Jump to main content.


Trends Report Frequent Questions

2004-2006 Trends Report Highlights

The frequently asked questions include:

  1. Why does EPA publish the Trends Report?
  2. How does this Trends Report differ from the previous one?
  3. How much progress has been made and where has progress been made toward reaching EPA's GPRA goal to reduce Priority Chemicals
  4. Which Priority Chemicals were generated in the greatest and smallest quantities in 2005
  5. In which industries did facilities generate the largest quantities of Priority Chemicals?
  6. Which data were used in the Trends Report and what were the data limitations?

    1. Why does EPA publish the National Priority Chemicals Trends Report?

    EPA publishes the National Priority Chemical Trends Report to provide information and describe trends to the public about the generation and management of Priority Chemicals (PCs) in hazardous and non-hazardous industrial wastes.  The Trends Report also provides information for individual EPA regions, states, counties, key industry sectors, and federal facilities to use in identifying potential waste minimization opportunities for reducing PCs in wastes.

    EPA also uses the Trends Report to show progress in achieving our PC reduction goal: By 2011, reduce 4 million pounds of priority chemicals from wastestreams as measured by National Partnership for Environmental Priorities (NPEP) contributions, Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs), and other tools used by EPA to achieve priority chemical reductions.  We measure progress in reaching this goal through the achievements of National Partnership for Environmental Priorities (NPEP) partners.

    Top of Page

  7. 2. How does this Trends Report differ from the previous one?

    We made several improvements to this year’s Trends Report, including:

    This Report is an evolving document and we continue to look for ways to better present the data. If you have any comments concerning this Report, please contact us. One way to do so is to use the Customer Feedback Survey at the beginning of this Report.

    Top of Page

    3. How much progress been made and where has progress been made toward reaching EPA's Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) goal to reduce Priority Chemicals?

    EPA is making progress in reaching our current five year GPRA goal: By 2011, reduce 4 million pounds of priority chemicals from wastestreams as measured by National Partnership for Environmental Priorities (NPEP) contributions, Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs), and other tools used by EPA to achieve priority chemical reductions. We use current data from private sector NPEP partners who have agreed to reduce their PC wastes to measure our progress in reaching this goal. Through FY 2007, NPEP partners have reduced more than three million pounds of PCs.The table below shows the reductions for each PC that NPEP partners have achieved from FY 2004 to FY 2007. Visit our NPEP Status Boards for current reduction totals.

    Priority Chemical FY 2004 Reductions Achieved(pounds) FY 2005 Reductions Achieved (pounds) FY 2006 Reductions Achieved (pounds) FY 2007 Reductions Achieved (pounds) Total (pounds) FY2004-2007 Percent of Total FY 2004-2007
    Lead and lead compounds
    49,527
    822,564
    1,249,699
    546,766
    2,668,556
    74.1%
    Naphthalene
    0
    103,746
    0
    528,607
    632,353
    17.5%
    Polycyclic aromatic compounds
    0
    9,318
    0
    219,529
    228,847
    6.4%
    Mercury and mercury compounds
    0
    4,346
    26,750
    9,603
    40,699
    1.1%
    Dibenzofuran
    0
    0
    0
    23,830
    23,830
    0.7%
    Polychlorinated biphenyls
    0
    0
    4,335
    4,600
    8,935
    0.2%
    Dioxin and Dioxin-like Compounds
    0
    0
    144
    0
    144
    0.0%
    Total
    49,527
    939,974
    1,280,928
    1,332,935
    3,603,364
    100.0%

    Top of Page

    4. Which Priority Chemicals (PCs) were generated in the greatest and smallest quantities in 2005?

    Four PCs accounted for 86% of the total quantity of PCs generated in 2006:

    Largest quantity of PCs in 2006 Lead and Lead Compounds (Lead) Naphthalene Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds (PACs) Hexachloro 1,3-butadiene Total of these Four PCs
    Pounds
    36,270,099
    13,755,764
    7,968,088
    7,081,116
    65,075, 066
    Percentage of National Total PC Quantity
    47.8%
    18.1%
    10.5%
    9.3%
    85.7%

    Largest Increases in Quantities 2005-2006

    Anthracene (pounds) Cadmium and Cadmium Compounds (pounds) 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (pounds) Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (pounds)
    1,800,000
    342,000
    101,000
    96,000

    Largest Decreases in Quantities 2005-2006

    Naphthalene (pounds) Hexachloroethane (pounds) Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds (PACs) (pounds) Hexachlorobenzene (pounds)
    3,500,000
    1,300,000
    1,100,000
    1,100,000
    * No lindane and only small quantities of heptachlor and methoxychlor were reported for 2006. Approximately 500 pounds of dioxin and dioxin-like compounds were reported; however, significant potential health effects are associated with even small quantities of dioxins.

