Nihonbashi Station
ue

pre
ssw
ay)

uo
-do
ri a
ven

uto

do
ri

Hatchobori
Intersection

Exit No.1

Hotel
Sardonyx
Tokyo

Takaracho
StationShinkawa
1-chomeIntersection

Exit No.3

S
avheinohnue ash
i-

ircu

lar

Ro
ute

(Sh

Family
Mart

Inn
e

rC

2015

Kayabacho Station

Ex

Ch

JCIA Annual Report

Sumitomo
Mitsui
Banking
Corporation

Reference Materials

Japan Chemical
Industry Association

As a supplement to the contents of JCIA Annual Report 2015,
this pamphlet introduces various data and initiatives relating to the activitiesof the Japan Chemical Industry Association.
Please read it together with JCIA Annual Report 2015.

ReiganjimaIntersection

Exit No. B1
Hatchobori Station

AccessContacts

Kayabacho Station (Tokyo Metro Hibiya and Tozai Lines)
Walk straight ahead from Exit No. 3 and turn rightat the Shinkawa 1-chome Intersection.
Approximately 3 minutes on footKayabacho Station (Tokyo Metro Hibiya Line)
Walk straight ahead from Exit No 1,
turn left at the intersection with the Family Mart store,
and then turn left at the Reiganjima Intersection.
Approximately 3 minutes on footHatchobori Station (JR Keiyo Line)
Approximately 8 minutes on foot from Exit No. B1

General Affairs
Department
TEL 03-3297-2550
FAX 03-3297-2610

Environment and Safety
Department
TEL 03-3297-2568
FAX 03-3297-2606

Public Relations
Department
TEL 03-3297-2555
FAX 03-3297-2615

Chemicals Management
Department
TEL 03-3297-2567
FAX 03-3297-2612

International Affairs
Department
TEL 03-3297-2576
FAX 03-3297-2615

Long-range Research
Initiative (LRI)TEL 03-3297-2575
FAX 03-3297-2612

Department of Business/
Economic Information
TEL 03-3297-2559
FAX 03-3297-2615

Responsible Care
Department
TEL 03-3297-2583
FAX 03-3297-2606

Labor Department
TEL 03-3297-2563
FAX 03-3297-2615

Chemical Products
PL Consulting Center
TEL 03-3297-2602
FAX 03-3297-2604

Technical Affairs
Department
TEL 03-3297-2578
FAX 03-3297-2615

MIX

Nikka-chan:
JCIA’s official character

Paper from
responsible sources

Dream Chemistry 21
Committee
TEL 03-3297-2555
FAX 03-3297-2615

This report has been printed using printing processes and materials that are considerate
to the environment. Energy-saving UV printing has been used, as has NON VOC ink
that releases only tiny amounts of volatile organic compounds into the atmosphere.
It is printed on paper certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) that contains
ingredients from forests that are manages in an appropriate manner.

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials
Japan Chemical Industry Association

レスポンシブル・ケア

7F Sumitomo Fudosan Rokko Building
1-4-1 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0033
TEL 03-3297-2555 FAX 03-3297-2615

Japan Chemical Industry Association[JCIA URL]
http://www.nikkakyo.org/
15.10.JBA1000

Contents
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
2-1
2-2

Environmental Protection(Prevention of Global Warming)
Environmental Protection(Industrial Waste Reduction)
Environmental Protection(Reduction of Chemical Emissions)
Environmental Protection(Prevention of Atmospheric Pollution and Water Pollution)
Environmental Protection(Prevention of Soil and Ground Water Pollution, PCB)
Environmental Protection(Environmental Investment and Biodiversity)
Process Safety and Disaster Prevention(Efforts to Prevent Facility Accidents)
Process Safety and Disaster Prevention(Response to Possible Large-Scale Earthquake)

01
02
03
04
05
06

1-2

Environmental Protection (Industrial Waste Reduction)

3-1

Industrial Health and Safety

09

4-1

Distribution Safety

11

5-1

Chemicals and Product Safety (Safety Assessment)

12

Progress in Achievement of FY 2015 Target for Final Disposal Volume

5-2

Chemicals and Product Safety (Information Supply)

13

Already achieved FY 2015 target

6-1

Management System

14

7-1

Social Dialogue

15

7-2

Dialogue with the Community

16

8-1

Members’ Self-Assessment

17

9-1

Responsible Care Verification

18

Expect to be able to achieve target

Uncertain whether or not can achieve target

59
0%

20%

9
40%

Not expected to achieve target

24

60%

8

80%

100%

07
Industrial Waste Volume and Effective Resource Utilization Ratio

08

Industrial waste volume

Effective resource utilization ratio（%）(1,000 tons/year)

10,000
8,000

1-1

6,000

Environmental Protection (Prevention of Global Warming)

4,000

CO² Emissions Index(ten-thousand tons)

6,823

6,222

6,000
4,000

100

8189

66

80
60

36

4041

2,000
0

8,000

40
20

2000

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

CO² Emissions Index
The “Commitment to a Low-carbon
Society” activities were launched in
FY 2013. Compared with FY 2005 taken
as the base year, CO² emissions havebeen reduced by 6,000,000 tons.

2012

2013

2014

0

Final Landfill Disposal Volume
Final landfill disposal volume

2005

2009

2010

(Base year)

2011

2012

2013

2014

(FY)
(343 companies and two associations)(The JCIA’s interim report figures for FY 2014)

Reduction of Emissions of CO² andFour Alternatives to Freon
When the reduction of CO² emissions
and the reduction of emissions in the
manufacture of four alternatives to Freon(HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3) are combined,
emissions in 2013 were down 28% fromthe base years (= 100%).

