7
Appleton Papers, Inc.        1030 W Alex-Bell                 373,780        85,700            1,585,480        18,000
(coated and laminated paper) Rd.
                             W. Carrollton 45449
Chrysler Corp (refrig.       1600 Webster St.                  62,293        237,586            381,741              3,292,000
and heating equipment)       Dayton 45401
CWM Resource Recovery        4301 Infirmary Road                                                                    46,350,000
(industrial chemicals)       W. Carrollton 45449
Delphi Chassis System        480 N. Dixie Dr.                  34,507        491,373            478,125               122,480
(vehicle parts & access.)    Vandalia 45377
Delphi Chassis System        2000 Forrer Blvd.                193,215        119,845            611,438              3,680,660
(vehicle parts & access.)    Kettering 45420
Delphi Chassis System        1420 Wisconsin Blvd.              8,992         294,107            313,466              2,696,000
(vehicle parts & access.)    Dayton 45408
Ecolotec Inc.                636 N. Irwin St.                                                                        5,272,000
(refuse systems) (closed)    Dayton 45403
Fraser Papers WC Mill        51 S. Elm St.                     5,457             0              767,490
(paper mills)                W. Carrollton 45449
GMC Trucks/Moraine           2601 Stroop Rd.                  288,018        729,307           2,023,327             1,644,000
(trucks and bus bodies)      Moraine 45439
Hohman Plating               814 Hillrose Ave.                 5,300          27,375            590,305               716,000
(plating and polishing)      Dayton 45404
Perma-Fix (refuse systems) 300 S. West End Ave                                                                      13,867,300
(aka Clark Oil)              Dayton 45427
Quality Chemicals (aka       1515 Nicholas Rd.                   581         997,423            998,250             18,046,000
Montsanto Research)          Dayton 45418
(pesticides & agric. chem.)
Varity Dayton Walther Corp 2490 Arbor Blvd.                      500         390,000            390,500
(vehicle parts & access.)    Dayton 45439
 Totals for Top Tier                                          972,643       3,372,716          8,140,122            95,704,440
Totals for Montgomery County                                 1,477,058      4,268,320         10,503,511            103,886,320
 (Source: Right-to-Know Network, http://www.rtk.net)

       Releases: fugitive air emissions+stack air emissions+quantity discharged to surface waters+quantity disposed of in
     underground injection wells onsite=quantity disposed to the land onsite.
       Transfers: quantity of toxic chemical sent to any off-site facility, including sewage treatment plants, off-site
     recycling, treatment, or disposal facilities, and energy recovery operations.
       Production-Related Wastes: the amount of chemical waste that is created by an industrial process. Because it
     includes all waste prior to any form of waste management, it is a more valuable indicator than total TRI (i.e.,
     releases + transfers) for how well local industries are doing to cut wastes.
       Hazardous waste generated: the amount of RCRA hazardous that is created by a facility during an industrial
     process. This waste can be treated, disposed of, or stored. Hazardous waste is defined as waste that is ignitable,
     toxic, corrosive or reactive.

Environmental Livability Index

Ø Transfers: Top 10 Companies Receiving Toxic Chemicals (1997)
In addition to companies that create toxic chemical pollution or hazardous waste, several
facilities in Montgomery County also accept wastes from other facilities both in- and outside the
county, and even outside the state. The largest of these facilities in the county are listed below.

Facility                          Address                                 Pounds received
CWM Resource Recovery             4301 Infirmary Rd., W. Carrollton 45449    10,810,665
Midwest Iron                      813 W. Stewart St., Dayton 45408            924,929
Stoney Hollow RDF                 2460 S. Gettysburg, Dayton 45449            804,173
Franklin Iron & Metal Inc.        1939 East First St., Dayton 45403                 697,833
Perma-Fix (aka Clark Oil)         300 S. West End Ave., Dayton 45427                534,609
Isaac Corp. – Counselor           4634 S. Infirmary Rd., Miamisburg 45342           437,250
Material Process
Appleton Papers, Inc. –           4000 Hydraulic Rd., W. Carrollton 45449           69,000
Wastewater treatment plant
Industrial Waste Disposal         3975 Wagoner Ford Rd., Dayton 45401               27,187
Appleton Papers, Inc. –           4000 Hydraulic Rd., W. Carrollton 45449           13,000
Wastewater treatment plant
Montgomery County                 2550 Springboro Rd., Dayton 45439                 10,732
South Incinerator (closed)
(Source: Right-to-Know Network, www.rtk.net)

