EPA-260-R-002-004

May, 2003



# How Are the Toxics

Release Inventory Data Used?

-- government, business, academic and citizen uses

Toxics Release Inventory Program Division

Office of Environm ental Inform ation

Office of Inform ation Analysis and Access

U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency

W a shington, DC

May 2003

## Table of Contents

F o r e w o r d

.................................................................... i

Introduction ..................................................................1

P ub l i c U s e ...................................................................2

C i t i z e n s a n d C o m m u n i t y O r g a n i z a t i o n s ......................................3

N a t i o n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n s ...................................................5

D i r e c t N e g o t i a t i o n .......................................................6

E n v i r o n m e n t a l J u s t i c e ....................................................8

Industry Use ..................................................................9

C o s t R e d u c t i o n .........................................................9

P ub l i c R e l a t i o n s T o o l s ...................................................1 0

P ub l i c D i s c l o s u r e .......................................................1 0

G o v e r n m e n t U s e .............................................................1 1

E n v i r o n m e n t a l S o l u t i o n s .................................................1 1

E n v i r o n m e n t a l T a r g e t i n g .................................................1 2

L e g i s l a t i o n a n d R e g u l a t i o n s ...............................................1 3

R i s k A s s e s s m e n t .......................................................1 3

Quality Assurance and Control ............................................1 4

O t h e r G o v e r n m e n t U s e s ..................................................1 4

I n t e r n a t i o n a l R i g h t

- t o

- K n o w ....................................................1 4

I n v e s t m e n t ..................................................................1 5

A c a d e m i c U s e ...............................................................1 5

R e s e a r c h ..............................................................1 6

C l a s s r o o m U s e .........................................................1 7

C o n c l u s i o n s .................................................................1 7

A p p e n d i x A .................................................................1 8

L i t e r a t u r e C i t e d ..............................................................6 0

## Foreword

The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data are used in m y riad ways. There are m a ny uses

of the TRI data that the authors of the legislation (the Em ergency Planning and Com m unity

Right-to Know Act) m a ndating the TRI envisioned and m a ny that they did not foresee. The

Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 increased the types of data required to be reported to the TRI,

which expanded the potential uses of the TRI. The com b ination of the types of data collected

under TRI and the fact that they are m a de available to the public under EPCRA 313 m a kes TRI a

powerful tool for m a ny environm ental analyses and understanding the m a ny factors that

contribute to hum an health and environm ental conditions.

The intent of this report is to provide the reader with an overview of the different ways

in which the TRI data are used, and as such does not include a description of all program s,

activities, and analyses that use the TRI data. The case studies that are presented in this report

were gathered through literature searches and phone interviews. EPA does not support or

condone any of the uses of the TRI data presented here; nor does it endorse any of the

organizations that are discussed in the case studies. To learn m o re about TRI data and about

EPA' s annual Toxics Release Inventory Public Data Release (PDR), consult EPA' s TRI website

at <www.epa.gov/tri>.

EPA is interested in learning of new uses of the TRI data. If you know of uses of the TRI

data, particularly types of uses not covered in this docum ent, and wish to share them , please send

them to:

Toxics Release Inventory Program Division (2844T)

United States Environm ental Protection Agency

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

W a shington, D.C. 20460

or via e-m a il to: tri.us@epa.gov

i

### Introduction

A chem ical accident killed m o re than 2,000 people and injured hundreds of thousands of

others in Bhopal, India, in Decem ber 1984. Coupled with sim ilar, though less devastating,

chem ical accidents in the United States, the Bhopal incident greatly increased the public’s

awareness of and concern about the dangers of chem icals used and released into com m unities.

Consequently, in 1986, Congress passed the Em ergency Planning and Com munity Right-toKnow Act (EPCRA) as a part of the Superfund r eauthorization. EPCRA’s m a ndate is twofold:

• p rom o te contingency planning for chem ical em ergencies, and

• p rovide the public with previously unavailable inform ation about toxic and hazardous

chem icals in their com m unities.

Section 313 of EPCRA created the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), which requires

com p anies within the m a nuf acturing sector and f e deral f acilities to report specif i ed quantities of

certain chem icals released from their facilities. In 1990, Congress passed the Pollution

Prevention Act (PPA), which requires that f acilities report to the TRI the quantities of toxic

chem icals that they m a nage in waste and the types of pollution prevention (source reduction)

activities they undertake. In 1998, the public gained access to data from additional industrial

sectors. The other industries now required to report under EPCRA and the PPA include m e tal

m i ning, coal m i ning, coal and oil burning electrical utilities, hazardous waste treatm e nt and

disposal f acilities, chem icals distributors, petroleum bulk plants term inals, and solvent recycling

operations.

Under Section 313(h) of EPCRA, Congress cl early provides for the wide distribution of

the industry inform ation gathered:

"The release form s required under this section are intended to provide inform ation to the

federal, state, and local governm e nts and the public, including citizens of com m unities

surrounding covered facilities. The release form shall inform persons about releases of toxic

chem icals to the environm ent; to assist governm e ntal agencies, researchers, and other persons in

the conduct of research and data gathering; to aid in the developm ent of appropriate regulations,

guidelines, and standards; and for other sim ilar purposes." Through their availability, TRI data

have becom e a useful resource for m a ny different organizations:

• C om m unities use TRI data to begin dialogues with local facilities and to encourage them

to reduce their em issions, develop pollution prevention (P2) plans, and im prove safety

m easures.

• P ublic interest groups, governm e nt, academ icians, and others use TRI data to educate the

public about toxic chem ical em issions and potential risk.

• I ndustry uses TRI data to identify P2 opportunities, set goals for toxic chem ical release

reductions, and dem onstrate its com m itm ent to and progress in reducing em issions.

1• F ederal, state, and local governm e nts use TRI data to set priorities and allocate

environm ental protection resources to the m o st pressing problem s.

• R egulators use TRI data to set perm it lim its, m easure com p liance with those lim its, and

target f acilities f o r enf o rcem ent activities.

• P ublic interest groups use TRI data to dem onstrate the need for new environm ental

regulations or im proved im plem entation and enforcem ent of existing regulations.

• I nvestm e nt analysts use TRI data to provide recom m e ndations to clients seeking to m a ke

environm entally sound investm e nts.

• I nsurance com p anies use TRI data as one indication of potential environm ental liabilities.

• G overnm e nts use TRI data to assess or m odify taxes and fees based on toxic em issions or

overall environm ental perform a nce.

• C onsultants and others use TRI data to identify business opportunities, such as m a rketing

P2 and control technologies to TRI reporting facilities. 1

This docum ent presents uses of TRI data in the following categories: public, industry,

governm e nt, international, investm e nt, and academ ic. Case studies were found prim arily by

consulting with EPA/TRI program representatives in the state and EPA regional offices,

researching num erous literature sources, conducting internet searches and following up leads

with phone interviews, m a il and em ail correspondences with TRI data users. This docum ent

does not describe all of the m a ny people, program s, and activities that use TRI data, but instead

presents exam ples in each category. Appendix A provides additional exam ples. More case

studies were found of TRI data use by individuals, com m unity groups and environm ental

organizations than by private industries.



### Public Use

Each year, the EPA m a kes TRI data

available to the public on two Internet sites:

TRI Explorer <www.epa.gov/triexplorer>

and Envirofacts <www.epa.gov/enviro>. The

EPA also provides sum m a ry national and

state data in the annual publications Toxics

Release Inventory: Public Data Release and

Toxics Release Inventory: Public Data

Release: State Fact Sheets

. States also

release their own reports. Com m unity

organizations, universities, local public

interest organizations, national nongovernm e ntal organizations (NGOs), and worker s and labor unions also conduct analyses and

risk assessm ents based on TRI data. Som e of these organizations also m a ke data and analyses

available to the public. The public can use TRI data to:

• learn about their local environment

and

chemicals

• participate in environmental

decision-making

• l earn more about the environmental

behavior of companies in

communities to which they might

consider moving

. potential exposures to toxic

2Citiz e ns and Community Organiz ations

Citizen activists and com m unity organizations educate their citizens or residents about

toxic chem ical releases using TRI data, often com b ining education with a call to action. Som e

com m unity organizations have used TRI data to initiate discussions with local industries or to

call on local and public interest organizations to lobby for their causes. Local public interest

organizations im prove citizen environm ental awareness, encouraging them to becom e involved

in the environm ental health of their com m unities. Mem b ers of a local public interest

organization can be of technical and legal help to citizens in the field of environm ental

negotiation. Exam ples of citizen activists and com m unity interest organizations and the ways in

which they use TRI data f o llow:

• T he Eugene Toxics Right-to-Know program

, a local grassroots organization in Eugene,

Oregon, used TRI as a m odel to develop the first city right-to-know program

. This

program gives citizens inform ation about toxic m a terial use and m a terials accounting

inform ation to the kilogram level. Voters adopted the program in 1996 as an am endm ent

to the Eugene City Charter. A citizen initiative placed the am endm ent on the ballot.

Previously, inform ation concerning the use of hazardous substances in the com m unity,

and the releases of those substances into the local environm ent in particular, was not

readily accessible to citizens under existing reporting regulations. Unlike other

hazardous substance reporting program s, the Eugene charter am endm ent requires

affected businesses to provide m a terials balance accounting. In other words, inputs and

outputs of hazardous substances m u st be reported and m u st balance. These reports,

required annually, are available in an accessible form at at the Eugene Public Library. For

m o re inform ation, or to view the database, go to

<www.ci.eugene.or.us/firedept/Toxics/toxicsb.htm >

. 2

• S outh Carolina Environm ental W a tch is an environm ental organization that educates

com m unities about toxic chem icals and their possible health effects. The organization

presents TRI data to com m unities and discusses the potential ef f ects of toxic chem ical

releases. 3

• T he Louisiana Environm ental Action Network (LEAN) was form ed over a decade ago to

educate and provide a voice for residents con cerned about toxic chem ical releases from

local f acilities. LEAN uses TRI data to help residents becom e aware of risks associated

with toxic chem ical releases and to f acilitate discussions between com m unities and

industries to evaluate the im pact of those releases. 4 LEAN “encourages com m unity

decision-m a king and legislative challenge in neighborhoods near toxic chem ical sites.

The organization locates waste disposal sites, dum ps and industrial facilities that could

potentially affect com m unities, and com p iles TRI, accident release data, and state

groundwater data on these types of sites. The resulting data com p ilations are then used

as the spearhead of strategic cam paigns directed at m a king changes at the legislative

level.” LEAN publicizes its inform ation in the form of “briefing books,” which it

3presents to m e m b ers of the Louisiana House and Senate environm ental com m ittees.