Reduction of Emissions of CO² and Four Alternatives to Freon
CO ² emissions (10,000 tons/CO ²): Energy source CO ² emissions
Estimated emissions in manufacture of HFCs, etc.: CO ²e* emissions of four alternatives to Freon*
CO ²e (CO ² equivalent): Corresponding value of CO ² emissions
（%）

120

100

28%
80

Ratio to FY 2000

(1,000 tons/year)

（％）

1,000

100

800
600

100

80

640

60

31

400
200
0

197
2000

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Industrial Waste Volume and Effective
Resource Utilization Ratio
Industrial waste volume in FY 2014 was
4,041,000 tons, down 54,000 tons fromthe FY 2013 level and down 51% fromthe level in the base year of FY 2000.
We are also making positive efforts
to encourage sorting and reuse. The
effective resource utilization ratio (theratio to the volume of waste discharged
by effectively used resources) increased
from 36% in FY 2000 to 66% in FY 2014.

(FY)(100 survey-responding companies)

2,000
0

Progress in Achievement of FY 2015
Target for Final Disposal Volume
In accordance with the Keidanren (Japan
Business Federation) Voluntary Action
Plan on the Environment, JCIA has set a
new target since FY 2011 (a reduction in
final disposal volume by about 65% fromthe FY 2000 level by FY 2015) and ismaking efforts to achieve that goal.

2012

2013

2014

40
20
0

(FY)
(100 survey-responding companies)

Item (FY 2014)

Relative to FY 2000

Relative to FY 2013

Industrial waste volume
Effective resource utilization
ratio
Final disposal by JCIA
members

Reduced by 51%

Reduced by 1%

Improved by 30 points

Improved by 3 points

Reduced by 69%

Hovering around the samelevel

Final Landfill Disposal Volume
The final landfill disposal volume in FY
2014 was 197,000 tons, down 1,000
tons from FY 2013 and down 69%
from the FY 2000 level. Furthermore,
as well as reducing the final landfill
disposal volume, in accordance withlegal revisions member companies arestrengthening their verification of theproper disposal of waste by, among
other things, the issuance, recovery, andverification of industrial waste manifestos
and the inspection of final disposal sites.

60

40

20

0

Base year* 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(year)* Base years: The base year for CO ² emissions is FY 1990; the base year for estimated emissions associatedwith manufacturing of HFCs, etc. is 1995 (calendar year).

01 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

02

Environmental Protection(Reduction of Chemical Emissions)

1-3

Emissions of PRTR* Substances
In FY 2014 Emissions of PRTR
substances amounted to 11,800 tons,
a reduction of about 74% from the
FY 2000 level. Because the numberof designated substances increased
following a revision of the law, the volumeof emissions temporarily increased in
FY 2010, but since then the downward
trend has continued. Emissions into theatmosphere accounted for 93.2% of thetotal, and emissions into water areasfor 6.8%. No emissions to soil werereported.

Emissions of PRTR Substances
Atmosphere

Water

Soil

Release (1,000 tons/year)

60
50

46.1

40
30
20

11.8
10
0

2000

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014
(FY)

Emissions of Voluntary Surveyed Substances
Atmosphere

Water

Release (1,000 tons/year)

60

55.4

50
40
30

20.2

20
10
0

2000

* PRTR (Pollutant Release and Transfer
Register): The PRTR system is designed to
identify, collect and disseminate data on theamounts and sources of a variety of toxic
chemicals released to the environment ortransferred outside of facilities in the formof waste. PRTR Law: Act on Confirmation,etc. of Release Amounts of SpecificChemical Substances in the Environment
and Promotion of Improvements to theManagement Thereof

Emissions of Voluntary Surveyed
Substances
The emissions of voluntary surveyed
substances was 20,200 tons, resulting
in over 60% reduction compared to FY
2000. The breakdown of the emission
quantities was 93% for emissions into
the air and 7% for emissions into water
areas. No emissions to soil werereported.

Soil

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014
(FY)

VOC EmissionsNote) Change in the number of substances
voluntarily surveyed by JCIA:
From FY 2000 to 2009:
125 substances and 1 substance group*
From FY 2010 to 2012:
105 substances and 1 substance group*
From FY 2013 to the current:
89 substances and 1 substance group** Chain hydrocarbons with up to 4 to 8
numbers of carbon atoms

VOC* Emissions
Member companies are making
tremendous efforts to install equipment
and improve processes for controllingemissions of VOCs.
The VOC emissions in FY 2014
amounted to 29,700 tons, almost thesame as those in FY 2013, a 67%
reduction compared with FY 2000 level,
continuing a significant downward trend.

Emissions (1,000 tons/year)

100

90.2
80

60

40

29.7
20

Environmental Protection(Prevention of Atmospheric Pollution and Water Pollution)

1-4* VOC (volatile organic compound): VOC is acollective term for a wide variety of volatileorganic compounds that turn into gas andenter the atmosphere, including toluene,
xylenes and ethyl acetate.

Chemical companies in Japan have significantly reduced their emissions of air and water pollutants. In particular, member companies
not only comply with regulatory standards but also agreements with municipalities. They also set their own voluntary management
criteria, which are more rigorous than government standards, to intensify their ongoing efforts to reduce emissions.

SOx Emissions

NOx Emissions

Emission intensity

SOx emissions

NOx emissions

Emissions (1,000 tons/year)

Emission intensity (kg/1 mil. yen)

50

5.0

39.69

40
30

24.20

1.87

20

0

2000

2007

2008

2009

03 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

2010

2011

2012

2013

120

3.0

90

1.0

30

85

84

83

77

83

83

83

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0.0

0

5.0

4.00

3.36 4.0

83.75

3.0

62.34

85

84

83

77

83

83

83

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

The figures in the bars indicate the numbers of companies that submitted data.
Emission intensity: Emissions per ¥1 million sales

COD Emissions

Dust Emissions
Emission intensity

COD emissions

Emissions (1,000 tons/year)

Emission intensity (g/1 mil. yen)

5.0
4.0
3.0

157.8
3.35

2.0

200

25

160

0.98
20 20.84
15

1.96 80

10

40

5

85

85

84

82

75

81

82

82

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0

0

(FY)

Emission intensity

0.8

15.45

0.6

0.2

86

86

84

83

77

83

83

83

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Total Phosphorous emissions
Emission intensity (kg/1 mil. yen)

40

0.0

(FY)

1.0

1.8

0.8

37.80

21.05 1.6

0.6

0.75

1.4

0.4

1.2

0.2

1.32
1.13

8

78

77

76

76

69

76

77

78

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014
(FY)