These facilities can handle the waste on-site in a number of ways, including recycling, energy
recovery, treatment and land disposal. Recycling involves recovering some or all of the waste and
making it available for future uses. Other wastes can be burned in an energy recovery device,
such as a furnace or boiler. Burning a chemical as a fuel is also characterized as energy recovery.
Waste treatment can involve a number of processes, including neutralization, incineration, and
physical separation, thereby destroying the chemical. Finally, land disposal includes dumping in
landfills, application farming, or creating surface impoundments.

Environmental Livability Index

2. What types and amounts of pollutants are released and what do we know about their
   health impacts?

In 1998, roughly 2 million pounds of toxic chemicals were released to the environment by
industries in Montgomery County.

Top 5 chemicals released in Montgomery County (1998)
 Chemical               Pounds     Human Health Effects and Relative Hazard Ranking
 Hydrochloric Acid       1,002,529 Suspected liver, respiratory, and skin toxicant. Ranked among the
                                          worst 10% of hazardous compounds to ecosystem and human health.
 Methanol                    674,678 Suspected developmental, liver, gastrointestinal, skin and
                                          neurotoxicant. Ranked more hazardous than most chemicals in 2 out
                                          of 10 ranking systems.
 Glycol Ethers               510,781 Suspected neurotoxicant as well as kidney, liver, reproductive,
                                          developmental, blood, and respiratory toxicant. Ranked as less
                                          hazardous than most chemicals in 8 ranking systems.
 Zinc and                    360,946 Suspected cardiovascular, developmental, reproductive, respiratory,
 Compounds                                skin, and immunotoxicant. Ranked more hazardous than most
                                          chemicals in 4 out of 12 ranking systems.
 Nitrate Compounds           309,546 Suspected cardiovascular or blood toxicant. Ranked as less hazardous
                                          than most chemicals in 2 ranking systems.
(Source: Ohio EPA, http://www.epa.ohio.gov/dapc/tri/tri.html; Scorecard, http://www.scorecard.org)
For information about known or suspected human health effects of these and other chemicals,
check out http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/

Virtually all of these reported releases are to the air via smokestacks. Over 3,500 pounds were
released directly to surface waters, although almost 1 million pounds were transferred to the
sewage treatment facilities where the chemical wastes were treated before being pumped into
nearby rivers and streams.

Total Montgomery County TRI releases and transfers, by type (1998)
                                   Total Releases            Total Transfers          Total TRI (lbs)
Released to air                     1,889,608                       -
   - fugitive releases               249,044                        -
   - stack releases                 1,640,564                       -
Released to water                      3,533                        -
Released to ground                    66,311                        -
Underground injection                    0                          -
Transferred to POTW                      -                      956,521
Offsite transfers for disposal           -                     2,512,689
and treatment
Transfers for recycling                    -                   2,372,136
Transfers for energy                       -                   22,717,308
Total                                 1,959,452                28,558,654                30,518,106
(Source: Ohio EPA, http://www.epa.ohio.gov/dapc/tri/reptsdb.html)

                        Environmental Livability Index

                        3. Is pollution from local industries getting better or worse?

                        Ø TRI Trends (1993-1998)
                        The following TRI charts show the total releases and transfers for Montgomery County between
                        1993 and 1998. One of the charts gives the “normalized data,” which excludes chemicals that
                        were not reported for all years because they were either delisted or added, as well as the expanded
                        industries, such as those that reported for the first time in 1998. This can give a better indication
                        of the TRI trends through the years. The data shows that, after declines in 1994 and 1997, total
                        releases and transfers increased for both the “real” and the normalized data. Total Production-
                        Related Waste (TPRW) declined steadily between 1993 and 1996 and then leveled off in 1997.
                        This data is not yet available for 1998.