These reports “can be the starting points for change. The goal is to build a knowledge

base f o r legislators and com m unities and to raise awareness of local environm ental

problem s.... In one case, a briefing book was com p iled for neighborhoods near a railroad

switchyard, where leaking valves on the chem ical transport cars stored there overnight

were found to have contam inated groundwater. The chem icals included styrene,

perchloroethylene, benzene, toluene, hexachlorobenzene, hexachlorobutadiene, and vinyl

chloride.” 5

• C alifornia facilities are required to develop and m a ke public P2 plans under the state

Hazardous W a ste Source Reduction and Managem e nt Review. A com m unity

organization called “The Mothers of East Los Angeles of Santa Isabel” used TRI data to

com p are toxic chem ical release estim ates listed in P2 plans subm itted by f acilities to their

actual estim ated releases. 6

• T he Oneida Environm ental Resources Board in W i sconsin used TRI data to convince

leaders of the Oneida Tribe to organize a conference on cleaner ways to m a nufacture

pulp and paper. The Board used TRI data to show that the pulp and paper industry was

the largest industrial source of toxic chem ical releases in W i sconsin, despite industry

claim s that significant release reductions in the past m a de further im provem e nts

unnecessary. The conference im proved industry awareness of m o re environm entally

friendly practices and procedures. The Board also used TRI data to alert a local labor

union about possible worker health risks. The union included requests for reductions in

toxic chem ical releases in its contract renewal negotiations. 7

• C alifornia’s Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition has used TRI data for over a decade. The

Silicon Valley Environmental Index ( The Index) <www.svep.org> shows “sustainability

trends” in Santa Clara County, California. The Index provides inform ation about, but not

lim ited to, hazardous m a terials and air and water quality. At least five cities in Santa

Clara County have referenced or relied on the Index as the basis f o r their "sustainable

city" ef f o rts or m unicipal environm ental m a nagem e nt system (EMS) initiatives. Privatesector com p anies, such as IBM and Philips Sem i conductor, have also used the Index in

evaluating their own EMS practices. Several universities have incorporated the Index

into their environm ental science course curricula. In addition, several states (W isconsin,

South Carolina, New Jersey) and countries (Germ a ny and the Netherlands) have

developed regional environm ental indicators studies m odeled after the Index

. 8

• Ms.W ilm a Subra, a chem ical research analyst in Louisiana, has been a vocal citizen

leader and an active proponent of the TRI program for 20 years, working to change

regulations and policies to im prove public health and the environm ent at the local level. 9

Ms. Subra has inform ed residents about the possible effects of toxic chem ical releases

and has aided their work to im prove environm ental conditions. The TRI data support

4Ms. Subra’s efforts to reduce toxic chem i cal releases from Louisiana’s industrial

facilities. Ms. Subra gathers and analyzes TRI data, distributes inform ation to the public,

participates in legal and regulatory processes against industrial facilities, and is a m e m b er

of national and international advisory com m ittees.

National Organiz ations

National organizations em ploy TRI data in m a ny of the sam e ways as sm all com m unity

organizations, but on a larger scale. Such organizations analyze TRI data, use it to conduct risk

screening and risk assessm ent, and often help the public interpret the data. National

organizations of ten work with local public interest and com m unity organizations to initiate

discussions between citizens and industry. Som e national organizations also use TRI data to

help them lobby for changes in environm ental policy. Exam ples of TRI data used by national

organizations include the following:

• E nvironm ental Defense (ED) launched its Scorecard web site in1998

<www.scorecard.org/>. The site’s “polluter locator” allows users to perform a search by

ZIP code on a database containing inform ation on m o re than 17,000 chem ical-releasing

facilities. The Scorecard also provides data on the health effects and regulatory status of

different chem icals. 10 The site correlates TRI chem ical release data with U.S. Census

dem ographic data. ED is currently linking TRI data with toxicological studies to create a

Scorecard tool that com p ares the risks of different toxic chem ical releases. 11 Logging

500,000 data requests on its first day of operation, the Scorecard web site has drawn

signif i cant public interest.

• T he Right-to-Know Network (RTKNet) we b site <www.rtknet.org>, launched in 1989 by

the nonprofit organizations OMB W a tch and the Unison Institute, also facilitates public

access to TRI data. Users can search the TRI data by ZIP code, city, county, state, year,

or chem ical. The web site also includes links to additional inform ation about chem icals

and right-to-know issues. RTKNet estim ates that about a quarter of a m illion searches

are perform e d on the site annually. 12

• T he form er Environm ental Inform ation Center conducted a study of the Great Lakes in

1997. Scientists used TRI data to exam ine endocrine disrupters released in states

bordering the Great Lakes. The study ranked the largest em itters of various classes of

toxic chem icals by region, and found the Great Lakes region to be the nation’s top

em itter of reportable endocrine disrupting chem icals. 13

• I n Septem ber 2000, Physicians for Social Responsibility, along with the National

Environm ental Trust and the Learning Disabilities Association of Am erica, released the

report, “Polluting Our Future: Chem ical Pollution in the U.S. that Af f ects Child

Developm ent and Learning” <www.psr.org/trireport.pdf>. This report used TRI and

5other data to present national inform ation about releases of chem icals that present

potential developm ental and neurological risks. The report ranked states by their releases

of these chem icals and included inform ation about counties, industries, and facilities with

the highest toxic chem ical releases. 14

• L abor unions also have used TRI data to support dem a nds for safer working conditions

f o r em ployees. Other than citizens who live near f acilities, em ployees of TRI reporting

facilities are m o st at risk from toxic chem ical releases because they are m o st likely to

com e in regular contact with these chem icals. Beginning in 1990, the International

Union, United Autom obile, Aerospace & Agricultural Im plem ent W o rkers of Am erica

(UAW ) began training em ployees and m a nagers of UAW com p anies to access, interpret,

and utilize com puter databases and program s in “critically assessing industrial em ergency

response activities at their facilities.” W o rkers were trained to download and interpret

environm ental com p liance data. TRI data com p rised one of the m a in sources of

inform ation for the program

. Concerning TRI, the UAW stated, “knowing about

m a xim u m am ounts on-site can help people prepare for a ‘worst-case scenario.’ It can

help an em ergency response planning group decide if there are enough response

equipm ent and personnel to deal with an em ergency involving the chem ical(s) in

question.” 15 The UAW continues to provide potential risk inform ation to workers

regarding toxic chem ical releases to the environm ent using TRI data. The UAW website

provides links to EPA Envirofacts, and to the m o st recent TRI Data Release

(<www.uaw.org/hs/at/index.htm l >).

Direct Negotiation

Through increasing their understanding of TRI data, m e m b ers of the public can begin to

understand potential risks associated with toxic chem ical releases in their com m unities, and can

work with f acilities to reduce those risks. The nation’s f i rst “right-to-act” law was enacted in

Septem ber 1999 by the Passaic, N.J., Board of Chosen Freeholders, the county’s governing

body. The law “allows neighbors and/or em ployees to petition the county health officer for

creation of Neighborhood Hazard Prevention Advi sory Com m ittees (NHPACs) for specific

f acilities.” 16 Even without the aid of this law, concerned citizens nationwide can take action in

their own com m unities. Com m unity organizations and citizen activists have used TRI data to

negotiate with local f acilities. Exam ples of direct negotiation agreem ents between citizens and

f acilities f o llow:

• I n the city of Richm ond, California, com m unity m e m b ers were concerned about toxic

chem ical releases from several oil refineries and other large industrial facilities. The

W e st County Toxics Coalition, a local environm ental organization, joined with

Com m unities for a Better Environm ent, a statewide environm ental organization, to

investigate industrial polluters in Richm ond. Using the TRI and other databases, they

published the report, Richmond at Risk , which identified the area’s 20 largest industrial

polluters and nam e d the Chevron oil refinery the num ber one polluter. The report served

6to initiate discussions am ong Chevron, the W e st County Toxics Coalition, and other

com m unity and environm ental organizations. As a result of the m eetings, the com p any

agreed in 1994 to close down older portions of the plant and install P2 equipm ent to

achieve zero net toxic chem ical releases on its reform ulated fuel project. 17

• T he Calhoun County Resource W a tch (CCRW ), founded by a Texas environm ental

activist and shrim p er nam e d Ms. Dianne W ilson, used TRI data to build com m unity

awareness about pollution of the rich shrim p and oyster breeding grounds of Lavaca Bay

on the Gulf of Mexico 18

. Calhoun County was ranked first in the nation for toxic

chem ical disposal to the land, based on the 1987 TRI data. Lavaca Bay was designated

as a Superfund site in 1993. CCRW brought suit against the Alum inum Com p any of

Am erica (Alcoa) related to this pollution. In 1995 Alcoa signed an agreem ent designed

to protect the breeding grounds. 19 Two Alcoa firm s, a chem ical plant and a bauxite

refinery, com m itted to “fund independent review of zero discharge options and to adopt

the technologies where technically, econom ically, and environm entally sound.” 20 In

return, CCRW agreed to drop its legal challenges and suspend perm it interventions

against the com p anies. According to an Alcoa Operations Manager, as of March 2000

the com p any had m a de considerable progress toward the goals set in 1995, including

com p liance with a perm it that sets the “allowed total annual m a xim u m m a ss loading

m e rcury lim it” at 30 pounds, developm ent and im plem entation of a Best Managem e nt

Practices plan, and installation of an “evaporative spray and dust control system ” near the

refinery. 21

• I n 1998, Butler County, PA, warned pregnant wom e n and infants against drinking water

from Connoquenessing Creek due to high levels of nitrates in the water. In its report, the

Pennsylvania Public Interest Research Group (PennPIRG) used TRI data to highlight the

significant quantities of nitrate com pounds being released into the creek. 22 The report

identified the m a jor source of the nitrates as the AK Steel Corporation. TRI data showed

that the com p any had discharged approxim a tely 29 m illion pounds of nitrates into the

creek in 1997 and 32 m illion pounds in 1998. This report and several newspaper articles

about these toxic chem ical releases prom pted the state to com m it to reduce the levels of

nitrates that AK Steel is perm itted to release into the creek. 23 Pennsylvania began

developing a new water perm it to reduce allowable nitrate releases to a level 90 percent

lower than the previous level. In June 2000, EPA issued an em ergency order requiring

AK Steel to significantly reduce the nitrate com pounds it discharges into

Connoquenessing Creek. In addition, AK Steel was required to provide and pay for an

alternative water source f o r the af f ected public on any day that the local water plant could

not m eet the federal m a xim u m nitrate contam inant standard.

• W orking with The Ecology Center, a public in terest organization based in Ann Arbor,

Michigan, residents of the town of Flat Rock used TRI data to obtain a com m itm ent from

Auto Alliance International to enact an aggressive solvent reduction program

. TRI data

7showed that the com p any’s air releases of toluene had increased from 100,000 pounds in

1991 to 800,000 pounds in 1993, along with an increase in noxious odors in the

com m unity. A form er Ecology Center staff m e m b er, Andrew Corm ai, said, “[R]esidents

who have put up with the sm ells since 1987 suddenly have a bone to pick with the

com p any. The com p any is going to be saving som e m oney by recapturing solvents, and

they will be im proving com m unity air quality.” 24

Environmental Justice

The goal of environm ental justice is to ensure that all people, regardless of race, national

origin, or incom e , are protected from dispropor tionate im pacts and environm ental hazards. “The

concept [of environm ental justice] addresses evidence [that] in som e parts of the nation, poor and

m i nority com m unities live closer to factories, highways and airports and are exposed to m o re

pollution and noise and generally m o re environm ental risks than the population at large.” 25 TRI

data have proved to be an im portant tool in environm ental justice. Com m unities that were once

uninform e d about the toxic chem ical releases in their area now have access to that inform ation.

Exam ples of TRI data use in environm ental justice activities include:

• T wo areas of Louisiana have becom e focal points for environm ental justice efforts: the

Mississippi River corridor, popularly known as “Cancer Alley,” and the Lake Charles

region. Local groups have used TRI data to illustrate the high toxic chem ical release

rates in these areas com p ared to those in other regions. 26 Several sm all com m unities have

confronted industrial facilities about their toxic chem ical releases and possibly related

health ef f ects. One illustrative dispute arose in Mossville, Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana,

where som e residents suspected that poor health in their com m unity was due to the

activities of 17 industrial facilities located with in one half-m ile of the com m unity. Their

concerns prom pted num erous public interest organizations to collaborate on the report,

Breathing Poison: The Toxic Costs of Industries in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana

. The

2000 report used TRI data and inform ation from the Scorecard web site to convey the

health risks to which the com m unity m i ght be exposed, and stated the need for “pollution

reduction, environm ental health services, and a fair and just relocation for consenting

residents.” 27

• T he Asian Pacific Environm ental Network (APEN) works with Asian and Pacific

Islander com m unities in the San Francisco Bay Area, Calif ornia. APEN created a series

of m a ps that com b ined TRI and dem ographic data, to show that m a ny poor Asian and

Pacific Islanders live in “toxic hot spots.” The m a ps increased awareness am ong

com m unity m e m b ers about both their environm ent and environm ental justice issues.