1.0

Emission intensity

Emissions (1,000 tons/year)

2.0

26.50

24

0

1.0

Total Phosphorous Emissions

Emissions (1,000 tons/year)

16

0.83

The figures in the bars indicate the numbers of companies that submitted data.
Emission intensity: Emissions per ¥1 million sales

Total Nitrogen Emissions

32

Emission intensity (kg/1 mil. yen)

0.4

The figures in the bars indicate the numbers of companies that submitted data.
Emission intensity: Emissions per ¥1 million sales

Total Nitrogen emissions

Emission intensity

Emissions (1,000 tons/year)

105.5 120

1.0
0.0

0.0

(FY)

The figures in the bars indicate the numbers of companies that submitted data.
Emission intensity: Emissions per ¥1 million sales

Dust emissions

2.0
1.0

85

(FY)

The figures in the bars indicate the numbers of companies that submitted data.
Emission intensity: Emissions per ¥1 million sales

0

4.0

60

85

Emission intensity (kg/1 mil. yen)150

1.30 2.0

10

Emission intensity

Emissions (1,000 tons/year)

0.0

Emission intensity (g/1 mil. yen)50

34.40 40
0.64

30
20
10

77

77

75

76

69

76

77

78

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0

(FY)
The figures in the bars indicate the numbers of companies that submitted data.
Emission intensity: Emissions per ¥1 million sales

2014
(FY)

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

04

Environmental Protection(Prevention of Soil and Ground Water Pollution, PCB)

1-5

Soil and Ground Water Pollution

Reasons for Implementing
an Investigation
Regarding soil pollution, member
companies not only conduct surveys
based on the Soil Contamination
Countermeasures Act but also inmany cases implement their own
voluntary surveys and adopt necessary
countermeasures if pollution is
discovered.

Reasons for Implementing an Investigation (Multiple answers allowed)
Voluntary implementation

68

Implementation specified
by laws/ordinances
External request

44
2

0%

Investment in Environmental Measures
Environmental investment

1,000
800

100%

Countermeasures against
Contamination
In FY 2014, 41 companies conductedsurveys in 94 places, and 13 companies
discovered pollution exceeding thestandards in 16 places. When casesof pollution discovered before FY 2014
are included, 29 companies have
implemented countermeasures against
contamination at 46 places.

Countermeasures against Contamination (Multiple answers allowed)
48

In situ extraction

24

Removal by excavation
Containment(interceptor/water shielding)21

Treatment(separation/degradation)

21

Solidification/
insolubilization

0.40 0.6
0.4

88

87

85

79

72

81

83

83

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Other

29%

Promotion of greenification

0.5%
Measures to prevent noise,vibration, and offensive odor

Atmospheric pollution
countermeasures

2%

22%

2%

Water pollution countermeasures

Soil and ground water pollution countermeasures

15%

Measures to reduce emissions ofharmful substances

Industrial waste andrecycling measures

4%

20%

6%

State of Efforts to Preserve Biodiversity
40%

60%

80%

PCBs

State of Storage and Disposal of
PCB Waste
The actual results obtained fromtreatment of the PCB wastes are steadily
increasing every year.
Under the Act on Special Measures for
Promotion of Proper Treatment of PCB
Waste, companies were obligatedto report on the state of storage anddisposal of polychlorinated biphenyl(PCB) to the prefectural governor and to
dispose of PCB waste within 15 years of
the law’s enforcement on July 15, 2001.
However, a partial revision of the decree
enforcing the law on December 12, 2012,extended the deadline for the disposal of
PCB waste to March 31, 2027.

State of Storage and Disposal of PCB Waste
Existence of PCB waste storage
Storage of high-concentration
PCB waste

82

Storage of low-concentration
PCB waste

91

Existence of disposal record in FY 2014
Partial disposal ofhigh-concentration PCB waste

82

Partial disposal of
low-concentration PCB waste

0%

69
20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Notes: 1. H
 igh-concentration PCB waste: Electric equipment, such as transformers and capacitors, that used
PCB intentionally as insulating oil before the termination of PCB manufacture (before 1972). Insulating
oil contains from about 50% to 100% PCB.
2. L
 ow-concentration PCB waste: Electric equipment made after the termination of PCB manufacturethat unintentionally contained small quantities of PCB.

Planning or considering

Already implementing

100%

No plans

FY 2012

42

21

37

FY 2013

46

18

36

FY 2014

42

18

40

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Consideration for Biodiversity in Procurement of Materials
Already implementing

Planning or considering

Not considering or no plans

Not applicable in view of business characteristics

49
0%

20%

40%

24

18

60%

80%

9
100%

Content of Efforts (%)
Implemented
in FY 2014

Scheduled to
implement in
FY 2015

67

Compilation of activity targets
Establishment of body to oversee andpromote activities
Tree planting and conservation offorest resources
Conservation of river and ocean
resources
Restoration of lost parts in vicinity or
elsewhere
Collaboration with external bodies,such as other companies,
organizations, and NPOs
Other

9

Scheduled to
implement in
FY 2016No
implementation
schedule

21

Not applicablein view ofbusinesscharacteristics

0

0

64

3

6

6

0

64

12

15

15

3

61

15

21

18

6

12

0

12

39

15

58

12

18

9

0

18

0

6

0

0

Reference Guidelines
Ministry of the Environment, Private-Sector Engagementin Biodiversity Guidelines

Guidelines of industrial organization, private-sector
organization, etc.

38
0%05 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

Investment in Environmental
MeasuresIn FY 2014 investment for the installationand maintenance of environment-friendly
equipment, such as energy-saving and
CO²-reduction equipment, and for thedevelopment of environment-friendly
products and technologies and so on
amounted to ¥73.6 billion, up 9% overthe fiscal 2013 level and equivalent to
0.4% of sales (up 15% over FY 2013).
Member companies are implementing
planned investment in environmental
measures and steadily linking thatinvestment to sustained improvements intheir environmental performance.

Energy-saving and
CO²-reduction measures

19.5%

17
0%

0.0

(FY)
The figures at the bottom of the bars indicate the number of companies that submitted data.