                                               Montgomery County Releases and Transfers                                                          Normalized Data: MontgomeryCountyTRI
                     6,000,000                                                                                                     6,000,000
                                                                                             Releases                                                                                               Releases
                                                                                                              TRI Waste (pounds)
TRI Waste (pounds)

                                                                                             Transfers                             5,000,000
                     4,000,000                                                               Total TRI                             4,000,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                    Total TRI
                     3,000,000                                                                                                     3,000,000                                                        (normalized)

                     2,000,000                                                                                                     2,000,000

                     1,000,000                                                                                                     1,000,000

                            0                                                                                                             0
                            1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999                                                                       1992     1993   1994   1995   1996   1997   1998   1999
                                               Year                                                                                                                 Year

                        (Sources: Ohio EPA, http://www.epa.ohio.gov/dapc/tri/tri.html; Right-to-Know Network, http://www.rtk.net)

                                                   Montgomery County Total Production-Related
                                                                                                                                                   # Facilities
                                               30000000                                                                                            Reporting:
                                               25000000                                                                                            1993 – 59
                                                                                                                                                   1994 – 59
                             Waste Generated

                                               20000000                                                                                            1995 – 57

                                               15000000                                                                                            1996 – 53
                                                                                                                                                   1997 – 54
                                               10000000                                                                                            1998 – 56

                                                       1992    1993   1994    1995    1996    1997           1998

Environmental Livability Index

For RCRA hazardous waste generation, the trend is not as good, even though waste levels have
plateaued since 1995. Total waste is still significantly higher than it was in 1991, despite a
decrease in the number of facilities reporting (i.e., fewer facilities are producing more hazardous
waste which must be treated and disposed)
                            RCRA Hazardous Waste Generated

                                                                              # RCRA Facilities
 Pounds of waste

                   100,000,000                                                 Reporting:
                    80,000,000                                                1991 – 62
                                                                              1993 – 60
                                                                              1995 – 52
                    40,000,000                                                1997 – 49

                             1989   1991   1993          1995   1997   1999

(Sources: Right-to-Know Network, http://www.rtk.net; U.S. EPA Biennial Reporting System,

4. What are the state and local governments doing to reduce industrial pollution?

The best way to reduce the amount of hazardous and toxic wastes released is to prevent their
production in the first place. Many states, including Ohio, have programs to encourage
businesses to reduce wastes. Cities and counties, however, can go beyond state and federal
requirements to ensure that local facilities seek out and implement the best approaches to cut
wastes before they are created. (Refer to the text box “Cincinnati, Ohio: Creating a Model
Urban Area Pollution Prevention Program” for an overview of Cincinnati’s pollution prevention

Many of the pollution prevention activities in Dayton/Montgomery County are focused in the
well field area and on wastewater. The well field – an area of 6,280 acres, containing 160
monitoring and 107 production wells – lies underneath the city of Dayton as well as portions of
Harrison Township, Huber Heights, Riverside, Vandalia and Wright Patterson Air Force Base.
The well field supplies drinking water to all residents in Dayton as well as most of Montgomery

The Dayton Department of Water’s Well Field Protection Program seeks to prevent
contamination from entering the groundwater in the well field area. There are about 600
businesses in the well field area, 300 of which handle or produce hazardous substances and
therefore have to report their chemical inventory every two years. At the start of this program in
1988, each facility was required to determine the maximum amount of each chemical that it
could have on site at any given time. This amount is the upper limit for the amount of chemicals
allowed on that site, whether or not the site changes owners. In addition, the upper limit can be
lowered at the discretion of the Dayton Department of Water. The Well Field Protection

                           Environmental Livability Index

                           Program also has a “Risk Point Buy Down” program where it pays facilities that reduce 97% or
                           more of their chemical inventory. As a result, the amount of chemicals in the well field area
                           declined by approximately 16 million pounds in 17 facilities between 1988 and 1999, costing $4

                           The program also suggests “good housekeeping” measures to area facilities and has organized
                           free pollution prevention workshops for all businesses. In addition, there are separate workshops
                           for the printing, vehicle maintenance, metalworking and electronics industries.