APEN m i ght add m o re environm ental, health, and dem ographic inform ation, and expand

its m a pping work to other nearby counties. 28

• T he Los Angeles chapter of Com m unities f o r a Better Environm ent used TRI data to help

8ensure that the com m unities it serves would not be exposed to higher environm ental risks

as a result of poverty or ethnicity. In one project, the organization com b ined 1996 TRI

data with GIS m a pping data to show that 80 to 100 percent of facilities that release toxic

chem icals in Los Angeles County were located in areas where a large m a jority of the

residents were people of color. These findings led to the report, Holding Our Breath –

the Struggle for Environmental Justice in Southeast Los Angeles. 29



### Industry Use

Although Congress intended the public to be the prim ary audience for TRI data, the TRI

has also benefitted industries.

Cost Reduction

A prim ary goal of ISO 14000 (International Organization for Standardization' s standards

on environm ental m a nagem e nt) was to bring environm ental issues to the attention of the highest

levels of corporate m a nagem e nt. Leaving decision-m a king to environm ental m a nagers alone

m i ght not produce the corporate com m itm ent necessary to achieve the best success. 30 TRI data

have been used as evidence to convince high-level m a nagem e nt of the need for an

Environm ental Managem e nt System (EMS). In turn, the proactive environm ental protection

afforded by an EMS can reduce corporate costs.

For som e industries, the creation of the TRI m a rked the first tim e that com p any m a nagers

and operators could look closely at the quantity of chem icals being released from their facilities.

Initially, som e com p anies expressed surprise

at their own toxic chem ical release am ounts

and set goals to im prove their environm ental

perform a nce. Som e com p anies have reduced

their toxic chem ical releases and increased

their efficiency at the sam e tim e, leading to

an increased profit. Exam ples of ways that

industry has used TRI data to reduce costs

f o llow:

• A t the1997 EPA Toxics Release

Inventory and Right-to-Know

Conference, John Pine provided

exam ples of how TRI inform ation has helped com p anies develop waste reduction

strategies. For exam ple, Marathon Oil installed a therm a l desorption unit to process oily

waste and recovered over 120,000 barrels of oil and the Georgia Gulf Corporation

relocated a m e thanol stripper purge line that resulted in the recovery of 9,300 gallons of Industry can work with TRI data to:

• i mprove internal auditing

• s timulate more efficient use of

chemicals by identifying material

losses

• p rovide a template for

environmental reporting under ISO

14000.

9m e thanol that previously underwent biological waste treatm ent. 31

• T he Haartz Corporation, located in Acton, Massachusetts, m a kes coated fabrics used in

autom obiles. The firm once used 800,000 pounds per year of m e thyl ethyl ketone

(MEK), a solvent that can cause dizziness, nausea, or unconsciousness when inhaled. 32

In 1987, when Haartz was preparing its first TRI report, the com p any installed a new

em issions control system to capture and recycle MEK. TRI data enabled Haartz Corp. to

track the association between reduced toxic chem ical releases and reduced costs.

According to the Haartz environm ental m a nager, the com p any’s “em issions have stayed

pretty flat” despite its “double-digit sales growth” between 1993 and 1998. In addition,

reducing its MEK releases saved Haartz an estim ated $200,000 annually. 33

Public Relations Tools

Dem onstrating environm ental progress has becom e a selling point for industries, and

m a ny com p any web sites now include an environm ental report. Exam ples of positive

environm ental m a rketing include:

• T he Boeing Com p any posts TRI release data on its web site and uses the inform ation to

track the com p any’s environm ental progress. The web site noted that overall toxic

chem ical releases have decreased by m o re than 82 percent since 1991, and that “Boeing

continues to invest and innovate in pollu tion prevention program s and find new ways to

get greater leverage for current em ission reduction program s.” 34

• M onsanto’s sim ilar web site provides both current and past TRI inform ation on

consolidated chem ical releases and transf ers f r om Monsanto f acilities. The web site also

includes data about carbon dioxide releases, priority on-site toxic chem ical releases,

com p liance penalties, chem ical spills, Superfund sites, safety, and com p liance. 35

Public Disclosure

Com p anies can use TRI data to “obtain an overview of the release and m a nagem e nt of

toxic chem icals, to identify P2 and release reduction targets, and to m e asure progress toward

these goals. The publicity that has resulted f r om the availability of TRI data has prom pted m a ny

f acilities to pledge toxic chem ical release reductions, and to work with com m unities to develop

effective strategies for reducing environm ental and hum an health risks.” 36 For exam ple, the

Iowa Association of Business and Industry organized a com m unity-wide pollution prevention

initiative in the Des Moines-Polk County area. The organization adopted a goal of a 60 percent

reduction of all TRI chem icals by 1992 and a 70 percent reduction by 1995. 37

10

### Government Use

Environmental Solutions

Governm e nt agencies can take a variety of actions when TRI data reveal an

environm ental problem in a specific state or re gion. Som e of these actions involve voluntary

incentive program s for com p anies. Although these program s are not binding com m itm ents, they

offer good publicity for participating com p anies. Exam ples include:

• G overnor Frank O’Bannon of Indiana announced the Indiana Governor’s Toxics

Reduction Challenge in 1998. The challenge pledged to “support the state' s goal to

reduce toxic chem ical releases to the air and water from 1995 levels: 50% by Decem b er

31, 2000, in large urban areas for carcinogens and persistent bioaccum u lative toxic

chem icals; 60% by Decem ber 31, 2002 statewide for these chem icals; and, 50% by

Decem ber 31, 2002, statewide for all toxic chem icals reported in the Toxics Release

Inventory.” The Challenge also pledged to “energetically help the state reach these goals

through efforts em phasizing pollution preven tion within your organization and/or in

cooperation with other organizations.” As of m i d-April 2000, 67 com p anies in Indiana

had com m itted to the Challenge. A list of the com p anies and an update on their progress

is available on the Indiana state web site <www.in.gov/idem /oppta/p2/toxicchallenge/>. 38

• T he EPA “33/50 Program ” targeted 17 priority TRI chem icals for 33 percent and 50

percent reductions from 1988 release levels, to be attained by 1992 and 1995,

respectively. More than 1,200 com p anies nationwide joined the Program , which

provided several form s of recognition to participating com p anies. The Program reached

both its interim 33 percent reduction goal and its final 50 percent reduction goal one year

early.

• T he P2 Program of the Colorado Departm e nt of Public Health and the Environm ent used

TRI data, in com b ination with other data about hazardous waste and toxic chem ical

releases to air and water, to identify the ten industry organizations responsible for the

largest quantities of hazardous waste generation or toxic chem ical releases in the state.

This research served as the basis f o r establishing priorities f o r P2 activities and f o r

distribution of technical assistance grants. The report also aided in targeting large

com p anies for participation in the “Governor’s P2 Challenge Program ” to reduce toxic

chem ical releases and hazardous waste generation. 39

• D ue to the new TRI reporting requirem e nts for dioxin, the Delaware Departm e nt of

Natural Resources and Environm ental Control becam e aware of dioxin-tainted waste at

DuPont’s Edge Moor, DE titanium dioxide (TiO[ 2 ] ) plant. Subsequently, DuPont agreed

to pay an estim ated $15 m illion to rem e diate dioxin-tainted waste at this facility. DuPont

discovered that the waste sludge was contam inated with dioxin while the com p any was

11preparing to com p ly with EPA' s requirem e nt that dioxin releases be reported under TRI.

In addition, DuPont agreed with the Delaware Departm e nt of Natural Resources and

Environm ental Control to spray a 23-acre stretch along the Delaware River with a starchlike coating to keep the dioxin from being stirred up by the wind or eroding into the river.

DuPont used the site to store waste sludge from the Edge Moor plant. The com p any will

also close four sludge lagoons near the plant and plans to cut dioxin form ation in half by

2003 and by 90 percent by 2007.

Environmental Targeting

Budgets to fund environm ental program s and m easures often do not increase in

proportion to the need for these activities. Environm ental targeting initiatives, such as those

listed below, help governm e nts and com m unities prioritize their needs and ensure that their

resources are used m o st efficiently.

• T he P2 Division in Georgia’s Departm e nt of Natural Resources used TRI data to identify

the technical assistance needs of m a nufacturing sectors generating chem icals that pose

the greatest relative risk to public health and the environm ent. The Division prioritized

chem icals, exam ined m a nufacturing sectors releasing the highest priority chem icals, and

identified particular subsectors for further assessm ent. The Division also conducted indepth m a nufacturing sector assessm ents to determ ine which processes produce which

wastes, what m u lti-m e dia waste problem s exist, what P2 activities were being

undertaken, and what additional opportunities m i ght exist. 40

• T he Florida W a ste Reduction Assistance Progr am provides assistance in source reduction

and waste m i nim i zation to f acilities handling TRI chem icals. The Program relies on TRI

and other data to target f acilities f o r the Program

. 41

• E PA' s Of f i ce of Enf o rcem ent and Com p liance Assurance uses TRI data within its Online

Tracking Inform ation System (OTIS) -- a collection of on-line search engines that

enables EPA staff, state/local/tribal governm e nts, and federal agencies to access a wide

range of data relating to enforcem ent and com p liance. Data on the OTIS site are from

OECA' s Integrated Data for Enforcem ent Analysis ( IDEA ) system , which extracts and

integrates inform ation from TRI as well as the following databases: AFS (Clean Air Act

-- AIRS Facility Subsystem ) , PCS (Clean W a ter Act -- Perm it Com p liance System ),

RCRAInfo (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Inform ation System ), the Federal

Enforcem ent Docket, National Com p liance Database (NCDB), and the 1990 U.S.

Census. OTIS can be used for m a ny functions, including program planning, enforcem ent

targeting, sector and geographic analyses, data quality review, and pre-inspection review.

As of March 2002, all states, all EPA Regional Offices, and another 90 local, state and

federal governm e ntal organizations are registered.

12Legislation and Regulations

TRI data often provide the im petus for legislative action from federal, state, and local

governm e nts. For over a decade, TRI data has been used to influence and change environm ental

standards, regulations, and legislation, for exam ple:

• I n response to legislation passed in 1987 to address toxic chem ical releases to the air, the

Illinois EPA Bureau of Air used TRI data to determ ine quantities of stack and f ugitive air

em issions of reported substances to support continued developm ent of regulatory

proposals. 42

Risk Assessment

As the connection between toxic chem icals and hum an health becom e s better known,

public health officials are looking for ways to assess the levels of risk in their com m unities. TRI

data have been a crucial com ponent in creating tools to address these assessm ents. Exam ples

f o llow:

• T he New York State Departm e nt of Health de veloped a risk screening protocol using TRI

air release data and toxicity potency data to produce relative risk scores and rankings for

facilities and chem icals within the state. Results suggested the need for a m o re careful

evaluation of health effects resulting from large releases of noncarcinogenic

com pounds. 43

• R esearchers from EPA’s Office of Health Research published a study of national and

regional differences in county-level TRI chem ical releases to air according to the

ethnicity or race and household incom e of the populations. Using the “Population

Em issions Index,” a population-weighted average release for each county, the study

found that all m i nority groups except Native Am ericans tend to live in counties where

levels of TRI chem ical releases to air are higher. The data also suggest that household

incom e s tend to be higher in counties with higher TRI chem ical releases to air. 44

• T he EPA Office of Pollution Prevention a nd Toxics’s Risk-Screening Environm ental

Indicators Model provides year-to-year indicators of the potential im pacts of TRI

chem ical releases on hum an health and the environm ent. The indicators consider TRI

release and transfer volum es, chronic toxicit y, exposure potential, and the size of receptor

populations. Both generic and site-specific exposure characteristics can be incorporated.

The m odel allows the targeting and prioritization of chem icals, industries and geographic

areas. Facility scores can also be tracked f r om year to year to analyze trends. 45

13Quality Assurance and Control

Som e states, such as Massachusetts, that require separate reporting of toxic chem ical

releases f o r their f acilities f i nd TRI data to be a usef ul m easure of quality assurance and control.

