![[logo] US EPA](../gif/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Trends Report Frequent Questions
2005-2007 Trends Report Highlights
The frequently asked questions include:
- Why does EPA publish the Trends Report?
- How does this Trends Report differ from the previous one?
- How much progress has been made and where has progress been made toward reaching EPA's GPRA goal to reduce Priority Chemicals
- Which Priority Chemicals were generated in the greatest and smallest quantities in 2005
- In which industries did facilities generate the largest quantities of Priority Chemicals?
- Which data were used in the Trends Report and what were the data limitations?
1. Why does EPA publish the National Priority Chemicals Trends Report?
EPA publishes the National Priority Chemical Trends Report to provide information and describe trends to the public about the generation and management of Priority Chemicals (PCs) in hazardous and non-hazardous industrial wastes. The Trends Report also provides information for individual EPA regions, states, counties, key industry sectors, and federal facilities to use in identifying potential waste minimization opportunities for reducing PCs in wastes.
EPA also uses the Trends Report to show progress in achieving our PC reduction goal: By 2011, reduce 4 million pounds of priority chemicals from wastestreams as measured by National Partnership for Environmental Priorities (NPEP) contributions, Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs), and other tools used by EPA to achieve priority chemical reductions.2. How does this Trends Report differ from the previous one?
We made several improvements to this year's Trends Report, including:
- Expanded the presentation of data derived from a methodology to extract BR data applicable to PCs. We present these data, where available, by individual PC or by industry sector (NAICS code), to supplement the TRI data and provide a better picture of which industries and waste streams might offer the most promising waste minimization opportunities. For the first time, we also present these data for federal facilities.
- Compiled data about recycling of PCs into one place - as an appendix (see Appendix C) - to more succinctly and clearly show the extent to which PCs are recycled.
- Provided a new appendix to show data about TRI reported air emissions and surface water discharges of PCs (see Appendix D).
This Report is an evolving document and we continue to look for ways to better present the data. If you have any comments concerning this Report, please contact us. One way to do so is to use the Customer Feedback Survey at the beginning of this Report.
3. How much progress been made and where has progress been made toward reaching EPA's Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) goal to reduce Priority Chemicals?
EPA is making progress in reaching our current five year GPRA goal: By 2011, reduce 4 million pounds of priority chemicals from wastestreams as measured by National Partnership for Environmental Priorities (NPEP) contributions, Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs), and other tools used by EPA to achieve priority chemical reductions. EPA has set additional goals to reduce 2 million pounds of priority chemicals un FY 2011 and 3 million pounds in FY 2012.
We use current data from private sector NPEP partners who have agreed to reduce their PC wastes to measure our progress in reaching this goal. From FY 2007 through FY 2010, NPEP partners have reduced approximately 16 million pounds of PCs. The table below shows the reductions for each PC that NPEP partners have achieved from FY 2007 to FY 2010.
| Priority Chemical | Reductions Achieved (pounds) | Total Reductions Achieved (pounds) FY 2007–2010 |
Percent of Total Reductions Achieved FY 2007–2010 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FY 2007 | FY2008 | FY2009 | FY2010 | |||
| Lead and lead compounds | 553,831 |
3,845,767
|
6,849,711 |
1,708,793 |
12,958,102 |
81.8% |
| Naphthalene | 528,607 |
1,187,863 |
52,789 |
0 |
1,773,487 |
11.2% |
| Polycyclic aromatic compounds | 219,529 |
518,982 |
37,655 |
110,568 |
886,734 |
5.6% |
| Polychlorinated biphenyls | 4,600 |
5,671 |
96,089 |
359 |
106,719 |
0.7% |
| Dibenzofuran | 23,830 |
61,055 |
0 |
0 |
84,885 |
0.5% |
| Mercury and mercury compounds | 9,603 |
8,744 |
4,228 |
940 |
23,515 |
0.2% |
Total |
1,340,000 |
5,628,082
| 7,040,472 |
1,820,660 |
15,833,442 |
100.0%
|
4. Which Priority Chemicals (PCs) were generated in the greatest and smallest quantities in 2005?
| Largest Quantity PCs in 2007 |
Lead and lead compounds (Lead) | Naphthalene | Hexachloro- 1,3-butadiene |
Polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs) | Total of these four PCs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pounds | 34,467,769 |
12,071,587 |
10,312,897 |
10,211,230 |
67,063,484 |
| Percentage of National Total PC Quantity | 40.6% |
14.2% |
12.2% |
12.0% |
79.1% |
| Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds (PACs) | Hexachlorobenzene | Hexachloroethane |