                           While these programs can help prevent actions that may pollute the groundwater, including the
                           release of toxic and hazardous chemicals, they are limited in scope. For example, as long as there
                           is a moratorium on the maximum amount of each chemical that is allowed on a site, any
                           reductions to this amount and other pollution prevention measures that a facility implements are
                           largely voluntary.

                           5. Are state and local efforts enough to reduce pollution? What is achievable?

                            How much pollution prevention is achievable? We do not yet know. We do know that
                           continual declines are feasible and cost-effective, but that often businesses need help to
                           understand what is possible and to be encouraged to change standard practices. Many states

                                                  TRI per Capita (1997)                                                                                                         Release and Transfers per manufacturing job
                      70                                                                                                                                               1200
                                                                                                                              60                                                                                                                                                      1015
                      60                                                                                                                                               1000
                                                                                                                                            Toxic Chemicals (pounds)
TRI/capita (pounds)

                      40                                                                                         32
                                                                                                      28                                                                600
                      30                                                                  22
                                                                              19                                                                                        400
                      20                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   296
                                                                 11                                                                                                                                                                             237        236
                                                    10                                                                                                                                                            172           201
                      10                                                                                                                                                200                           99
                             2.2        2.8                                                                                                                                               38
                      0                                                                                                                                                   0

                                                                                                                            TX (worst in



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Kent Co., MI



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Harris, TX
                                                                                                    Kent Co.,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Lake Co., IL
                                                                             Lake Co.,
                            Co., OH

                                                                                                                                                                              Co., OH
                                       Co., PA

                                                                                         Co., OH

                                                                                                                            Harris Co.,

                                                                                                                                                                                         Co., PA
                                                                                                                 Co., WI

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Co., WI
                                                                                                                                                                                                     Co., OH
                                                   Co., OH

                                                                Co., NC



                           (Sources: Right-to-Know Network, http://www.rtk.net; U.S. Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/)

                           already have programs to provide pollution prevention assistance to businesses. Increasingly
                           counties and cities are getting involved too, to further encourage local industries to cut their
                           wastes. Cincinnati, in Hamilton County, Ohio is considered by many to have a model urban-
                           area pollution prevention program. The box on page 14 describes the Cincinnati program in
                           more detail. Some of the additional strategies employed by other states, cities and counties

Environmental Livability Index

•     State pollution prevention planning. Internal accounting or management systems often do
      not relate inputs and wastes to specific processes, so managers do not know what operation is
      generating the most waste and therefore where the greatest opportunities for cutting wastes
      are. To change this, many states require large businesses to develop pollution prevention or
      waste minimization plans. As of 1994, 15 states have planning requirements: Arizona,
      California, Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey,
      New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington.8 The most
      effective plans are those that are very detailed, such as those in Massachusetts and New

•     Good Neighbor Agreements. Community groups can work with nearby industrial facilities
      to negotiate agreements on pollution reductions that go beyond regulatory requirements. By
      negotiating directly with companies, the groups can reach a far more complete solution than
      what the various fragmented laws and uneven enforcement efforts would otherwise provide.

•     High-profile pollution prevention resources. A high-level city office of pollution prevention
      or a designated senior staff person with pollution prevention responsibility can raise
      awareness of the issue and help recognize pollution prevention opportunities. Helping
      businesses become more efficient by producing less waste can be the difference between
      staying in business and shutting down, only to leave behind contaminated properties.

•     Evaluating city-owned or operated facilities for pollution prevention opportunities. Another
      important activity that any city or county should undertake is to audit their own facilities to
      ensure that the facilities and operations are doing everything feasible to prevent pollution.
      This makes good economic, as well as environmental, sense. In addition it can pave the way
      for others to follow – demonstrating to local businesses and the public some of the innovative
      technologies and cost savings of conserving energy and water, reducing waste generation, or
      substituting non-toxic materials for toxic materials. For example, in Milwaukee, the Greater
      Milwaukee Toxics Minimization Task Force, produced a Toxics Reduction Strategy in 1991,
      which contained 22 recommendations to promote pollution prevention at facilities that
      discharged to the local sewage treatment facility.

