Measurement and Targeting – Design and Implement Programs to Track Results and Accountability

1. Measurement and Targeting – Design and Implement Programs to Track Results and Accountability National Environmental Partnership Summit 2006 Wednesday, May 10th Douglas Chatham, Carl Koch, Tracy Dyke-Redmond

2. Applying Environmental Data at the Sector Level Carl Koch Sector Strategies Division Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation National Center for Environmental Innovation U.S. Environmental Protection Agency May 10, 2006

3. EPA Office of the Administrator Office of Policy, Economics & Innovation National Center for Environmental Economics Office of Regulatory & Policy Management • Sector Strategies Program • Facility Innovation Pilots • Small Business Ombudsman • Performance Track Program • Community Smart Growth • Program Evaluation

4. The Sector Strategies Program: • Seeks industry-wide environmental gains through innovative actions taken with a number of manufacturing and service sectors. • A voluntary effort with select trade associations, EPA programs and regions, states, and others to find sensible solutions to sector-specific problems.

5. Features: • National point-of-contact • Address regulatory performance barriers • Promote EMS implementation • Measure and communicate environmental performance • Address cross-cutting environmental policy issues • Support NCEI programs

6. Participating Sectors • Agribusiness • Cement Manufacturing • Colleges & Universities • Construction • Forest Products • Iron & Steel • Metal Casting • Metal Finishing • Paints & Coatings • Ports • Shipbuilding & Repair • Specialty-Batch Chemical Sector Welcoming Event & Policy Dialogue, June 2, 2003 24 national associations $2.1 trillion contribution to GDP 780,000 facilities and locations 30% of total industry environmental spending

7. Sector Measurement Approach: • strategy developed in partnership with industry • track a core set of indicators over time • include unique sector-specific data • data is “Normalized ” - a common base for comparing • environmental data over time by adjusting for year-to-year • changes in industry size or production. • no imposed industry-specific targets • inform as well as track

8. Key Data Sources: • Government • Economic Census and Annual Survey of Manufactures (Census Bureau) • Industry Economic Accounts (Department of Commerce • Mineral Commodities Summaries (U.S. Geological Survey) • National Center for Education Statistics, • Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (Department of Energy) • National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report (Office of Solid Waste) • National Emissions Inventory (OAQPS) • Toxic Release Inventory (OEI) • Risk Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) • Industry • American Forest & Paper Association • Portland Cement Association - Annual Surveys • Specialty Batch Chemical Data Collection • Iron & Steel Reporting on Sustainability Indicators • Preliminary Survey of Port Authorities • Colleges & Universities Self-Tracking Tool

9. Environmental footprint of our sectors • 32% of TRI releases • 18% of hazardous waste generated • 33% of criteria air pollutant emissions from point sources • 20% of energy consumption

10. Examples of core metrics tracked …

11. … & some unique sector-specific data

12. Paint & Coatings TRI Data Example: three related charts – provide context and a progressively focused look at a sector’s TRI releases and waste management activities.

13. Paint & Coatings TRI Data Example: • TRI Waste Management • larger pie chart – overall % for releases, treatment, energy recovery, and recycling. • smaller pie chart - details the “releases” slice of the large pie chart, showing the percentages released to air, water, and disposed.

14. Paint & Coatings TRI Data Example: • 2. Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases • - trends from 1994 - 2003 • top line = total releases (including • disposal), bottom line = releases to air • and water • data normalized by annual value of shipments

15. Paint & Coatings TRI Data Example: • 3. TRI Air and Water Releases • - trends from 1994 - 2003 • blue line = releases in pounds to air and water, green line = toxicity-weighted • results for those releases • scale in pounds line is located on the left side of the chart • scale for toxicity-weighted line on the right • - data normalized by annual value of shipments

16. Paint & Coatings TRI Data Example: Applying Toxicity Weights to TRI Data – A Basic (VERY) Overview: • Toxicity – the inherent ability of a chemical to cause harm – varies greatly. • EPA’s Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) tool calculates a • toxicity weighted score (“hazard-based”) =pounds of air or water releases • Xa toxicity weight specific to the chemical and exposure route. • toxicity weights increase as the toxicological potential to cause chronic human • health effects increases. • alternative perspective to the typical pounds-based presentation. • does NOT identify “risk” - that relies on additional information • (i.e. fate and transport of the chemical in the environment after release, • pathway of human exposure, number of people exposed). • (for more: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/index.html)

17. Paint & Coatings TRI Data Example: • 4. Top Toxicity-Weighted TRI Chemicals • chemicals that accounted for 90% • of the sector’s total toxicity-weighted • results in 2003 • separate columns for Air and Water • releases • identifies opportunities for source • reduction or chemical substitution

18. Sector Measurement Challenges • Practical • Limits of data base content • Major reporting systems not static • Toxicity-weighting tool – judicious use • Need to educate sectors about data sources and environmental footprint. • Assist sectors in defining a measurement strategy • Attribution – contributions of voluntary programs not easily recognized in PART or GPRA structure.

19. Sector Measurement Challenges • Strategic – Influencing Change • EPA regulations • Sector stewardship initiatives

20. Questions?