The Air Pollution Control Program in the Missouri Departm e nt of Natural Resources also

com p ares f ugitive and stack em issions reported to the TRI with toxic chem ical release data

reported on the state’s Em issions Inventory Questionnaire for quality control. 46

Other Government Uses

Additional governm e ntal uses of TRI data can be found in agencies not im m e diately

associated with environm ental issues. The U.S. Internal Revenue Service used TRI data to

identify com p anies releasing chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in order to enforce a tax im posed on

releases of CFCs and thus f acilitate the phase-out of these chem icals. 47



### International Right-to-Know

The TRI has served as the m odel for m a ny countries’ Chem ical Right-To-Know

program s and laws. W ithin the next few years, m o re than 30 nations are expected to have a TRIlike system , known internationally as Pollutant Re lease and Transfer Registers (PRTRs). PRTRs

allow the public to obtain toxic chem ical release data over a large geographic area. Countries

can com p are their data and share ideas about im proving environm ental regulations. Exam ples of

how PRTR inform ation is being used include:

• T he Com m i ssion for Environm ental Cooperation (CEC), which was created by a sideagreem ent to the North Am erican Free Trade Agreem ent (NAFTA), began it’s PRTR

work by preparing a docum ent that com p ares U.S. and Canadian PRTR system s. The

CEC now develops an annual report, entitled “ Taking Stock ”, that correlates data f r om

the TRI and the Canadian National Pollutant Release Inventory to give an overall view of

releases and transfers of toxic chem icals within and between countries. The CEC also

has created an Internet search engine that allows the public to obtain continental PRTR

data. 48

• I n 2000, the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition attended an international conference in

Croatia on public participation and com m unity right-to-know. Participants recognized

the fundam e ntal im portance of Chem ical Right-To-Know and are lobbying the United

Nations to prom ote the program and persuade nations to support the passage of

com m unity right-to-know laws m odeled after the TRI. 49

14

### Investment

The public’s increased awareness of environm ental issues has m a de environm ental

perform a nce an im portant factor in their inve stm e nt decisions. Many investm e nt com p anies

have responded to this dem a nd by providing socially responsible investm e nt options. Exam ples

of how TRI data have been used in investm e nt decisions include:

• G reen Century Funds, an investm e nt organization that specializes in socially responsible

m

u tual funds, offers two funds com m itted to prom oting corporate environm ental

responsibility. The Green Century Balanced Fund invests in “perform ance-driven

com p anies that are a part of the solution to environm ental problem s,” as well as in

environm entally benign com p anies and “best of class” com p anies that are setting

standards for environm ental protection in their industries. The Green Century Equity

Fund screens out com p anies with the worst environm ental and social records. The funds

are m onitored for environm ental perform a nce using TRI data. 50

• V anderbilt University’s Owen Graduate School of Managem e nt found a correlation

between a com p any’s stock value and its P2 efforts, which were assessed using TRI data.

A researcher from the University perform e d two separate studies com p aring the progress

of

a com p any’s P2 activities as reported on TRI f o rm s to a com p any’s stock m a rket

perform a nce. The study reported that “com p anies that underperform expected pollution

prevention goals are penalized in the stock m a rket, and the stock of the com p anies that

engage in pollution prevention activity tends to outperform the stock of com p anies that

do not engage in pollution prevention.” 51

• U sing TRI data, the Investor Responsibility Research Center (IRRC) developed an

Em issions Ef f i ciency Index® that indicates which com p anies have a com p etitive edge in

environm ental perform a nce. The Index is predicated on the idea that greater toxic

chem ical releases are associated with higher risks of negative publicity, m o re tort actions,

and higher costs for pollution control and waste m a nagem e nt. IRRC’s constituency uses

TRI-based inform ation to identify com p anies with poor environm ental records. Using

the index, investors can either screen such com p anies out of their portfolios or purchase

shares and use their ownership as leverage to im prove environm ental perform a nce. 52



### Academic Use

A variety of TRI data use applications occur in academ ia, in areas ranging from doctoral

theses to journal publications to use in the classroom itself.

15Research

Universities and research institutions are using TRI data as a m eans f o r “exam ining

environm ental policies and strategies, and clarifying risks associated with toxic chem icals at the

state and local level.” 53 Students and faculty in the academ ic com m unity also perform studies

based on TRI data. Exam ples of academ ic research using TRI data include:

• I n February 2000, the journal Drug and Chemical Toxicology published an article

entitled, “Using GIS to Study the Health Im pact of Air Em issions.” This article showed

how public health professionals are able to use data (such as the TRI) on toxic chem ical

releases to air, air dispersion m odeling, and GIS to identify and define a potentially

exposed population. In addition, such data can be analyzed to estim ate the health risk

burden of that population and determ ine correlations between point-based health outcom e

results and estim ated health risk. 54

• I n the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management in 1999, researcher Mr.

Madhu Khanna published results of research that exam ined the environm ental, econom ic

and investm e nt effects of voluntary and m a nda tory toxic release reporting program s. One

of the research studies focused on the EPA’s "33/50" Program during its first three years,

1991-1993, and its im pact on the U.S. chem ical industry. The paper concluded that

Program participation led to a statistically signif i cant decline in toxic releases over the

tim e period, a statistically significant negative im pact on current return on investm e nt,

but a positive and statistically significant im pact on the expected long run profitability of

fi rms. 55

• A t Louisiana State University, environm ental science professor Paul Tem p let developed

a m e thod, using TRI data, to evaluate the com p arative effectiveness of pollution control

strategies, policies, and program s, by calculating an “em issions to jobs ratio.” This ratio

consists of the num ber of pounds of toxic chem ical releases per job in a given industry

and location, can be com p ared to a national or other average. The com p arison is then

used to assess the relative toxic air releases associated with a certain job. This ratio was

used to m odif y tax exem ptions granted to f acilities to encourage and reward job

creation. 56

• P rofessor Mark Stephan used TRI as the background for an academ ic paper focusing on

the role of inform ation disclosure program s in environm ental policy. Professor Stephan

used TRI as a prim e exam ple for the fundam e ntal theories and concepts that underlie the

em pirical work on the com p arison of basic theories arising from the knowledge of

econom ics, psychology, and politics. 57

• R esearchers Klassen and W hybark studied m a nagem e nt of the natural environm ent in

m a nufacturing firm s, given increased public awareness and scrutiny as a result of

16program s like the TRI. In one of their published studies, they concluded that an

em phasis on pollution prevention instead of pollution control, im proved delivery

perf orm a nce and f i rm com p etitiveness. 58

Classroom Use

High school and university instructors have incorporated the TRI into curricula involving

subjects ranging from introductory chem istry to business.

• T he JSI Center for Environm ental Health Studies developed a field-based environm ental

education curriculum for high school students in Chelsea, Massachusetts, a low-incom e

m i nority com m unity near Boston. The goal was to encourage student participation in

environm ental assessm ent and protection. Students learned to inventory sources of

contam ination in a local creek and worked with com m unity agencies on protecting a

valuable environm ental resource. TRI data were an integral part of the students’

research. 59



### Conclusions

A variety of stakeholders work with TRI data on a regular basis. Som e data uses, such as

risk screening, were recognized when the TRI was first im plem ented; other uses have developed

as the program has m a tured and expanded. TRI data have been a key tool in the environm ental

justice m ovem e nt and in the drive toward m o re environm entally responsible investm e nt. The

applications of TRI data will likely increase in num ber as environm ental awareness grows and

opportunities are identified for integrating TRI data with other types of inform ation.