3

Others0.2

Breakdown of Environmental Investment in FY 20147

Litter control

736.4 0.8

0.40

10

In situ degradation

1.0

843.6

400

20%

80%

1.2

600

0

60%

（%）

1,200

20
40%

Ratio to sales(¥100 million)

200

OthersEnvironmental Protection(Environmental Investment and Biodiversity)

1-6

20%

Own company guidelines

25
40%

37
60%

80%

100%

State of Efforts to Preserve
Biodiversity
Regarding biodiversity, 42% of member
companies said they were “already
implementing” measures and 18% said
they were “planning or considering”
measures. Furthermore, about halfof the member companies already
implementing measures said that they
took biodiversity into consideration in the
procurement of materials.
Content of Efforts
Member companies are also
aggressively promoting specific activities
and activities in collaboration withexternal organizations, including tree
planting and the conservation of forest
resources, the conservation of river andocean resources, the restoration oflost ecosystem parts in the vicinity or
elsewhere, the installation of biotopes
using green zones at plants, thepreservation of water resources, and theprotection of endangered species.
Reference Guidelines
In conjunction with the 10th Meetingof the Conference of the Parties to
the Convention on Biological Diversity(COP 10) held in Nagoya in October
2010, Nippon Keidanren and others
established the Japan’s Biodiversity
Initiatives based on Private Sector
Engagement to promote the preservationof biodiversity by companies andlaunched the Japan Business andBiodiversity Partnership. About half ofmember companies addressing theissue of biodiversity take part in thispartnership. Member companies that are
working to address biodiversity issues
use this Partnership’s Guidelines andother guidelines as their standards.

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

06

Process Safety and Disaster Prevention(Efforts to Prevent Facility Accidents)

2-1

Accident Occurrences (Explosions, fires, leakage, etc.)
Number of incidents

Number of leakage accidents

Number of explosions and fires

Number of faculty accidents per company(incident)

1.08 1.2

120
100

1.0

0.74

80

0.8

52

60
40

64

20
0

0.6

100

100

(FY)
Note: From FY 2009, the number of facility accidents is devided into leakage accidents and explosion/fire accidents.
The figures in the bars indicate the number of companies that submitted data.

80

80

60

60

40

40

20

20

84

76

83

83

83

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Review and Strengthening of Countermeasures

92

Explosion, fire

26
60%

80%

15

100%

Efforts to Prevent Facility Accidents
In response to the frequent outbreakof incidents at facilities in recent years,
many member companies are reviewing
and strengthening their facility
countermeasures, work management
countermeasures, and worker educationand training.

Reviews by Type of Accident

No schedule

Scheduled to implement0%

Leakage

Both

75

10
20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0

Facility
countermeasures

92

Work management
countermeasures

89

Worker educationand training

85
8

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

2011

Not satisfactory

2012

（%）

Not applicable

2013

2014

Backup of Computer Systems and Data

0

Satisfactory

Not satisfactory

2011

2012

Not applicable

2013

Satisfactory

Not satisfactory

Securing Internal and External Means of Communication（%）

Not applicable

100

80

80

60

60

40

40

20

20
2011

2012

2013

2014
(FY)

100

0

100%

Satisfactory

(FY)

（%）

Main Targets of Review Countermeasures (Multiple answers allowed)

Other

Preparation/Revision of Earthquake Disaster Prevention Guidelines

（%）

86

40%

Following the Great East Japan Earthquake, many member companies have undertaken reviews of their earthquake and tsunami
countermeasures.
Changes in review items surveyed in a questionnaire conducted immediately after the earthquake during the last four years are shown
below, indicating that the state of preparedness for a large-scale earthquake has been steadily improving.

0.0

86

20%

Self-Evaluation on Emergency Measures

0.2

86

Efforts to Prevent Facility Accidents

0%

Process Safety and Disaster Prevention(Response to Possible Large-Scale Earthquake)

Implementation of Emergency Earthquake Drills

0.4

38

Implemented

Accident Occurrences
The total number of accidents at facilities
in FY 2014 was 90, which was lower thanin FY 2013, and the number of accidents
at facilities per company (1.08) slightly
decreased from FY 2013.

2-2

2014

0

Satisfactory

Not satisfactory

2011

2012

Not applicable

2013

(FY)

2014
(FY)

Specific Review Examples

Identification of potentially dangerous places, strengthening of inspections, and implementation ofcountermeasures; review of work standards and management standards; preparation of educational
materials based on examples of accidents; strengthening of worker education; etc.

Implementation of Emergency Drills in the Event of a Tsunami

Reasons for Conducting Prior Facility Evaluations

Breakdown of Safety and Disaster-Prevention Investment Amount

OthersOthers4%

7%Consideringexternal cases

New construction/
addition2%

45%

Enforcement of
new laws/
revisions of laws

Earthquakeand other natural
disastercountermeasures

Measures todeal withaging of facilities

Explosion,
fire, and leakage
countermeasures

Measures toimprove worksafety andwork environment

49%

12%

6%

Remodeling

43%

15%

17%

Investment in Safety, Security, and Disaster-Prevention Measures
Safety and disaster-prevention investment amount

Ratio to sales（％）(¥100 million)

1,000

882.3

800 761.2
600
400

0.8

0.48 0.6

0.38

0.4

200
0

1.0

0.2
82

82

81

77

69

83

83

83

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0.0

(FY)
The figures at the bottom of the bars indicate the number of companies that submitted data.

07 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

Prior Facility Evaluations andManagement
All member companies have priorevaluation criteria for facilities. In
FY 2014, 96% of member companies
conducted prior facility evaluation. In
88% of the cases, the motivation was
the new construction, addition, or
remodeling of facilities.
Breakdown of Safety and DisasterPrevention Investment AmountOf the investment in safety and disasterprevention in FY 2014, the investment in“measures to deal with aging of facilities”
accounts for nearly half of the total.

