Appendix B
Descriptions of Programs to Promote Industry-Initiated Efforts

The following efforts are included: environmental management standards, environmental product certification, industrial consortia, partnerships between industry and other organizations, and nonregulatory federal programs. Information was provided by organizations in response to requests from the committee.

Environmental Management Standards

Environmental management has become increasingly influenced by nonregulatory international standards, and the Europeans have taken an important leadership role in facilitating the process. The United States, with its past reliance on traditional approaches to environmental regulation, only recently began to assume a strong role in international, consensus-based, environmental management standards as mentioned below. Several efforts underway appear to offer the prospect of advancing corporate environmental performance, well ahead of any regulatory requirements. The efforts dovetail to an increasing extent with domestic ''beyond compliance'' proposals now being developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of regulatory reform and by Congress as it debates a series of risk-management and regulatory-reform proposals. Examples of standards (or codes) of environmental management practice include the Chemical Manufacturers



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 41
--> Appendix B Descriptions of Programs to Promote Industry-Initiated Efforts The following efforts are included: environmental management standards, environmental product certification, industrial consortia, partnerships between industry and other organizations, and nonregulatory federal programs. Information was provided by organizations in response to requests from the committee. Environmental Management Standards Environmental management has become increasingly influenced by nonregulatory international standards, and the Europeans have taken an important leadership role in facilitating the process. The United States, with its past reliance on traditional approaches to environmental regulation, only recently began to assume a strong role in international, consensus-based, environmental management standards as mentioned below. Several efforts underway appear to offer the prospect of advancing corporate environmental performance, well ahead of any regulatory requirements. The efforts dovetail to an increasing extent with domestic ''beyond compliance'' proposals now being developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of regulatory reform and by Congress as it debates a series of risk-management and regulatory-reform proposals. Examples of standards (or codes) of environmental management practice include the Chemical Manufacturers

OCR for page 41
--> Association's Responsible Care program, the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES) principles, the International Chamber of Commerce's Business Charter for Sustainable Development, and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Nash and Ehrenfeld (1996) report that such standards differ from government regulations in that they attempt to foster long-term changes in the ways companies think about the environment and how they integrate environmental aims with other business objectives. In contrast, the main purpose of government regulation has been to protect humans and the environment. The ISO 14000 series of environmental management documents is perhaps the most promising of the current international efforts now under the auspices of the ISO, an international body that has developed international consensus standards for business in a wide variety of fields since 1951. More than 400 U.S. industries have participated in the development of ISO 14000. And like other ISO standards, ISO 14000 applies across a range of organizations and geographic locations, a feature that helps ensure common attributes throughout corporate management structures. The ISO 14000 standards focus on tools for environmental management and planning, not performance or setting of environmental release levels. They are intended to help companies manage their organizations better within their own limitations, demonstrate their commitment to pollution prevention, and ensure that laws, regulations, and other goals are met. To become registered as an ISO 14000 entity, an organization needs to demonstrate to an independent, external registrar that It has implemented all the elements of the Environmental Management Standards developed under the auspices of ISO It has an effective system for maintaining its compliance to applicable laws and regulations

OCR for page 41
--> Its management practices promote continual improvement of its systems for environmental protection Advocates of international environmental-management standards expect enormous benefits. Such standards, they say, have the potential to change the culture of companies worldwide on environmental protection and commitment; harmonize environmental management frameworks, labels, and methods worldwide; move companies beyond compliance; and promote voluntary improvements. However, like most environmental-management standards, ISO 14000 stops short of requirements for reporting or performance. Companies may choose to become certified under an environmental-management standard for a number of reasons. They may become certified as a result of outside influences such as the need to retain customers and market shares or the desire to cultivate a positive public image. Alternatively, companies may become interested in standards because of internal influences, such as a desire to operate in a manner that is protective of the environment or the desire for a well-managed, efficiently run company. Finally, companies might be interested in certification out of perceived long-term interest. Investment in proper environmental-management techniques today might save future regulatory compliance costs or clean-up costs, make them less vulnerable to changing regulations, or ensure competitiveness. Environmental Product Certification (Labelling) Environmental product-certification programs usually are performed by independent organizations and adopted voluntarily by