17Appendix A:Expanded Lists of TRI Data Uses and BenefitsUserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Citizens/Community OrganizationsAmalgamated Clothing andTextile Workers Union andcommunityactivists inNorthfield, MNAmalgamated called for emissions reductions fromalocal facilityranked as the nation’s 45thlargest emitterof carcinogens to the air.Contract negotiations led toan agreement for a 64%reduction in use of toxicchemicals by1992 and a 90%reduction in toxicemissions by1993.Economic Analysis of the Final Ruleto Add Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-20, April1997California Public InterestResearch Group (CALPIRG)CALPIRG uses TRI data to supplement the informationthat water utilities publish in their ConsumerConfidence Reports, and to identifypotential watercontamination sources.CALPIRG presents these datato policymakers to provide more information to thepublic on drinking water contamination.<www.calpirg.org>Don’t Waste ArizonaDon’t Waste Arizona produced two videos about theCommunityRight-to-Know Act for the public and theregulated community.The organization held “houseparties” to show the videos and discuss howcommunities can identifyand reduce toxic pollution.Don’t Waste Arizona has also distributed videos tocitizens, libraries, andcompliance assistance centersthroughout Arizona, thus increasing public awarenessabout pollution.A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing ToxicsRisks: Putting the TRI to Work!,EPA909-B98-001, Region 9 Cross MediaDivision, January, 199818UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Citizens/Community OrganizationsEugene Toxics Right-to-Knowprogram, ORThe Eugene Toxics Right-to-Know programused TRIas a model to develop the first cityright-to-knowprogram.gives citizens informationabout toxic material use and materials accountinginformation to the kilogramlevel.placed the amendment on the ballot.the programin 1996 as an amendment to the EugeneCityCharter.ore information, or to view thedatabase, go to<www.ci.eugene.or.us/firedept/Toxics/toxicsb.htm>.<www.ci.eugene.or.us/firedept/toxicsb.html>JSI Center for EnvironmentalHealth StudiesThe Center trained librarians on how to accessinformation fromcomputerized electronic databases,including TRI, especiallyfor use as tools to investigateenvironmental health problems.JSI Center for Environmental HealthStudies: A Division of the JSIResearch and Training InstituteLouisiana Environmental ActionNetworkThe Network uses TRI data as part of strategiccampaigns for change at a better informed legislativelevel.House and Senate members and holds tours of focussites for representatives, media, citizens, etc.<www.leanweb.org/>Massachusetts Toxic UsageReduction Institute (TURI)TURI uses TRI production data to normalizeinformation on annual toxic chemical releases toeliminate the effects of changes in production.Tenney,H.M., Mass TURI, e-mailcorrespondence with Abt Associateson 4/01/99 and 4/15/99This programA citizen initiativeVoters adoptedFor mThe network creates "briefing books" for state19UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Citizens/Community OrganizationsMothers of East Los Angeles ofSanta IsabelThe organization used TRI data to compare toxicchemical release estimates contained in P2 plans withactual releases to the environment., which led tocommunityevaluation of facilityP2 plans.<http://clnet.ucr.edu/community/intercambios/melasi/>National Conference of StateLegislators (NCSL)NCSL conducted a 1996 surveyof states, which EPAused to assess how states currentlyaccess and use TRIdata.-four states produce annual TRI reports,37 use TRI data to identifyfacilities for P2 activities,22 use TRI data to target facilities for inspection toensure compliance with permits, 22 use TRI data foremergencyplanning, seven use TRI data to develop orrevise permits, and 5 use TRI data for facilitysiting andpermitting decisions.entsinclude annual press releases, facts sheets, computerapplications, chemical fact sheets, and tables ofemissions quantities.A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing ToxicsRisks: Putting the TRI to Work!,EPA909-B98-001, Region 9 Cross MediaDivision, January, 1998TwentyOther state-produced docum20UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Citizens/Community OrganizationsSilicon ValleyToxics CoalitionThe Coalitionuses TRI data on the hazardous materialssection of their web site to displaytoxic chemicalreleases and other information, increasing publicawareness.progress reports of the Silicon Valleytoxic chemicalreleases.<www.svep.org>The Coalition used TRI data to develop the first SiliconValleyEnvironmental Index <www.svep.org>,showing local sustainabilitytrends in Santa ClaraCounty.Wilma Subra, grass rootsadvocateMs. Subra uses TRI data to support regulations andpolicies to improve public health and the environmentat the local level.Personal interview byKatherineJennrich, intern, Toxics ReleaseInventoryProgramDivision, OPPT,US EPA, July21, 2000Toxics Action Center, Sharon,MAThe Center used TRI to assess the specific mediathrough which toxic chemical releases are made, suchas septic systems.<www.toxicsaction.org>WashPIRGWashPIRG used TRI data to relate the number of TRIsites in states to the incidence rates of cancersassociated with environmental toxins.Wise, Alison.Washington: Our Health andEnvironment at Risk,” April, 2001The Coalition also uses TRI data in its“The Toxic State of21UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- National OrganizationsCitizen’s FundThe Fund summarized 1991 TRI data nationallyand bystate to attempt to measure the progress ofmanufacturers in preventing pollution, andincluded report cards of the top 50 wastegenerating facilities in the chemical industry.TheFund aggregated 1990 TRI data fromdifferentfacilities bytheir parent companies to holdcorporations more accountable for the full extent oftheir toxic pollution.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-20, April1997Environmental Defense (ED)ED uses TRI data, along with other resources on itsScorecard web site, to allow the public to findchemical information about their communities bysearching byZIP code.OMB Watch and the Unison Institute,“The Right Stuff: Using the ToxicsRelease Inventory.”13 July1995ED is in the process of linking toxic chemicalrelease data with toxicological studies on itsScorecard web site.1998 and focused on the human health impacts oftoxins.ical releasesbyequivalencyfactors, taking into account toxicityand exposure potential.A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing ToxicsRisks: Putting the TRI to Work!,EPA909-B98-001, Region 9 Cross MediaDivision, January, 1998ED used TRI data to rank the efficiencyof 166U.S. refineries based on toxic chemical releasesand waste per barrel of oil refined per day.Selcraig, Bruce.Know Can Hurt You,” SierraMagazine. Jan/Feb, 1997It released the first version inThe project ranked toxic chem“What You Don’t22UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- National OrganizationsEnvirotrustEnvirotrust uses section 8 TRI data to develop anindex that can compare facilities’progress towardbetter environmental management.Nathan, T.conversation with Abt Associates,March 3, 1999Hampshire Research Institute(HRI)HRI surveyed TRI facilities reporting largereductions in their toxic chemical releases andproduction-related waste to determine if thesechanges resulted fromP2 activities, “paper”reporting changes, or other factors.<www.hampshire.org/hri02.htm>National Environmental Trust forClear the Air, the NationalCampaign Against DirtyPowerThese organizations analyzed TRI data frompowerplants, and compared themto those of otherindustrysectors, and used TRI data to rank thepower plants within individual sectors.Nathan, et al.Toxic Power: What theTRI Tells Us About Power PlantPollution, August 2000Physicians for SocialResponsibility(PSR)PSR used TRI and other data in a report thatincludes national information about releases ofdevelopmental and neurological toxins, a rankingof the states, and information about the topreleasing counties, industries, and facilities in eachof the 50 states.<www.psr.org/trireport.pdf>Right-to-Know Network(RTKNet)RTKNet maintains a web site similar toEnvironmental Defense's Scorecard (see p.22).Users can also search byspecific chemicals.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-20, April1997Sierra ClubThe Sierra Club uses TRI data in citizen outreachdocuments.<www.sierraclub.org>Envirotrust, phone23UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- National OrganizationsPublic Interest Research Group(U.S. PIRG)U.S. PIRG examined TRI releases to surface watersand to publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs)inTroubled Waters: Major Sources of Toxic WaterPollution(1993). U.S. PIRG identified the nation’stop releasers of toxic chemicals to those watersources.ade recommendationsfor amending the Clean Water Act to provide thepublic with more information about toxic chemicalreleases to waterways.Hopey,Don..February18, 2000 <www.postgazette.com/healthscience/20000218/pollute2.asp>Unison Institute/OMB WatchThe organizations collected anecdotal data abouthow the Right-to-Know Network (RTKNet) usedTRI data inThe Right Stuff: Using the ToxicsRelease Inventory(1995).Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-20, April1997The organizations’ publicationWhere the WastesAreexamines facilities receiving the largestquantities of shipments of TRI chemicals in waste.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-20, April1997Working Group on CommunityRight-to-KnowThe Working Group created a list of questions forconcerned citizens, reporters, and other interestedparties to ask corporations reporting reduced toxicchemical releases, to find out if the decrease is a“phantomreduction” due toa change in reportingprocedure (e.g., acetone no longer being requiredfor reporting) rather than a change in productionpractices.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997The organization mPost-Gazette (Pittsburgh)24UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- National OrganizationsThe Working Group prepared a bibliographylistingwell over 100 state and local reports and more than30 national TRI reports compiled bypublic interestgroups.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-20, April199725UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Direct NegotiationCommunities for a BetterEnvironment, CAIn 1994, the organization targeted 16 facilitiesin California that failed to submit toxic releaseinformation of ozone depleting chemicals.all but one settlement, industries agreed tophase out the chemicals and to donate funds tolocal communityor environmental groups.Selcraig, Bruce.Know Can Hurt You.”Sierra Magazine.Jan/Feb, 1997Communities for a BetterEnvironment, Richmond, CAThe organization used TRI data to negotiate anagreement with General Chemical, which willfund a $15,000 studyof public health, spend$100,000 on the surrounding neighborhood,payfor community’sexperts to do a safetyaudit of the plant, and then submit to bindingarbitration should it disagree on safetyrecommendations made bythose experts.A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing ToxicsRisks: Putting the TRI to Work!,EPA909-B98-001, Region 9 Cross MediaDivision, January, 1998Consumer PolicyInstitute ofBrooklyn, NYThe institute used 1988 TRI data to identifyUlano Corporation as the top industrial airtoxic polluter in New York City, and launcheda media campaign to pressure the stateDepartment of Environmental Conservation(DEC) to take action.to use a new incinerator that reduced tolueneemissions byapproximately95%.Fung and O’Rourke, “ReinventingEnvironmental Regulations fromtheGrassroots Up,” EnvironmentalManagement. Vol. 25, No. 2In“What You Don’tThe DEC forced Ulano26UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Direct NegotiationDon’t Waste ArizonaIn 1996, the organization filed about 30lawsuits against facilities for not submittinginformation on their toxic chemical releases.Facilities signed agreements to adopt P2measures that resulted in significant reductionsin toxic chemical releases.A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing ToxicsRisks: Putting the TRI to Work!,EPA909-B98-001, Region 9 Cross MediaDivision, January, 1998EcologyCenter,Ann Arbor, MIThe Center used TRI data to get commitmentsfromthe president of Auto AllianceInternational to embark on an aggressivesolvent reduction program.mitmentsimproved air quality(fewer instances ofnoxious odors).OMB Watch and the Unison Institute,“The Right Stuff: Using the ToxicsRelease Inventory.”13 July1995MapCruzinMapCruzin combines GIS technologywith TRIdata to let Santa Cruz residents and SiliconValleyresidents find the exact location ofbusinesses in their areas that report transfersand toxic chemical releases<www.mapcruzin.com/svtc_maps/index.html>.<www.mapcruzin.com/environmental_justice.htm>Massachusetts Public InterestResearch Group (MASSPIRG)MASSPIRG used TRI data to target Raytheon,the state’s largest emitter of ozone-destroyingchemicals such as CFCs and methylchloroform, in a public accountabilitycampaign in 1990.pledge fromRaytheon to switch to water-basedalternatives to CFCs.Fung and O’Rourke, “ReinventingEnvironmental Regulations fromtheGrassroots Up,” EnvironmentalManagement, Vol. 25, No. 2The comaMASSPIRG obtained27UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Direct NegotiationMinnesota Citizens for a BetterEnvironmentThe organization released a report profiling thestate’s “top 40 toxic polluters” based onemissions of certain prioritychemicals.data were combined with other data to provideenough information to support local efforts tonegotiate with facilities for emissionsreductions.worked with 18 of the 40 facilities.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997Pennsylvania Public InterestResearch Group (PennPIRG)PennPIRG used TRI data to identifyAK SteelCorporation as the source of nitrate loading ofConnoquenessing Creek, a local water source.PennPIRG’s report prompted the state tocommit to reduce the amount of nitrates AKSteel is permitted to release into the creek.<www.pennpirg.org>CommunityMembersofMansfield, TXCommunityMembers of Mansfield used TRIdata to negotiate permission to have its ownexperts performregular environmental andsafetyaudits of a local Rhone-Poulencchemical plant.Selcraig, Bruce.Know Can Hurt You.”Sierra Magazine.Jan/Feb, 1997TRISince publication, activists have“What You Don’t28UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Environmental JusticeAsian Pacific EnvironmentalNetwork (APEN)APEN created a series of maps that combineTRI and demographic data through GIS.Themaps show that manypoor Asian and PacificIslander communities live in toxic hot spotsand are a powerful visual tool to raiseawareness among communitymembers abouttheir environment and environmental justice.A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing ToxicsRisks: Putting the TRI to Work!,EPA909-B98-001, Region 9 Cross MediaDivision, January, 1998Environmental Systems ResearchInstituteThe institute used TRI data in a studythatcompared race, age, and incomein areas thatwere near or far fromairborne toxic chemicalreleases.The studyused buffers, based on thetoxin released, its quantity, and theatmospheric conditions present at the time ofthe release, to measure “nearness.”Variousmaps created in the studyhelp communicateresults and explain spatial relationships.“Toxics Releases and DemographyinMinneapolis/St. Paul: A GISExploration.”