（%）

Satisfactory

Not satisfactory（%）

Not applicable

100
80

80

60

60

40

40

20

20

0

Satisfactory

Not satisfactory

2011

2012

Not applicable

100

2011

2012

2013

2014

0

2013

(FY)

Seismic Diagnosis on Facilities and Reinforcement Work（%）

Satisfactory

Not satisfactoryProtection of Facilities against Tsunamis
Satisfactory

Not satisfactory

2011

2012

Not applicable

100

80

80

60

60

40

40

20

20

0

2014
(FY)

（%）

Not applicable

100

Investment in Safety, Security, andDisaster-Prevention Measures
The investment in safety and disasterprevention in FY 2014 was 88.2 billion
yen (up 8% from FY 2013) and theinvestment-to-sales ratio was 0.48% (up
16% from FY 2013). Member companies
are implementing safety and disasterprevention investment in a planned andsustained manner.

Fulfillment of Responsibility as a Supplier

2011

2012

2013

2014
(FY)

0

2013

2014
(FY)

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

08Industrial Health and Safety

3-1

Occurrence of Occupational Accidents
Frequency Rate* Trends
Frequency rate =Number of accident victims requiring absence from work

* Frequency rate: Indicator that shows the frequencyof occupational accidents

Total working hours (per one million hours)

Frequency Rate Trends
In 2014 the frequency rate for member
companies and their cooperative
companies was lower than in the
manufacturing industry as a whole and in
the chemical industry as a whole,although the figure is hovering aroundthe same level.

Efforts to Prevent Occupational Accidents
Review and Strengthening of Countermeasures
Implemented

Scheduled to implement

No schedule

90
0%

20%

40%

5
60%

5

80%

100%

Frequency Rate Trends
Manufacturing industry (MHLW)

1.2

Chemical industry (MHLW)

Cooperative companies

Member companies

1.10
1.09

Main Targets of Review Countermeasures (Multiple answers allowed)
Worker educationand training

1.06

85

Facility
countermeasures

0.76
0.6 0.62

80
9

Other

0.54

0%

0.43
0.33

0.3

0.0

93

Work management
countermeasures

0.9

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Specific Review Examples

Promotion of risk assessment; strengthening of danger prediction; strengthening of measuresfor dangers inherent in the workplace, such as rotating objects; review and compilation ofstandards; implementation of safety-awareness education; etc.
2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014
(Calendar year)

Severity Rate Trends
The severity rate of the member
companies and their cooperative
companies in 2014 worsened compared
to 2013. Further efforts to improve areneeded.

Severity Rate* Trends
Severity rate =Lost days* Severity rate: Indicator that shows the severity of occupational accidents

Total work hours (per thousand hours)

State of Preparedness for the “Mandatory Risk
Assessment of Chemicals” Required by the Revised
Industrial Safety and Health Act
Percentage of Member Companies dealing with 640 Substances for which Risk Assessment Is Required
Those dealing with themThose not dealing with them

97

Overall Severity Rates

0%

Chemical industry (MHLW)Manufacturing industry (MHLW)

0.3

Cooperative companies

20%

40%

3
60%

80%

100%

Member companies

Level of Understanding of the Status of Use of the 640 Substances
0.30

Mostly understandPartially understandIntend to understand

91
0.20

0.2

0%

20%

40%

6
60%

80%

3
100%

0.17

0.1

0.12

Presence or Absence of a Plan to Address the Risk Assessment Requirements (at present)

0.09

0.10

Have plan

0.04
0.04
0.0

Efforts to Prevent Occupational
Accidents
In recent years many member
companies have been reviewing andstrengthening their worker educationand training, work management
countermeasures, and facility
countermeasures. Furthermore, member
companies have been actively investingin safety and disaster-prevention
measures. (See section 2-1 Process
Safety, Investment in Safety, Security,
and Disaster-Prevention Measures.)

2007

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

0%

2014

(Calendar year)

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Member companies

1

1

1

2

1

2

0

5

Cooperative companies

9

6

1

1

1

2

2

4

Chemical industry (MHLW)

17

28

19

11

13

17

17

11

264

260

186

211

182

199

201

180

09 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

20%

30
40%

60%

80%

100%

(Calendar year)

Number of Fatalities from Occupational Accidents

Manufacturing industry(MHLW)Have no plan

70
2008

State of Preparedness for the“Mandatory Risk Assessment ofChemicals” Required by the Revised
Industrial Safety and Health Act
The act (Act No. 82, 2014) to partiallyrevise the Industrial Safety and Health
Act was issued on June 25, 2014, in
response to health problems caused bychemicals, such as bile duct cancer, andan increase in occupational accidents
from mental illness. The objective of therevision is to quickly respond to recentchanges in the social situation andthe trend of occupational accidents inorder to further improve measures forthe safety and health of workers. Seven
items in the Act have been revised,
including “mandatory risk assessment ofchemicals.”[Scheduled to be enforced by June 2016
(to be stipulated by a cabinet order)]We surveyed the current state ofmembers’ preparedness for addressing
the requirements.

Number of Fatalities from
Occupational Accidents
The number of fatalities at member
companies and their cooperative
companies was the worst in the last few
years.

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

10Distribution Safety

4-1

Chemicals and Product Safety (Safety Assessment)

5-1

Response to Distribution Accidents

Response to Distribution Accidents
In preparation for unexpected accidents,
member companies implement
emergency-response training for
distributors. Almost all member
companies have emergency-responsemanuals and have established 24-hour
emergency-response contact networks.

Emergency Contact Arrangements for Distribution Accidents
Have none

2.5%

Prior Safety Assessment
Application of Prior Safety Assessment (Multiple answers allowed)
Per substance97

Inside the plant

96
75

Transportation82

Use by customers

Have a 24-hour emergency
contact network,
especially for nighttime

85

Disposal

97.5%

Prior Safety Assessment
All member companies implement
prior safety assessment to specify thesafety of chemical substances andevaluate their impact on the health ofpeople handling them and theenvironment.
Prior safety assessment isconducted not only by substance andinside the plant but also more broadly
for transportation, use by the customer,
disposal, and so on.

80

Others

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Factors Covered by Prior Safety Assessment (Multiple answers allowed) (%)
Mutual Support in Accidents andEmergencies
Also, about 90% of member companies
have established mutual support
systems for emergencies involving
combustible solids, liquids, gases, highpressure gases, corrosive substances,
and acutely toxic substances.