OCR for page 41
--> manufacturers. The U.S. government does not support or endorse any labelling programs by independent organizations, although some foreign countries provide significant support to and endorsement of seal-of-approval type programs. Types of Labelling Programs There are a number of different types of labelling programs, including seals of approval, single-attribute certification programs, and report cards. Seals of approval are generally intended to identify products or services as meeting certain criteria and minimum standards for environmental effects. These types of programs award the use of a logo to products meeting criteria for a particular product category. Single-attribute certification programs usually indicate that an independent organization has validated a particular claim made by the manufacturer. Typically, the claim is validated by means of a review of information supplied by the manufacturer plus analysis of other relevant independent data. Finally, report cards offer consumers neutral information about a product or a company's environmental performance in multiple categories. In this type of labelling program, various environmental attributes are categorized, quantified, and listed on the product label. Criteria for Evaluating Labelling Programs Labelling programs can be evaluated according to the level of consumer awareness and acceptance that they generate. Surveys documenting percentages of customers who understand labelling programs and consider labels in their purchasing decisions can be

OCR for page 41
--> used for these evaluations. In addition, labelling programs can be evaluated by examining consumer behavior. Changes in the market share of a labelled product might indicate whether the labelling program has had an effect. Manufacturer use of labelling can be evaluated; for example, the percentage of manufacturers in a product category that participate in labelling might be an indication of the effects of a program. Another factor in evaluating the effectiveness of a labelling program is the environmental benefit generated. That type of effect is difficult to quantify, however. Barriers to Adoption/Implementation Barriers to the adoption of labelling programs include expense of data development, lack of consensus on validity of the data, and lack of acceptance by small manufacturers. Other barriers that might deter labeling are low consumer understanding of a label's significance and lack of resources to educate consumers, lack of a uniform approach to environmental labelling, reluctance of manufacturers to disclose proprietary information needed for certification, and difficulty in demonstrating economic or environmental benefits. Industrial Consortia Companies are collaborating in several ways to share environmental management experiences and to develop proactive ways of addressing environmental problems. They have formed consortia that deal with environmental issues, directly and indirectly. These consortia are often based on underlying common interests such as

OCR for page 41
--> a similar type of manufacturing, specific pollutant, or a particular environmental strategy. This section discusses two industry consortia: the Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI) and Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology (SEMATECH). These two consortia are known for their substantial membership and reported achievement. Each represents a different type of consortium. SEMATECH represents a domestic consortium organized around a particular industry, the semiconductor industry. GEMI represents a consortium with broader membership in industry sectors and international participation. Assessments by industry representatives regarding the benefits of membership in consortia such as GEMI and SEMATECH have common themes. They say it is impossible to evaluate effectiveness of these programs in terms of pollution prevention or energy efficiency. However, it is possible to speculate that the programs had an effect of stimulating environmental initiatives through increased member awareness of improved environmental technologies and management strategies. The surveyed companies stated common reasons for joining GEMI, including (1) to share environmental-management experience with other companies; (2) to develop environmental-management information and to influence the use of environmental-management tools through participation; (3) to access a broad range of companies from different industry sectors; (4) to obtain greater proficiency in mid- and high-level environmental management; (5) to develop measurement tools for environmental performance; (6) to examine models for assessment of economic benefits associated with environmental management and performance; (7) to anticipate future environmental requirements and developing programs to respond to them positively; and (8) to produce environmental reports that are designed to attract investors.