<www.esri.com/index.html>29UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Environmental JusticeNorth Baton Rouge (LA)EnvironmentalAssociation,Florence RobinsonThe organization used TRI and U.S. Censusdata to demonstrate environmental racisminCancer Alley,in testimonybefore the CivilRights Association and at hearings onenvironmental justice for the Department ofEnvironmental Quality.OMB Watch and the Unison Institute,“The Right Stuff: Using the ToxicsRelease Inventory.”13 July1995Residents of Louisiana'sMississippi River corridor,popularlyknown as "CancerAlley"and Lake Charles regionsof LAThe residents used TRI data (and ED'sScorecard web site) to show that poor andminoritypopulations suffer frommoreenvironmental risks than the public at large.The residents published a reportBreathingPoison: The Toxic Costs of Industries inCalcasieu Parish, Louisiana, which indicatesthe health risks to which the minoritycommunitymight be exposed."Breathing Poison: The Toxic Costs ofIndustries in Calcasieu Parish,Louisiana." Residents of CalcasieuParish, LouisianaSheppard, E.; Leitner, H;McMaster, RB; Tian, H.Journalof Exposure Analysis andEnvironmental EpidemiologyThe authors used 1995 TRI and 1990 U.S.Census data for the Cityof Minneapolis, MN,to make a comparative evaluation of twocommonlyemployed proximitymeasures inGIS-based environmental equityassessmentand their influence on the results of theanalysis.The authors proposed amethodologyfor evaluating the significanceof these results.Sheppard, E.; Leitner, H; McMaster,RB; Tian, H."GIS-based Measures ofEnvironmental Equity: ExploringTheir Sensitivityand Significance."Journal of Exposure Analysis andEnvironmental Epidemiology, 9 Issue1, p. 18-2830UserDescriptionReferencePUBLICUSE- Environmental JusticeTexas Network forEnvironmental and EconomicJusticeThe Network publishedToxics in Texas andTheir Impact on Communities of Color.Thenetwork used TRI and other data to documentdisproportionate environmental impacts onracial and ethnic minoritycommunities inTexas.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997Universityof California,Los AngelesThe Universityfound that low-incomeandLatino neighborhoods in Los Angeles Countyare more likelythan other communities in theregion to be near major sources of toxic airpollution.Kolacovic, Gary.Los Angeles Times.October 18, 2001<www.greenwire.com>U.C. Santa Barbara, Center forGeographic Information andAnalysisThe Center used 1989 TRI data and U.S.Census data to examine and map significantrelationships between race and incomepopulations and their proximityto TRI sites inLos Angeles.<www.mapcruzin.com/scruztri/docs/seek55.htm>31UserDescriptionReferenceINDUSTRYUSE- Cost ReductionCommonwealth Edison(ComEd), other companiesThese companies have applied life-cyclecosting methods to achieve significantsavings. These steps resulted at least inpart due to public awareness of the TRIand the addition ofelectric utilities toTRI.ComEd has saved over $25 millionsince the program’s inception in 1993.McDonnell, Jeff S., “The ToxicsRelease Inventory:A New Challengefor Electric Utilities,”< www.battelle.org>EPA Region III TRI workshop,1997Attendees provided reasons for undertakingwaste reduction activities.ostfrequent reason given was cost reduction(98%of respondents).EPA Region III TRI workshop, 1997Their mFlorida Power and Light (FPL)FPL created a recycling center to recoverand sell a varietyof scrap materials, due topublic awareness of the TRI and theaddition of electric utilities to the TRI. Thiscenter generates $1.8 million in profitsannually.McDonnell, Jeff S., “The ToxicsRelease Inventory:A New Challengefor Electric Utilities,”<www.battelle.org>32UserDescriptionReferenceINDUSTRYUSE- Cost ReductionPine, J.1997 Toxics ReleaseInventory and Right-to-KnowConference ProceedingsPine provided examples of how TRIinformation has helped companies developwaste reduction strategies. For example,Marathon Oil installed a thermal desorptionunit to process oilywaste and recoveredover 120,000 barrels of oil; Georgia GulfCorporation relocated a methanol stripperpurge line that resulted in the recoveryof9,300 gallons of methanol that previouslyunderwent biological waste treatment.Pine, John.1997 Toxics ReleaseInventory and Right-to-KnowConference ProceedingsVarious Companies, TRI DataUse Conference for 1993Several corporations presented theirexperiences of how theyreduced emissionsand recognized P2 and cost savingopportunities through the EPA 33/50program.Various Companies, TRI Data UseConference for 199333UserDescriptionReferenceINDUSTRYUSE- Public Relations ToolsDuPontDuPont lists TRI data on its web site anduses its progress in emissions reductions asa marketing tool.<www.dupont.com>AlleghenyEnergyand EPRIAs a result of public awareness of the TRIand the addition of electric utilities to theTRI, these two companies are coordinatingtheir efforts to develop an approach forleveraging the utility-owned wetlands byselling conservation banking credits.McDonnell, Jeff S.Release Inventory:A New Challengefor Electric Utilities.”<www.battelle.org>“The ToxicsBoeingBoeing uses TRI data to track thecompany’s progress.panycontinues to invest and innovate in P2programs and find new waysto obtaingreater leverage for current emissionreduction programs.emissions have decreased for more than adecade – more than 82% since 1991.<www.boeing.com/companyoffices/aboutus/environment/eval_results.htm>The comBoeing’s overallEastman Chemical CompanyEach of the company’s four U.S. facilitieshas a CommunityAdvisoryPanel (CAP).In addition to other activities, the panelreceives updates on TRI data.then usesmend processand waste management improvements andwaysto present the data to the public.Forrest, Carol J.Public Dialogue,” Pollution PreventionReview, Winter 1995-96, p. 1The CAPthe data to recom“The TRI, P2, and34UserDescriptionReferenceINDUSTRYUSE- Public Relations ToolsMonsantoMonsanto provides a web site similar toDuPont’s(see above), including historicaldata for sites with over 100,000 pounds oftoxic chemical releases.<www.monsanto.com>PolaroidPolaroid used TRI data in its annual reportto informstockholders and the public ofefforts theywere making to reducepollution.OMB Watch and the Unison Institute,“The Right Stuff: Using the ToxicsRelease Inventory.”13 July199535UserDescriptionReferencesINDUSTRYUSE- Public DisclosureChemical EmergencyPreparedness and PreventionOffice (CEPPO), U.S. EPACEPPO conducted a studyto find outhow the media affects industries andtheir emissions reductions. The officefound that large polluters singled out bythe media due to the public availabilityof TRI data have decreased theiremissions byabout twice the percentageas the overall average.Chemical EmergencyPreparedness and PreventionOffice (CEPPO), U.S. EPAIowa Association of Businessand IndustryThe association coordinated acommunity-wide P2 initiative in the DesMoines-Polk Countyarea.association adopted goals of a 60%reduction of all TRI chemicals by1992and a 70%reduction by1995.Economic Analysis of the FinalRule to Add Certain IndustryGroups to EPCRA Section 313,p.6-29, April 1997The36UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Environmental SolutionsAir Pollution Control ProgramofMissouri, Department of NaturalResources (DNR)Missouri DNR used TRI data to checkqualityof their Missouri EmissionsInventoryQuestionnaire (EIQ) data.Missouri DNR was able to show that 2facilities incorrectlyreported emissionsdata on the EIQ.E-mail fromGiroir, Louis Eric,Toxicologist, Air Pollution ControlProgram, Missouri Department ofNatural Resources to Katherine Jennrich,intern, Toxics Release InventoryProgramDivision, OPPT,Colorado Department of PublicHealth and the Environment, P2ProgramThe Department used TRI and other datato identifythe 10 industrygroupsresponsible for the largest quantities ofhazardous waste generation or toxicchemical releases in the state.will serve as the basis for establishingpriorities for P2 activities and fordistribution of technical assistancegrants.companies for participation in aGovernor’s P2 Challenge Programtoreduce toxic emissions and hazardouswaste generation.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups to EPCRASection 313,p. 6-29, April 1997Indiana Governor’s OfficeThe Indiana Governor’s ToxicsReduction Challenge of 1998 givespublicityto companies meeting certainstandards (i.e., reductions in toxicchemical releases).<www.in.gov/idem/>June 13, 2000This workIt will also used to target large37UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Environmental SolutionsLouisiana’s EnvironmentalLeadership P2 ProgramLouisiana used TRI data to track theprogress of a statewide emissionsprevention and reduction programthatseeks a 45% reduction in toxic chemicalreleases by1997, using 1992 data as abaseline.sponsors theGovernor Awards for EnvironmentalExcellence to promote public recognitionof industryachievements (U.S. EPA,1993b).Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups to EPCRASection 313,p. 6-29, April 1997North Carolina P2 ProgramNorth Carolina uses TRI data to integratemulti-media toxic chemical release datainto statewide waste reduction activities,such as technical assistance, grants,research, and demonstration projects.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups to EPCRASection 313,p. 6-29, April 1997The Program38UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Environmental SolutionsStates of Kentucky, Ohio, andWest VirginiaThe states jointlyparticipated in a “TriState Initiative” to identify,prevent, andremediate environmental threats.Programcoordinators use TRI data intheir risk assessment process to focus onsources of greatest concern.programwill use voluntaryindustrycommitments and cooperative effortsamong industry,the public, andgovernment to achieve reductions in TRIchemical and criteria air pollutantreleases.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups to EPCRASection 313,p. 6-29, April 1997States of Arkansas, Ohio,Oregon, and WashingtonThe states participated in the EPA Officeof Solid Waste’s Measurement Project,using TRI data in projects assessing P2measurement at the facilitylevel.“Taking Stock” Commission forEnvironmental Cooperation (CEC)U.S. EPAThe EPA 33/50 Programincluded 1200companies that reduced emissions of 17priorityTRI chemicals from1988 levelsby33%and 50%by1992 and 1995,respectively.The programreached bothgoals a year early.U.S. EPA's33/50 Program, Office ofPollution Prevention and Toxics in theOffice of Prevention, Pesticides andToxic SubstancesThe39UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Environmental TargetingFlorida Waste ReductionAssistance Program(WRAP)WRAP uses TRI data to targetfacilities for the program, whichanswers facilityrequests to provideassistance in source reduction andwaste minimization in the handling ofTRI chemicals.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997Georgia Department of NaturalResources, P2 DivisionGeorgia used TRI data in the processof identifying the technical assistanceneeds of manufacturing sectors thatgenerate chemicals posing the greatestrelative risk to public health and theenvironment.prioritized chemicals, and thenexamined manufacturing sectorsreleasing the highest prioritychemicalsand identified particular subsectors forfurther assessment.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997Missouri Department of NaturalResources, Air Pollution ControlProgram(APCP)APCP uses TRI data to identifyairpollution sources that might have tocomplywith MaximumAchievableControl Technology(MACT)Standards.also used TRIdata to identifyenvironmental “hotspots” in Missouri for communitybased environmental project targeting.E-mail fromGiroir, Louis Eric,Toxicologist, Air Pollution ControlProgram, Missouri Department ofNatural Resources to KatherineJennrich, intern, Toxics ReleaseInventoryProgramDivision, OPPT,June 13, 2000The Division firstThe Program40UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Environmental TargetingNew JerseyDepartment ofEnvironmental Protection andEnergyNew Jerseyused TRI data in acomputerized GIS to prioritizefacilities and geographic areas forimplementing P2 measures.Department used minor watersheds toaggregate and map toxic chemicalreleases to water.entthen grouped chemicals based onhealth and environmental effects tostudythe cumulative impact of manyreleases in the area.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997New York State Department ofEnvironmental ConservationNew York State used TRI data toidentify400 facilities generating 95%of the state’s toxic pollution forpriorityattention in multi-mediainspection, enforcement, ongoingmonitoring, and P2 planning.“States as Innovators: It’s Timefor aNew Look to Our ‘Laboratories ofDemocracy’in the Effort to ImproveOur Approach to EnvironmentalRegulation.”a Law Review347, p. 370-71 (1994)TheThe DepartmAlabam41UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Environmental TargetingU.S. EPA, Office of Enforcementand Compliance Assurance(OECA)OECA uses TRI data as a tool ininspection targeting and enforcementand for cross-checking data fromothersources.ent personnel canuse TRI data and the FacilityandCompanyTracking System(FACTS)to identifyadditional facilities ownedbythe same corporation or bythe sameparent companythat might be subjectto liability.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcementand Compliance Assurance(OECA) (cont.)OECA uses TRI data in its EPCRATargeting System(ETS), whichprovides local access to TRI andFACTS data for all facilities subject toEPCRA section 313 requirements.ETS supports the creation ofprioritized inspection targeting lists,generated froma wide arrayofselection criteria.targeting activities, such as contactingfacilities and tracking tips andcomplaints.field offices currentlyuse this newsystem.as aboveEnforcemIt also supports dailyNine out of ten Regional42UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Environmental TargetingOECA provides guidance to Regionalfield offices on the resources availableto their inspectors in identifying nonreporters, later reporters, and dataqualityerrors.the inspectors with valuableinformation extrapolated fromthe TRI,such as facilityreporting rates,processes, and toxic chemical releases.as aboveU.S. EPA, Office of Solid Wasteand EmergencyResponse(OSWER)OSWER uses TRI data when analyzinglong-termtrends and identifyingparticular industrypractices thatwarrant attention bythe Office.OSWER also uses TRI data whenestablishing liabilityunder CERCLAand RCRA statutoryauthorities.data can be used when developingemission inventories for the Superfundsite discoveryprogramand duringpreliminaryassessments.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997These resources provideTRI43UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Environmental TargetingU.S. EPA, Office of WaterEnforcement and Compliance(OWEC)OWEC used TRI to identifyindustrialusers with the greatest contribution oftoxic pollutants to citysewer systems.The Office identified the industries andprovided facilitynames to the Regionsfor further evaluation.used TRI data to identifyindustrialusers subject to pretreatment standardsthat are located in cities not required tohave pretreatment programs.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997U.S. Occupational SafetyandHealth Administration (OSHA),local public health departmentsOSHA and local public healthdepartments requested identification offacilities in certain areas that releasespecific chemicals for the purpose oftargeting exposure screening forfacilityemployees.