Mutual Support Partners for Emergencies (Multiple answers allowed)
Cooperative companies/
plants

93

Sectors involved ininternal works

68

Administrative agencies(fire/police departments)

56
37

Nearby companies

27

Others

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Health ofhandlers

Safety ofhandlers

Explosivenessandinflammability

Environmental
impactof emissions

Others

Per substance

96

97

95

94

4

Inside the plant

95

96

94

91

4

Transportation

73

77

78

73

3

Use by customers

81

78

72

75

3

Disposal

77

76

76

80

4

Others

10

10

9

8

3

Others5%
Emergency Drills with Mutual Support Partners (Multiple answers allowed) (%)
Type of training

Communication
training

Desktop training

Field training

Administrative agencies

45

23

42

Nearby companies

34

24

34

Cooperative companies/plants

77

45

68

Sectors involved in internal works

68

39

69

Mutual support partners

Reasons for Implementing Prior
Safety Assessment
Almost all member companies
implement prior safety assessment every
year not only for the development,
manufacture, and sale of new
substances but also when existing
substances are newly introducedor when methods of manufacturing,transportation, use, and disposal arechanged.

Reasons for Implementing Prior Safety Assessment

100%

Introduction of new
substances

Announcement of relatedcases by other companies

Emergency Drills with Mutual Support
Partners
Furthermore, about 90% ofmember companies implement
emergency-response drills with mutual
support partners.

31%

2%

Requests from customers/
industries

Development/manufacturing/marketing of new substances

6%

28%

Establishment/revisionof related laws

12%

Modification of manufacturingmethods, or other16%

Management of Chemicals Based on Risk Assessment
State of Introduction of Risk Assessment for Chemical Substance Evaluation

Possession of the Yellow Card and Availability of theContainer Yellow Card
Do not check3%

Have introduced(including partially)

Scheduled to introduce

14%

83%

No applicable products

95
0%

Not scheduled to introduce

Possession of the Yellow Card
As a means of providing information
to parties responding to emergencies,
member companies have prepared andpromote the carrying of Yellow Cards.

Verification of Yellow Card Use
Check at time of shipment

20%

40%

3 2
60%

80%

100%

97
86

Inside the plant

Introduction of Container Yellow Cards
Partially introduced

Under consideration

No applicable products

65
0%

20%

18
40%

60%

7
80%

Transportation

62

Use by customers

63
57

Disposal

10
100%

Others0%State of Introduction of Risk
Assessment for Chemical Substance
Evaluation
A new initiative is the management ofchemical substances on the basis of risk
assessment.
83% of member companies have alreadyincorporated risk assessment in their
management of chemical substances,and 14% are scheduled to do so.

Targets of Risk Assessment
Risk assessment covers the entire
lifecycle of chemical substances, from
R&D and manufacturing to disposal.

Targets of Risk Assessment (Multiple answers allowed)
Per substance

Already introduced

Factors Covered by Prior Safety
Assessment
Prior safety assessment covers suchfactors as the health and safety ofhandlers, explosiveness andinflammability, and the environmental
impact of emissions.

5
20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Ratio of member companies targeting the subject.

11 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

12

5-2

Chemicals and Product Safety (Information Supply)

Provision of Information on Products
GHS Compliance of SDSs in Member Companies
Respond only to obligatory substances andproducts stipulated in Article 57 of theIndustrial Safety and Health Act

0%

Respond to some obligations
to make GHS-compliance efforts
in the PRTR Act and Industrial
Safety and Health Act

Respond to all obligations tomake GHS-compliance efforts
in the PRTR Act and Industrial
Safety and Health Act

21%

79%

GHS* Compliance of SDSs in Member
Companies
While substances for which it isobligatory to provide Safety Data Sheets(SDSs) are stipulated by the PRTR Act,
Industrial Safety and Health Act, andPoisonous and Deleterious Substances
Control Act, almost all member
companies also voluntarily issue SDSs
for substances (products) for which there
are no legal requirements.
In their compilation of SDSs, mostmember companies endeavor to fulfill
the obligation to make efforts to comply
with GHS.
* GHS (Globally Harmonized System ofClassification and Labelling of Chemicals): A
system to communicate hazard informationon labels and Safety Data Sheets. The
information provided is classified according to
the type and severity of hazards of chemicals
according to globally standardized rules.

Management System

6-1

Certified at all production sites

No GHS-compliant labels available because
no substances and products to which
relevant laws are applicable are manufactured
or imported

Respond to all obligations tomake GHS-compliance efforts
in the PRTR Act and Industrial
Safety and Health Act

1%

68%

Respond only to obligatory substancesand products stipulated in Article 57of the Industrial Safety and Health Act

No plans

81

12 0 7FY 200883

10 0 7FY 200986

7 0 7

FY 201088

6FY 201191

7

11

FY 201289

8

12FY 201389

9

11

FY 2014

89

9

02

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0 6

100%

Trend in Adoption of Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems (OSHMSs)

GHS Compliance of Labeling inMember Companies
Regarding labeling as well, mostmember companies endeavor to fulfill
the obligation to make efforts to comply
with GHS.

Respond to some obligations
to make GHS-complianceefforts in the PRTR Act andIndustrial Safety and Health Act

3%

Planning stage

Certified at some production sites

FY 2007

Already introduced

GHS Compliance of Labeling in Member Companies

Status of Environmental Management
Systems (EMSs) Certification
The introduction of Environmental
Management Systems (EMSs) is steadily
increasing: about 90% of the member
companies have acquired some kind of
EMS certification, such as ISO 14001, fortheir entire production sector (plants).

Status of Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) Certification

28%

Planning stage

Being introduced

FY 200744

FY 200848

FY 2009

No plans

18

29

10

12

30

48

10

8

34

FY 2010

51

5

10

34

FY 201156

932

FY 2012

58

4

9

29

FY 2013

58

4

9

29

FY 2014

60

6

30

0%

9

3

4

20%

40%

60%

80%

Trend in Adoption of Occupational
Safety and Health Management
Systems (OSHMSs)
The number of member companies
introducing Occupational Safety and
Health Management Systems (OSHMSs)is steadily increasing as well; the ratioof members with such systems is now
64%.
Furthermore, the establishment of such
systems is verified by the acquisitionof external certification, such as
OHSAS18001, or internal auditing withreference to the standards of suchorganizations as the Japan Industrial
Safety and Health Association (JISHA).