|---|---|---|
|
2.2 million pounds |
2.0 million pounds |
1.3 million pounds |
| Naphthalene | Lead and Lead Compounds | Phenanthrene |
|---|---|---|
|
(2.1 million pounds) |
(2.1 million pounds) |
(361,000 pounds) |
5. In which industries did facilities generate the largest quantities of Priority Chemicals (PCs)?
For 2007, Facilities in approximately 340 different North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes reported generating PCs. Facilities in four NAICS codes accounted for approximately 50% of the total quantity of PCs:
- NAICS code 325181 (Alkalies and Chlorine Manufacturing): 14.5%
- NAICS code 331492 (Secondary Smelting, Refining, and Alloying of Nonferrous Metal (except Copper and Aluminum): 14.3%
- NAICS code 331111 (Iron and Steel Mills): 11.7%
- NAICS code 325199 (All Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing): 9.2%
6. What data were used in the Trends Report and what were the data limitations?
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data was used to analyze and identify increases or decreases in the quantity and management of Priority Chemicals (PCs) and in which industries PCs were generated and managed. TRI is a publicly available EPA database about the release and management of 581 individually listed chemicals and 30 chemical categories reported by industrial and federal facilities whose primary business activity is on the Section 313 list of North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. This information is reported annually and reviewed and updated on an on-going basis.
TRI covers a wide variety of manufacturing sectors in National Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes as well as federal facilities. The database developed for use in this Trends Report includes all facilities, regardless of primary NAICS code, except as noted in the methodology (see PC-TRI Methodology), that reported a PC quantity to TRI for reporting years 2005-2007.
Some of the limitations associated with using this data are:
- The TRI does not cover all facilities that generate hazardous waste. TRI requires reporting from about 25,000 of the nation's largest manufacturers and users of certain toxic chemicals. However, many facilities that may generate waste that contains one or more PCs are not required to report to TRI.
- Although the list of reporting industries or NAICS codes is extensive, not all facilities that produce hazardous wastes are subject to TRI reporting requirements. In addition, the threshold quantities that determine whether facilities are subject to TRI reporting are based on quantities of chemicals used, manufactured, or processed. Consequently, some facilities producing hazardous waste within the NAICS codes covered by TRI may not be required to report to TRI.
- A single facility may report up to six four-digit NAICS codes on TRI Form R. If the facility is a multi-establishment facility, the primary six-digit NAICS codes for the entire facility are recorded first, and then the NAICS code of each associated establishment is recorded. The measurement methodology allocates all PC quantities, in any given reporting year, to the facility's primary NAICS code only. Thus, unless a facility only reported its primary NAICS code, the method allows for an overestimation of PC quantities allocated to the primary NAICS code and effectively assigns a zero quantity to all other NAICS codes reported by the facility. In addition, facilities may change their primary NAICS code from year to year. Therefore, when conducting the trends analysis, it could appear that PC quantities are being reduced or increased for certain industry sectors, when actual quantities are not changing but only being reported, under a different primary NAICS code.
- Although we ideally strive to determine the quantities of PCs that are contained in wastes amenable to waste minimization, often an increase or decrease at a facility is not necessarily related to production but rather is influenced by other factors such as process or plant shutdowns, periodic cleanout of tanks, piping systems, etc., that are part of routine maintenance, improved measurement and detection equipment, and compliance with new regulations. We often cannot readily discern that an increase or decrease of quantities of PCs was associated with such an event and may only learn about it as a result of conducting quality assurance of the data by, for example, contacting the facility to verify a significant change from one year to another.
We developed a methodology (referred to as the PC-BR methodology) to estimate, for the first time, the quantity of PCs contained in Hazardous Waste Biennial Report (BR) waste streams that are reported under RCRA. A BR must be submitted by large quantity generators (LQGs)[1] and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) every two years. The focus of the PC-BR methodology is on the primary generation activities because the waste streams associated with primary generation represent an opportunity to reduce PCs in hazardous waste streams. It only includes waste streams generated from a production process, service activity, or routine/periodic cleanup, where potential opportunities for direct waste minimization (e.g., source reduction, recycling) are the greatest. Waste streams not associated with primary generation, such as leachate (liquids that have percolated through land disposed wastes) resulting from the disposal of more than one hazardous waste, are not included because they generally do not offer opportunities for direct waste minimization.
The BR and TRI reporting processes are substantially different. These reporting differences, among others, can cause significant variation in the number of reporting facilities and quantities of chemicals reported. As such, we caution readers against making casual one-to-one comparisons between the TRI and BR data. We are continuing to evaluate if and how the TRI and BR quantities of PCs can be correlated.
Most of the analyses presented in this Report are based on the TRI data. We present the BR data in order to provide another perspective on hazardous wastes that might contain PCs.