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997OWEC also44UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Legislation and RegulationsStates of California, Delaware,Louisiana, New Jersey, andNorth CarolinaThese and other states have usedTRI to support the passage ofstricter environmental legislation.Fung and O’Rourke. “ReinventingEnvironmental Regulations fromtheGrassroots Up.” EnvironmentalManagement, Vol. 25, No. 2Illinois EPA, Bureau of AirThe Bureau uses TRI data todetermine quantities of stack andfugitive air emissions of reportedsubstances.This informationsupports continuing development ofregulatoryproposals in response tolegislation passed in 1987 toaddress air toxics.Dewulf, Cindy. “Utilization of FormRData,” TRI Contact for Ohio EPALouisiana State LegislatureTRI data supported theLegislature’s actions to require thestate DEQ to issue regulationsidentifying 100 prioritypollutants,set emissions standards for thosepollutants, and target a 50%emissions reduction from1987levels by1994.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997Minnesota LegislatureThe Minnesota Legislatureamended the state’s EPCRA in1993 to expand TRI reportingrequirements to non-manufacturingindustries.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April199745UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Legislation and RegulationsNorth Carolina EnvironmentalManagement CommissionThe Commission set limits for 105pollutants after a public interestgroup published a report onunregulated air toxics emissions inthe state.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997U.S. EPA, Office of PollutionPrevention and Toxics (OPPT),Pollution Prevention Division(PPD)PPD used TRI data as a screeningtool to prioritize proposedregulations and industrial sourcecategories, to promote P2 inrulemaking.The P2 Senior PolicyCouncil has identified a number ofregulatorydevelopment efforts thatshould consider inclusion of P2measures.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997U.S. EPA, Office of Water (OW)OW used TRI data as one of severalsources of information indeveloping regulations undersection 316(b) regarding coolingwater.The data were useful inidentifying facilities to include in anationwide list of facilities (i.e., the“sample frame”) within severalmajor industrial groups.OW usedthe list to select a randomsamplefor survey.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April199746UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Risk AssessmentKentuckyDivision ofEnvironmental ServicesKentuckyoccasionallyuses the TRI databasewhen it makes determinations regarding riskassessments.E-mail fromAlex Barber to KatherineJennrich, intern, Toxics ReleaseInventoryProgramDivision, datedJune 1, 2000New York State Department ofHealthNew York State developed a risk screeningprotocol using TRI air release data andtoxicitypotencydata to produce relative riskscores and rankings for facilities andchemicals within the state.the need for more careful evaluation of healtheffects resulting fromlarge releases ofnoncarcinogenic compounds.Hazen, Susan B. “An Overview ofUses of the Toxics Release InventoryData in the U.S.” EnvironmentalAssistance Division, OPPT, US EPA,1995.Oregon Department ofEnvironmental Quality(DEQ)Oregon relied on the TRI database to applyacomputer model that evaluates cross-mediaimpacts and ranks the relative risks to humanhealth and the environment associated withpollutant discharges.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcementand Compliance Assistance(OECA) and the Office ofResearch and Development(ORD)OECA and ORD used TRI to develop a“Multi-Media Ranking System” to prioritizesites for enforcement actions and to evaluatethe effectiveness of environmental laws inreducing risks fromsites.stemrankssites based on their multi-media releases ofpollutants, their potential risk to humanhealth and the environment, and the historyof legal violations bythe facility.U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement andCompliance Assistance (OECA) andthe Office of Research andDevelopment (ORD)Results suggestedThe sy47UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Risk AssessmentU.S. EPA, Office of HealthResearchThe Office published a studyof national andregional differences in county-level TRI airemissions according to the ethnicityor raceand household incomeof the populations.Using the “Population Emissions Index,” apopulation-weighted average emission foreach county,the studyfound that all minoritygroups except Native Americans tend to livein counties where TRI toxic chemicalreleases levels are higher.U.S. EPA, Office of Health ResearchU.S. EPA, Office of InformationResources ManagementThe Office sponsored the development of aPopulation Estimation and CharacterizationTool, which uses GIS technologyanddemographic data for risk-based andenvironmental justice applications.allows users to estimate and characterizepopulations within a given radius of a singleor multiple TRI facilities and to identifyareas of potential multiple exposure to toxicchemical releases.U.S. EPA, Office of InformationResources ManagementThe tool48UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Risk AssessmentU.S. EPA, Office of PollutionPrevention and Toxics (OPPT),Existing Chemicals ProgramOPPT uses TRI data for risk screening,determining testing needs and priorities, andconsidering and developing P2 activities.TRI data also serve as major inputs toexposure and risk assessments and are usedin OPPT’s outreach efforts in responses toinquiries fromvarious sources.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997EnvironmentalAssistance Division (EAD)EAD developed software that contains healthand ecotoxicityinformation on most section313 chemicals.TRIFACTS, was made available in January1991.understand the potential health andecological effects of chemical activitiesidentified in the TRI.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups toEPCRA Section 313,p. 6-29, April1997This software, called PCIt enables the TRI data user to better49UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Quality Assurance and ControlMissouri Department of NaturalResources (DNR), Air PollutionControl ProgramMissouri compared fugitive and stackemissions reported to TRI with emissionsdata reported on the Missouri EmissionsInventoryQuestionnaire (EIQ), identifiesfacilities reporting incorrectly, andcorroborates data.E-mail fromGiroir, Louis Eric,Toxicologist, Air Pollution ControlProgram, Missouri Department ofNatural Resources to KatherineJennrich, intern, Toxics ReleaseInventoryProgramDivision, OPPT,June 13, 200050UserDescriptionReferenceGOVERNMENT- Other Government UsesIllinois Department of PublicHealthIllinois Department of Public Health requestedand received TRI data to use as inputs into itsHealth and Hazardous Substances Registry.Dewulf, Cindy. “Utilization of FormRData,” TRI Contact for Ohio U.S. EPAIllinois EPA, Bureau of LandIllinois EPA uses TRI data to identifytoxicchemicals present at hazardous waste sites for anumber of programmatic reasons.Dewulf, Cindy. “Utilization of FormRData,” TRI Contact for Ohio U.S. EPAU.S. EPA, Office ofEnforcement and ComplianceAssurance (OECA)TRI data are included in the Integrated Data forEnforcement Analysis (IDEA) System, whichcombines TRI data with permit information fromother databases.information for several industrial sectors and asubset of federal facilities through the SectorFacilityIndexing Project (SFIP) web site<www.epa.gov/oeca/sfi>.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups to EPCRASection 313,p. 6-29, April 1997U.S. Internal Revenue Service(IRS)The IRS used TRI data to identifycompaniesreleasing CFCs in order to enforce a tax imposedon CFC releases.Hazen, Susan B. “An Overview of Usesof the Toxics Release InventoryData inthe U.S.” Environmental AssistanceDivision, OPPT, US EPA, 1995West Virginia Division ofEnvironmental Protection, PublicEmpowerment ProgramWest Virginia created a web site that includesTRI and other environmental, physical, anddemographic data in an easy-to-use and format toincrease the public’sunderstanding of theircommunities through better access toinformation.<www.dep.state.wv.us>The public can access IDEA51UserDescriptionReferenceINTERNATIONALRIGHT-TO-KNOWCommission for EnvironmentalCooperation (CEC)CEC releasesTaking Stock, an annualsourcebook that uses TRI data to track thesources of industrial pollutants throughoutthe U.S. and Canada.establishing an office to track toxic chemicalreleases.<www.cec.org/takingstock/index.cfm?varlan=english>CEC correlated TRI data and the CanadianNational Pollutant Release Inventory(NPRI)to give an overall view of releases andtransfers of toxic chemicals across bothcountries.engine that allows a user to search the TRIdata and its Canadian equivalent.<www.grconnect.com/querybuilder/index.php3?varlan=english&output=form>Mexico is currentlyThe CEC has developed a search52UserDescriptionReferenceINVESTMENTClean Yield Asset Management,New HampshireClean Yield Asset Management comparescompanies’TRI release data to their industryaverages of pounds of toxic chemicals persales dollars.The firmuses this comparisonto gauge how individual companies measureup against other companies in their industry.TRI data also allow Clean Yield AssetManagement to track how a company’s toxicchemical release performance improves fromyear to year.OMB Watch and the Unison Institute,“The Right Stuff: Using the ToxicsRelease Inventory.”13 July1995Green CenturyFundsGreen CenturyFunds offers sociallyresponsible mutual funds and uses TRI data totrack portfolio companyperformance.<www.greencentury.com>Investor ResponsibilityResearchCenter, Inc.The Center has an Emissions EfficiencyIndex® based on TRI data that indicateswhich companies have a competitive edge inenvironmental performance.Economic Analysis of the Final Rule toAdd Certain Industry Groups to EPCRASection 313,p. 6-29, April 1997The Center uses TRI data in developing itsCorporate Environmental Profile Directory,which presents quantitative, consistentlyderived data that allows investors to evaluateand compare corporate environmentalperformance.53UserDescriptionReferenceINVESTMENTFortunemagazineThe magazine used TRI data as a centralelement in compiling a “green index” ofAmerica’s largest manufacturers byexamining companies’environmental recordsand developing a relative ranking systemthatassigned companies scores from0-10 in 20categories.Rice, Faye, 1993."Who Scores Best onthe Environment," Fortune, Vol. 128, No.2 (July26, 1993)Neuberger and BergmanNeubergerand Bergman use TRI data toscreen socially-responsible portfolios.Hendricksson, Marla, “Proof Positive:TRI Success Stories,” Public AccessInformation, Vol. 3, No. 2Vanderbilt University, OwenGraduate School of ManagementVanderbilt Universityused TRI data inseparate studies showing that companies thatengage in P2 activityhave better stock values.<http://mba.vanderbilt.edu/fmrc/pdf/wp9719.pdf>54UserDescriptionReferenceACADEMIC- ResearchDrug and Chemical ToxicologyAn article shows how utilizing air emissiondata (such as the TRI), air dispersionmodeling, and GIS data enables public healthprofessionals to identifyand define thepotentiallyexposed population, estimate thehealth risk burden of that population, anddetermine correlations between point-basedhealth outcomeresults and estimated healthrisk.Dent, A.L., D.A. Fowler, B.M. Kaplan,G.M. Zarus, W.D. Henriques.“UsingGIS to Studythe Health Impact of AirEmissions.”Drug and ChemicalToxicology, 23, Issue 1, p. 161-178Duke University, JamesHamiltonMr. Hamilton found that stock prices ofcompanies that reported high emissionsdropped measurablythe daythe TRI data werefirst released.Another studyshowed thatpressure fromcommunities and investorsinfluenced firms to cut their toxic chemicalreleases.Varon, Elena.“Power to the People.”Federal Computer Week. March 30,1998<www.fcw.com>Institute for EnvironmentalStudies, Universityof NorthCarolina at Chapel Hill, FrancesM. LynnThe Institute conducted a national studyofusers of TRI data during 1991.The studyprovides evidence that the availabilityof TRIdata has contributed to the abilityof the rightto-know communityto effect changes inbehavior in 3 broad areas.Legislation orregulatoryaction was stimulated byefforts touse TRI data, source reduction activities hadtaken place, and the data’savailabilityhadprompted increased face-to-face meetingsbetween communitygroups and industry.Lynn, Frances.“The Toxics ReleaseInventory:An Evaluation of Use andImpact.” Institute for EnvironmentalStudies, UNC at Chapel Hill55UserDescriptionReferenceACADEMIC- ResearchMadhu Khanna, Lisa Damon,Wilma Rose H. Quimio, DoraBojilova -Journal ofEnvironmental Economics andManagementThe Journal of Environmental Economics andManagementhas published an article byMadhu Khanna and others that examines thepotential of voluntaryprograms as instrumentsfor regulating toxic releases as well as theirrole vis-à-vis mandatoryregulations.Anotherstudyin the same journal examines investorreactions to the repeated disclosure ofenvironmental information about firms in thechemical industryand the effectiveness of thisinformation as a decentralized mechanismfordeterring their pollution.Madhu Khanna, Lisa Damon, WilmaRose, H. Quimio, Dora Bojilova.“EPA’s 33/50 Program: Impact onToxics Releases and EconomicPerformance of Firms”Louisiana State University, PaulTemplet, Environmental ScienceProfessorTemplet developed a method to evaluate thecomparative effectiveness of pollution controlstrategies, policies, and programs bycalculating an “emissions to jobs ratio,” whichis the number of pounds of emissions per jobin a given industryand location.This ratio iscompared to a national or other average toassess the job’s standing.The ratio was usedto modifytax exemptions granted to facilitiesto encourage and reward job creation.Templet, Paul H., 1993. "TheEmissions to Jobs Ratio,"Environmental Science andTechnology, Vol. 27, No. 5 (May)56UserDescriptionReferenceACADEMIC- ResearchLynn and Kartez,Environmental ManagementLynn and Kartez conducted a mail surveyofactive TRI users.The surveyshowed whichdata the respondents found most helpful andhow theyused the data (e.g., check emissionswith permit records, identifysource reductionopportunities, etc.).The authors wrote that theTRI promotes sound policydevelopment byfostering dialogue among experts and thegeneral public on how to most effectivelycontrol toxic emissions into the environment.“Environmental Democracyin Action:The Toxics Release Inventory.”Environmental Management, Vol 18New York State School ofIndustrial and Labor Relations(NYSSILR), Cornell University,John BungeBunge conducted a statistical analysis of TRIdata to test the hypothesis: "Is formalemployee involvement in source reductionassociated with greater reduction in toxicreleases?"The studyfound, for example, thatmanufacturers using a certain combination ofthree formal employee participation practiceshad triple the reduction in toxic chemicalreleases of manufacturers using none of thesepractices. The studyalso discussed competingpredictors of source reduction and assessedfuture research directions.Center for Advanced Human ResourceStudies, New York State School ofIndustrial and Labor Relations.1996.<www.cfe.cornell.edu/WEI/employee.html>.Texas A&MTexas A&M used TRI and RCRA data in astudyof 58 landfills.The studydeterminedthat of 143 toxic chemicals found, 60 occurredin municipal waste samples, 31 in industrialwaste landfills, and 39 in both.Toxics Watch, 1995<www.informinc.org/summaries_chem.php>57UserDescriptionReferenceACADEMIC- ClassroomUseJSI Center forEnvironmental HealthStudiesThe Center developed a curriculumforhigh school students to encourageparticipation in environmentalassessment and protection.was an integral part of the students’research.JSI Center for Environmental HealthStudies: A Division of the JSIResearch and Training InstituteFlorida InternationalUniversity, ProfessorRobert HognorProfessor Hognor used TRI data inclasses in the Department of Businessand Society.Students issued a reportin 1994 on the impact of toxicchemicals in the Caribbean.OMB Watch and the Unison Institute,“The Right Stuff: Using the ToxicsRelease Inventory.”13 July1995The TRI58