100%

Verification of System’s Establishment (Multiple answers allowed)
Self-certification throughinternal auditing

55

Acquisition of external
certification

Understanding of Purpose and Use of Supplied Products (%)

Customers’
intended use

Usage bycustomers(in terms ofsafety)Intended use of
final products

Usage of final
products(in terms ofsafety)80% or over

85

55

53

37

50% or over

11

28

36

34

Under 50%

3

11

10

19

Don’t understand

1

6

1

10

Understanding of Purpose and Use of
Supplied Products
Furthermore, from the perspectiveof Responsible Care, it is importantto understand how your company’s
chemical products are being used andprocessed by customers and what
products are finally made from them anddelivered to consumers. Most member
companies therefore make efforts to findout about usage by customers and so on.

59
0

20

40

60

External Certification Acquired (Multiple answers allowed)
BS8800(UK standard)

BS8800(UK standard) 0

OHSAS
18001

Other

OHSAS
18001

76
31

Other

20%

45
64

JISHA

0

0%

100%

Reference Standards for Self-Certification (Multiple answers allowed)

0

JISHA

80

40%

60%

80%

100%

0%

Planning to introduce

No plans to introduce

32
20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Global Reporting Initiative
Already introduced

Now being introduced

39
0%

13 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

20%

6
40%

13

42
60%

80%

100%

Global Reporting Initiative
GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) is a
non-profit organization whose mission isto develop globally applicable guidelines
for global sustainability reporting.
Companies have started to adopt
sustainability reporting, including not
only environmental but also social andeconomic dimensions, according to theindicators developed by the GRI.

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

14

7-1

Social Dialogue
Publication of Responsible Care
Reports
The ratio of member companies issuing
Responsible Care Reports in FY 2014
was about 90%, almost the same as inprevious years. If group publications areincluded, the ratio rises to about 95%.

Publication of Responsible Care Reports
Regularly issued

In the planning process

No plans to publish

FY 200983

3

14

FY 2010851

14FY 2011891

10

FY 201289

0

11FY 2013871

12FY 2014

87

1

12

0%

20%

40%

Dialogue with the Community

7-2

60%

80%

Implementation of Regional Dialogue Meetings
Areas where implemented
in FY 2014

Yamaguchi-Higashi, Osaka, Chiba, Aichi, Yokkaichi, Kashima,
Okayama, Hyogo

Areas where implemented
in FY 2013

Niigata-Kita, Yamaguchi-Nishi, Kawasaki, Sakai & Senboku, Oita,
Iwakuni & Otake, Toyama & Takaoka

Other Community Activities

Publication of Site Reports
More than 30% of the member
companies issued local site reports. This
trend has remained the same for the last
few years.

Publication of Site Reports

Participation incommunity events

99

Volunteer activities

93

Acceptance ofplant visits

81

Organization of
discussion forums

79

FY 200933

FY 201034

FY 201134

Science classes

68

FY 201234

Lectures63

FY 2013

33

Other

0%

9
0%

33

FY 2014

20%

40%

60%

80%

Other Community Activities
Besides these meetings, member
companies endeavor to promote
communication with the local community
by participating in and supporting
community events and volunteer
activities, hosting plant visits for local
residents and elementary and juniorhigh school students, and giving lecturesat schools and civic groups. In
FY 2014, 79% of member companies
created opportunities for exchange withlocal residents, and dialogues wereconducted on a total of 768 occasions in
148 areas.

Means of Communication (Multiple answers allowed)

100%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100%

Agenda Items in Discussion Forums (Multiple answers allowed)
Contents of Responsible Care Reports
Contents
Basic items

Environmental
protection

Process safety anddisaster prevention

Occupational healthand safety

Chemicals andproduct safety

Distribution safety
Social dialogue

RC-related management policy, declaration, philosophy, etc.

Coverage (%)
100

RC-related management setup and organization

97

Industrial waste

100

Energy saving and global warming prevention

100

PRTR, harmful atmosphere-polluting substances

100

Atmospheric pollution countermeasures, water pollution
countermeasures

100

General content

99

Emergency response inside and outside company at time ofserious accident

86

Prior safety evaluation of facilities

70

General content

100Consideration of safety at affiliate companies, such as safety
education

71

General content

99

Supply of information through material safety data
sheets, etc.

91

Prior safety evaluation of chemical substances

83

Response to distribution accidents (setup, training)

71

Implementation of Yellow Cards and labeling74

Present state of employee education relating to RC and plans

70

Dialogue with the local community

91

15 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

Implementation of Regional Dialogue
Meetings
Responsible Care Committee
holds dialogue meetings with local
communities once every two years inareas where there is a concentrationof member company sites, especiallychemical complexes.

Contents of Responsible Care
Reports
Most of the reports carried the resultof activities in the six main areasof Responsible Care, namely,environmental protection, process safetyand disaster prevention, occupational
health and safety, chemicals and productsafety, distribution safety, and social
dialogue.
In particular, at a time when global
environmental problems are attracting
the attention of society, all of the reports
carried the results of activities in the
category of environmental protection.

Safety matters81

Pollution matters

80

Plant operation76

Chemical substancematters

66

Agenda Items in Discussion Forums
The discussions often involved mattersclosely related to the local community,
such as safety (accident- and disasterprevention measures, etc.), pollution,
chemical substances, and plant
management (the construction of new
facilities, site changes, etc.).

47

Other

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

16Members’ Self-Assessment

8-1

Details of Self-Assessment Scores (Average scores for all member companies based on a five-level assessment system)
Code

MS

EP

PS

Assessed item

OSH

DS

CPS

SD

Important items

Policy

4.5

4.5

4.3

4.4

3.9

4.2

4.4

Identification of striking environmental aspects,
identification of dangerous and harmful factors, etc.