•     Establish citywide waste and chemical use reduction goals. A program that establishes target
      goals within a specific timeframe will provide an effective mechanism to measure progress.
      The goals should be for progress aggregated across all of an industry, as opposed to a goal
      that would apply to specific facilities. This is a project that would be ideal for non-
      governmental organizations (NGOs), corporations, as well as governments to work on

      Tools such as this report and Scorecard (http://www.scorecard.org) can help organizations
      track the progress in waste reduction and pollution prevention, allowing them to assess how

    Robert Style, P2 Review, winter 93/94.

 Environmental Livability Index

     they perform compared to others, as well as allow them to see what more they need to
     accomplish to meet their waste reduction goals.

 •   Link prevention progress to economic development incentives. For example, by offering
     financial or other incentives to businesses with aggressive pollution prevention programs.

 For more information about what companies, communities, and individuals can do to cut wastes,
 check out Environmental Defense’s Pollution Prevention Alliance web site at

Cincinnati, Ohio: Creating a Model Urban Area Pollution Prevention Program
Cincinnati's pollution prevention began in August 1992 as a result of a partnership between the U.S. EPA,
University of Cincinnati, American Institute for Pollution Prevention, Institute of Advanced Manufacturing
Sciences, and other local resources. The city's Office of Environmental Management received a matching
grant from the U.S. EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics to hire a local P2 expert. The goal of
the program was to create a model urban area pollution prevention strategy for local governments, business
and industry, and the general public through local partnerships.

Within the local government, all divisions received P2 training and were responsible for implementing P2
practices on a daily basis. Measurements for improvements and cost savings were established to help the
agencies reach their goals. The city also adopted an "environmental preference" purchasing ordinance for all
city purchases; under this program, preference is given to environmentally preferable products, such as
recycled products or those with less hazardous or toxic materials. In addition, the city substituted lead-free,
waterborne highway line striping paints for leaded, solvent-based paints. This prevented 33,000 pounds of
lead and 36,000 pounds of VOCs from entering the environment. The city also works with the U.S.
Department of Energy to promote alternative fuels, and implemented a “Green Lights Program” to improve
energy efficiency in facility lighting, and reuse and recycle old bulbs.

For the business and industry sector, the City worked with the Institute of Advanced Manufacturing
Sciences (IAMS) to provide P2 training and technical assistance to local businesses. IAMS also maintains a
pollution prevention hotline and refers businesses to area technical experts. For each participating business, a
P2 team is created, which identifies the types of waste, pollution, and associated costs. The team then
suggests alternative processes or materials that would create less waste or use less toxic chemicals. Initially,
ten small to medium-sized industries were chosen, with potential savings of $2 million for these businesses
through P2 practices.

An ongoing public outreach program was developed to maximize public participation by encouraging
pollution prevention in the general public. The idea was not only to educate the public about P2, but also to
get their support for making pollution prevention the preferred method for waste management in the area.

In part due to these efforts, TRI releases in both Cincinnati and Hamilton County declined by more than
70% between 1991 and 1997. In Cincinnati, TRI releases dropped from approximately 5 million pounds to
1.4 million pounds, while the number of facilities reporting declined from 117 to 89. The amount of
production-related wastes declined over 60% during the same time period in Cincinnati and the surrounding
Hamilton County.
(Sources: City of Cincinnati Office of Environmental Management, http://www.ci.cincinnati.oh.us/oem/p2.html;
NACCHO, National Pollution Prevention Roundtable, U.S. Conference of Mayors, NACo, and MWMA, Preventing
Pollution in our Cities and Counties: A Compendium of Case Studies (1995); EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program, Local
Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit (1998); Right-to-Know Network, http://www.rtk.net)


To top