## Literature Cited

1. Linda W underlich, An Overview of the Uses of the Toxics Release Inventory Data in the

U.S. , U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,

(W ashington DC: 1995).

2. Eugene Toxics Right to Know Program , Eugene Fire and Em ergency Medical Services

Departm e nt, 07 January 2002 <http:www.ci.e ugene.or.us/firedept/toxics/toxicsb.htm >

.

3. Katherine Jennrich, U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, telephone interview with

Mildred Meyers, South Carolina Environm ental W a tch 26 July 2000.

4. Katherine Jennrich, U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, personal interview with

Marylee Orr, Louisiana Environm ental Action Network, 21 July 2000.

5. “Taking Stock: 1996,” Com m i ssion for Environm ental Cooperation, January 2002

<http://www.cec.org/hom e/index.cfm ? v arlan=english>.

6. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Region 9: Cross-Media Division, A Citizen’s

Guide to Reducing Toxic Risks: Putting the Toxics Release Inventory to W o rk! (EPA #

909-B-98-001, W a shington DC, 1998).

7. L. Manthe, “W hat Inf o rm ation Do Our com m unities Need: Native Nations,” Toxics

Release Inventory and Right-to-Know Conference Proceedings, (EPA #749-R-98-001,

W a shington DC, 1997: 104-108).

8. 1999 Silicon Valley Environm ental Index , 1999, Silicon Valley Environm ental

Partnership, 07 January 2003,

<http://www.webcom .com /2sustain/.page_creator/indexim p.htm l >.

9. Katherine Jennrich, personal interview with W ilm a Subra, 21 July 2000.

10. “Several W e b Sites Help Users with TRI Data Analysis,” Com m unity Right-to-Know

Manual Bulletin , 12.2, January 1999: 1-3.

11. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing Toxic Risks:

Putting the Toxics Release Inventory to W o rk! 1998.

12. “Several W e b Sites Help Users with TRI Data Analysis,” 1999.

13. “Part I: Great Lakes Report on Horm one Disrupting Chem icals,” Environm ental

Inform ation Center Regional Analysis of Major Toxic Chem ical Releases , Environm ental

Inform ation Center, W a shington DC, June 1997: 1-6.

6014. “Polluting our Future: Chem ical Pollution in the United States that Af f ects Child

Developm ent and Learning,” Septem ber 2002 National Environm ent Trust, Physicians

for Social Responsibility, and The Learning Disabilities , 07 January 2002

<http://www.psr.org/trireport.pdf>.

15. Proposal for Com puter-Based Training Program , (Detroit: International Union, United

Autom obile, Aerospace & Agricultural Im plem ent W o rkers of Am erica).

16. “First Neighborhood ‘Right-to-Act’ La w,” Com m unity Right-to-Know Bulletin , 11.11,

October 1998: 1-2.

17. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing Toxic Risks:

Putting the Toxics Release Inventory to W o rk! 1998.

18. “Agreem ents Target Zero Discharge,” W o rking Notes on Com m unity Right-to-Know,

January/February, 1996: 1-2.

19. “Industrial Giant Agrees to Zero Discharge Pact with Activist,” Calhoun County

Resource W a tch , Press advisory, August 1995.

20. “Agreem ents Target Zero Discharge,” 1996.

21. Mark deKiewiet, letter Dianne W ilson. 7 March 2000.

22. “Protecting Pennsylvania’s W a terways,” Pennsylvania Public Interest Research Group

(PennPIRG) , 1999.

23. Don Hopey, “PA. Ranks 2 nd W o rst in Toxic Dum p ing,” 18 February 2000; “Editorial:

Dubious Achievem ent,” 31 May 2000; “Polluter to Pick Up W a ter Bill,” 7 June 2000;

“EPA’s Strict W a ter Safeguards Bring Coll ective Sigh of Relief in Zelienople,” 8 June

2000; “Editorial: Unfit to Drink,” 13 June 2000, Post-Gazette.Com 07 January 2003

<http://www.post-gazette.com /healthscience/20000218pollute2.asp>.

24. “The Right Stuff: Using the Toxics Re lease Inventory, OMB W a tch and the Unison

Institute , 13 July 1995.

25. John McQuaid, “Q&A: W h at is Environm ental Justice? ” 21 May 2000, NOLA Live , 07

January 2002,

<http://www.nolalive.com / speced/unwelcom e /index.ssf? / unwelcom e /stories/05221qa.ht

ml >

26. Katherine Jennrich, personal interview with W ilm a Subra, 20 July 2000.

6127. “Breathing Poison: The Toxic Costs of Indus tries in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana,” June

2000, Mossville Environm ental Action Network , 07 January 2002

<http://www.m a pCruzin.com /m ossville/reportondioxin.htm >

.

28. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing Toxic Risks:

Putting the Toxics Release Inventory to W o rk! 1998.

29. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing Toxic Risks:

Putting the Toxics Release Inventory to W o rk! 1998.

30. John Harm an, EPA/TRI Program , electronic m a il to Maria Doa, EPA/TRI Program

Director, 20 Novem b er 2000.

31. John Pine, Toxics Release Inventory a nd Right-to-Know Conference Proceedings, 1997.

32. Elana Varon, “Power to the People: Activists tap EPA’s pollutants database for

environm ental clean-up,” Federal Com puter W eek 30 March 1998, 07 January 2002

<http://www.fcw.com / print.asp>.

33. Varon, Federal Com puter W eek , 1998.

34. Safety Health and The Environm ent , January 2002, Boeing Com p any W e b Site, 07

January 2003

<http://www.boeing.com /com panyoffices/aboutus/environm ent/eval_results.htm >

.

35. Monsanto Environm ental Safety and Health Data , 1998, Monsanto Hom e Page, January

2002 <http://www.m onsanto.com /m onsanto/sustain_98/esh_perform a nce/default.htm >

.

36. Francine Madden and Bettina Carcigil, TRI Toolkit , Mineral Policy Center, 2000: 1-4.

37. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, St ate Directory: 33/50 and Voluntary Pollution

Prevention Program , 1993 , (EPA # 745-K 93-002, W a shington DC, October 1993).

38. Governor O' Bannon' s Toxic Reduction Challenge , 1998, Indiana Departm e nt of

Environm ental Managem e nt, 07 January 2002

<http://www.in.gov/idem /oppta/p2/toxicchallenge/>.

39. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Econom ic Analysis of the Final Rule to Add

Certain Industry Groups to ECPRA Section 313, (W ashington DC, 1997).

40. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Econom ic Analysis of the Final Rule to Add

Certain Industry Groups to EPCRA Section 313, 1997.

6241. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Econom ic Analysis of the Final Rule to Add

Certain Industry Groups to EPCRA Section 313, 1997.

42. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Econom ic Analysis of the Final Rule to Add

Certain Industry Groups to EPCRA Section 313, 1997.

43. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). W underlich, Linda (prepared for

Susan Hazen). An Overview of the Uses of the Toxics Release Inventory Data in the

U.S

. W a shington, D.C.: Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). June, 1995.

44. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Econom ic Analysis of the Final Rule to Add

Certain Industry Groups to EPCRA Section 313, 1997.

45. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Econom ic Analysis of the Final Rule to Add

Certain Industry Groups to EPCRA Section 313, 1997.

46. Louis Eric Giroir, Air Pollution Control Program , Missouri Departm e nt of Natural

Resources, electronic m a il to Katherine Jennrich, EPA/TRI Program , 13 June 2000.

47. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA). W underlich, Linda (prepared for

Susan Hazen). An Overview of the Uses of the Toxics Release Inventory Data in the

U.S

. W a shington, D.C.:Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). June, 1995.

48. “International Perspective: Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers,” U.S.

Environm ental Protection Agency, Chem icals in the Environm ent: Public Access

Inform ation , (EPA # 749-R-97-001b, W a shington DC, 1997).

49. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing Toxic Risks:

Putting the Toxics Release Inventory to W o rk! (1998).

50. Green Century Funds Environm ental Investing , 2002, Green Century Funds Hom e Page,

07 January 2002, <http://www.greencentury.com /ER.htm >

.

51. “Study Finds Pollution Prevention Affects Stock Prices,” W o rking Notes on Com m unity

Right-to-Know: 2 , Appendix B, May 2000.

52. U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Econom ic Analysis of the Final Rule to Modify

Reporting of Persistent Bioaccum u lative Toxic Chem icals under EPCRA Section 313,

1999.

53. “TRI: An Academ ic Perspective,” U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, Office of

Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Chem icals in the Environm ent: Public Access

Inform ation , (EPA #749-R-97-001b, W a shington DC, 1997).

6354. “A.L. Dent, D.A. Fowler, B.M. Kaplan, G.M. Zarus, and W

. D. Henriques. “Using GIS

to Study the Health Im pact of Air Em issions,” Drug and Chem ical Toxicology 23 (1)

February 2000: 161-178.

55. Madhu Khanna, Lisa Dam on, W ilm a Rose, H.Quim io, Dora Bojilova, “EPA’s Voluntary

33/50 Program : Im pact on Toxic Releases and Econom ic Perform a nce of Firm s,” Journal

of Environm ental Econom ics and Managem e nt , 37 (1) January 1999: 1-25.

56. Paul H. Tem p let, “The Positive Relationship between Jobs, Environm ent, and the

Econom y: An Em pirical Analysis,” Spectrum , Spring Issue, 1995: 37-49.

57. Mark Stephan, “Environm ental Inform ation Disclosure Program s: They work, But W hy?

Social Science Quarterly , 83(1) March 2002.

58. R.D. Klassen and D.C. W hybark, “Just In-Tim e Manufacturing and Pollution Prevention

Generate Mutual Benefits in the Furniture Industry,” Interfaces , vol. 30, no. 3, 2000: 95-

106.

59. Selected Projects , JSI Center for Environm ental Health Studies, Boston: 1-5.

60. The Right Stuff: Using the Toxics Release Inventory , Office of Managem e nt and Budget

W a tch and the Unison Institute, 3 July 1995.

64