4.4

4.5

4.4

4.5

3.7

4.3

—

Legal and other requirements

4.7

—

—

—

—

—

—

Objectives

4.5

4.4

4.1

4.2

3.8

4.0

3.6

Plans

4.5

4.0

4.2

4.4

3.8

4.0

3.8

Organization

4.3

—

—

—

—

—

—

Education and training

4.2

4.2

4.2

4.3

3.9

4.0

3.6

Communication

4.2

3.9

3.6

4.5

4.0

4.0

4.0

Documentation and document
management

4.3

—

—

—

—

—

—

Operation management

4.2

3.8

—

—

3.9

3.4

—

Response to emergency situations

4.3

—

4.0

—

3.4

—

—

Inspection and monitoring

4.4

4.4

4.3

4.3

3.7

4.2

3.6

Corrections and preventive measures

4.4

4.4

4.4

4.5

4.0

4.3

—

Collection of information and management of records

4.3

—

—

—

—

—

—

Auditing

4.6

—

—

—

—

—

—

Revisions by management

4.6

—

—

—

—

—

—

(Overall assessment)

4.4

4.2

4.2

4.4

3.8

4.0

3.8

Abbreviation

Code

Self-assessment score

Classification

MS

Management system

4.5 points or over

Very satisfactoryEP

Environmental protection

3.5 to under 4.5 points

Just about satisfactory

PS

Process safety and disaster prevention

2.5 to under 3.5 points

Somewhat unsatisfactory

OSH

Occupational health and safety

Under 2.5 points

Unsatisfactory

Details of Self-Assessment Scores(Average scores for all member
companies)
on a scale of 5, scores in the 4-point
range were recorded for all of theimportant items in the categories ofmanagement system and occupational
health and safety, showing that the
PDCA cycle is rotating at a high level inthese categories.
In the category of environmental
preservation, more efforts should bemade to improve communication andoperation management.
In the category of process safety,
enhanced communication is desirable.
In the category of chemical productsafety, the improvement of operation
management is desirable.
In the category of distribution safety,
there are issues especially in the
response to emergency situations.
In the category of social dialogue, there
are still many issues, such as objectives,
education and training, and inspection
and monitoring.

Occupational Health and Safety
Very satisfactory

Distribution safety
Chemicals and product safety

SD

Social dialogue

61

33

6

FY 201361

34

5FY 2014

67

29

4

80%

100%

0%

20%

Very satisfactory

Somewhat unsatisfactory

Unsatisfactory

FY 201252

47

1

FY 2013

53

46

1

53
20%

46
40%

60%

80%

Just about satisfactory1

Somewhat unsatisfactory

Unsatisfactory

FY 201244

51

5FY 201345

51

4FY 2014

46

50

4

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Just about satisfactory

Somewhat unsatisfactory

Unsatisfactory

FY 20124250

8FY 20134250

8FY 2014

42

54

4

0

20%

Just about satisfactory

Somewhat unsatisfactory

Unsatisfactory

22

55

23

FY 2013

22

54

24

26

FY 2014

57

0%

20%

40%

16
60%

1

80%

100%

Chemicals and Product Safety
In the category of chemicals and productsafety, the ratio of member companies
replying “very satisfactory” or “just aboutsatisfactory” is almost 90%.

Chemicals and Product Safety
Very satisfactory

Just about satisfactory

Somewhat unsatisfactory

Unsatisfactory

FY 2012

29

60

11

FY 2013

30

59

11

31
0%

62
20%

40%

Just about satisfactory

Somewhat unsatisfactory

7

60%

80%

100%

40%

17 JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

60%

80%

Unsatisfactory

FY 2012

18

51

30

1

FY 2013

18

51

30

1

Management System
Regarding trends over the last three
years, in the category of management
system, the ratio of member companies
replying “very satisfactory” or “just aboutsatisfactory” has maintained a high levelof over 90%.

Environmental Protection
In the category of environmental
protection, the ratio of member companies
replying “very satisfactory” or“just about satisfactory” has remained
above 90%, and the ratio of those replying“very satisfactory” is increasing too.

18

56

0%

20%

25

40%

60%

Social Dialogue
In the category of social dialogue, theratio of member companies replying“unsatisfactory” or “somewhat
unsatisfactory” accounts for less than
30%.

1

80%

100%

100%

9-1

Responsible Care Verification

Companies Undergoing a Responsible Care (RC) Verification
Verification of actions

Verification of reports(Number of companies undergoing verification)

100%

Process Safety and Disaster Prevention
Very satisfactory

Distribution Safety
In the category of distribution safety,
the ratio of member companies
replying “unsatisfactory” or “somewhat
unsatisfactory” accounts for less than
20%.

100%

Environmental Protection
Very satisfactory60%

FY 2012

Very satisfactoryManagement System

0%

40%

Distribution Safety

FY 2014

FY 2014

Unsatisfactory

FY 2012FY 2014

Change in Comprehensive Assessment
Just about satisfactory

Somewhat unsatisfactorySocial Dialogue

DS
CPS

Very satisfactory

Just about satisfactory

Occupational Health and Safety
In the category of occupational healthand safety, the ratio of member
companies replying “very satisfactory” or“just about satisfactory” has remained
above 90%, and the ratio replying “verysatisfactory” is now more than 60%.

25

Process Safety and Disaster
Prevention
In the category of process safety anddisaster prevention, the ratio of member
companies replying “very satisfactory”
or “just about satisfactory” is above 90%
and on an upward trend.

20
15
10
5
0

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014
(FY)

Companies Undergoing a Responsible
Care (RC) Verification
In FY 2014, 10 companies underwent a
responsible care verification (verificationof reports). The total number ofcompanies that have undergone an RC
verification is 174.
Verification of reports (10 companies):
Daicel Corporation, Sanyo Chemical
Industries, Ltd., Shin-Etsu Chemical Co.,
Ltd., Nippon Shokubai Co., Ltd., Nippon
Soda Co., Ltd., Kaneka Corporation,
Ube Industries, Ltd., JSR Corporation,
Sumitomo Seika Chemicals Company
Limited, and Asahi Kasei Corporation

JCIA Annual Report 2015 Reference Materials

18