    Top of Page

    5. In which industries did facilities generate the largest quantities of Priority Chemicals (PCs)?

    For 2006, facilities in 350 different NAICS codes reported generating PCs; approximately 90 percent of the facilities in 24 of the NAICS codes. Facilities in three industries accounted for approximately 46 percent of the total quantity of the PCs generated in 2006 (see table below):

     

    NAICS Code NAICS Code Description Total PC Quantity in 2004 Total PC Quantity in 2005 Total PC Quantity in 2006 Percent of Total National PC Quantity (2006)
    325181
    Alkalies and Chlorine Manufacturing
    8,434,467
    13,125,343
    13,408,621
    17.7%
    331492
    Secondary Smelting, Refining, and Alloying of Nonferrous Metal (except Copper and Aluminum)
    10,213,273
    11,027,809
    11,410,674
    15.0%
    331111
    Iron and Steel Mills
    9,830,019
    9,270,225
    10,108,076
    13.3%
    928110
    National Security
    2,576,059
    2,740,057
    4,406,113
    5.8%
    335991
    Carbon and Graphite Product Manufacturing
    4,115,195
    4,651,306
    3,291,125
    4.3%
    331312
    Primary Aluminum Production
    2,974,060
    2,756,294
    3,233,397
    4.3%
    332812
    Metal Coating, Engraving (except Jewelry and Silverware), and Allied Services to Manufacturers
    2,085,146
    2,199,369
    3,000,504
    4.0%
    324110
    Petroleum Refineries
    3,338,171
    6,149,521
    2,944,295
    3.9%
    325192
    Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Manufacturing
    1,378,335
    3,916,502
    2,597,531
    3.4%
    325188
    All Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing
    2,292,261
    1,655,987
    1,926,879
    2.5%
    325110
    Petrochemical Manufacturing
    2,115,254
    2,828,812
    1,714,644
    2.3%
    331511
    Iron Foundries
    1,960,075
    1,626,420
    1,617,805
    2.1%
    325320
    Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing
    1,471,180
    1,541,579
    1,377,295
    1.8%
    325199
    All Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
    2,364,209
    1,241,040
    1,373,750
    1.8%
    325998
    All Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing
    332,498
    694,526
    958,058
    1.3%
    332992
    Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing
    182,316
    565,013
    790,921
    1.0%
    325211
    Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing
    945,158
    1,271,826
    666,773
    0.9%
    335110
    Electric Lamp Bulb and Part Manufacturing
    232,099
    567,422
    613,853
    0.8%
    541710
    Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
    479,037
    459,021
    592,124
    0.8%
    324191
    Petroleum Lubricating Oil and Grease Manufacturing
    448,910
    485,393
    515,286
    0.7%
    331421
    Copper Rolling, Drawing, and Extruding
    129,314
    120,833
    482,704
    0.6%
    335912
    Primary Battery Manufacturing
    456,055
    422,775
    427,678
    0.6%
    331222
    Steel Wire Drawing
    483,927
    375,607
    409,519
    0.5%
    331210
    Iron and Steel Pipe and Tube Manufacturing from Purchased Steel
    218,690
    204,649
    400,799
    0.5%

    6. What data were used in the Trends Report and what were the data limitations?

    Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data was used to analyze and identify increases or decreases in the quantity and management of Priority Chemicals (PCs) and in which industries PCs were generated and managed. TRI is a publicly available EPA database about the release and management of 581 individually listed chemicals and 30 chemical categories reported by industrial and federal facilities whose primary business activity is on the Section 313 list of North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. This information is reported annually and reviewed and updated on an on-going basis.

    TRI covers a wide variety of manufacturing sectors in National Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes as well as federal facilities.  The database developed for use in this Trends Report includes all facilities, regardless of primary NAICS code, except as noted in the methodology (see PC-TRI Methodology), that reported a PC quantity to TRI for reporting years 2004-2006.

    Some of the limitations associated with using this data are:

    We developed a methodology (referred to as the PC-BR methodology) to estimate, for the first time, the quantity of PCs contained in Hazardous Waste Biennial Report (BR) waste streams that are reported under RCRA. A BR must be submitted by large quantity generators (LQGs)[1] and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) every two years. The focus of the PC-BR methodology is on the primary generation activities because the waste streams associated with primary generation represent an opportunity to reduce PCs in hazardous waste streams. It only includes waste streams generated from a production process, service activity, or routine/periodic cleanup, where potential opportunities for direct waste minimization (e.g., source reduction, recycling) are the greatest. Waste streams not associated with primary generation, such as leachate (liquids that have percolated through land disposed wastes) resulting from the disposal of more than one hazardous waste, are not included because they generally do not offer opportunities for direct waste minimization. 

    The BR and TRI reporting processes are substantially different. These reporting differences, among others, can cause significant variation in the number of reporting facilities and quantities of chemicals reported. As such, we caution readers against making casual one-to-one comparisons between the TRI and BR data. We are continuing to evaluate if and how the TRI and BR quantities of PCs can be correlated.

    Most of the analyses presented in this Report are based on the TRI data. We present the BR data in order to provide another perspective on hazardous wastes that might contain PCs. 

    Top of Page


Local Navigation




Jump to main content.