OCR for page 41
--> Members of SEMATECH reported they had joined to ensure and improve the competitiveness of their own manufacturing processes as well as those of US industry. In addition, however, members listed environmental benefits derived from SEMATECH: (1) networking, working as a team, leveraging on environmental issues; (2) being proactive instead of reactive on environmental goals; (3) information sharing on issues such as emissions control equipment or chemical-risk assessment tools; and (4) working toward new process design standards. Partnerships Between Industry and Other Organizations Many innovative partnerships are being developed between and among industry, environmental organizations, government agencies, and community organizations. Three partnerships that represent a variety of alliances being forged are discussed below. They include a partnership between a large corporation and a national environmental organization, a partnership between several automakers and state and federal government agencies, and a series of agreements between facilities and communities. EDF/McDonald's Waste Reduction Task Force In 1991, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and McDonald's Corporation set up the Waste Reduction Task Force with the goal of developing a solid-waste management plan for McDonald's. The goals of the Waste Reduction Task Force were (1) develop a new waste-reduction policy for McDonald's; (2) create a new

OCR for page 41
--> waste-reduction action plan outlining 42 different actions; and (3) change management mechanisms to institutionalize waste reduction into McDonald's decision-making processes. Waste-reduction packaging specifications, for example, were added to existing specifications of cost, functionality, and availability. These new specifications were sent to more than 600 suppliers of McDonald's. The partnership measured environmental success by achieving consensus goals for the effort and by implementing an action plan. McDonald's reports that programs and actions resulting from the partnership include the McRecycle USA program, institutionalizing of environmental values throughout the system, education programs on rain forest conservation and solid waste, and tree planting and recycling efforts with local communities. Barriers to success for this project were primarily lack of infrastructure, such as source-separated composting facilities. Consensus on initiatives had to be developed within the company; that barrier was overcome through the efforts of task-force members from McDonald's, who served as internal advocates for the project. The project is exportable. One of the goals of the project is to serve as a model for other companies. Other companies, such as Burger King and Hardees, have undertaken similar initiatives. A final public report provides extensive details and offers a guide to actions taken. Automotive Pollution Prevention Project In September 1991, the American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA) (on behalf of Chrysler Corporation, Ford Motor Company, and General Motors Corporation) and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) (on behalf of the eight Great Lakes states and the U.S. EPA), agreed to a

OCR for page 41
--> pollution-prevention action plan to reduce the generation and release of persistent toxic substances in the Great Lakes basin. The agreement, known as the Automotive Pollution Prevention Project had the following goals: (1) identify Great Lakes persistent toxic (GLPT) substances and reduce their generation and release; (2) advance pollution prevention within the auto industry and its supplier base; (3) reduce releases of GLPT substances beyond regulatory requirements; and (4) address regulatory barriers that inhibit pollution-prevention activities. The results are claimed to represent benefits to the environment beyond any regulatory requirements. Releases of the listed GLPT substances by the auto companies were cut more than 20% in the first year of the project. When adjusted for production volumes, releases of auto project toxics reportedly were lowered by about 29%. The reductions were accomplished through the use of controls and treatment processes and pollution-prevention actions. The project is considered by some to be an example of how a flexible and cooperative environmental initiative by government and industry can achieve and reconcile mutual environmental and economic objectives. Good Neighbor Project for Sustainable Industries "Good neighbor" agreements have become increasingly used as a means of forming partnerships between industrial facilities and local communities. The Good Neighbor Project for Sustainable Industries provides legal, technical, and strategic assistance to secure rights and resources for effective participation by community groups. The project developed eight principles of sustainable industry partnerships:

OCR for page 41
--> Bring all the players to the sustainable industry negotiating table. Strengthen the sustainability of existing industrial operations. Take stock of unique local or regional characteristics to create and maintain a sustainable attraction for industries. Target environmentally sound industries that can tap growing global markets. Cultivate local sustainable industry clusters. Reinforce long-term commitments of industries. Address transitional issues for labor, land, and capital. Establish meta-policies: action beyond local communities. Through Good Neighbor agreements, firms have made environmental and health funding commitments, such as increased donations to local causes, paid for community-controlled health clinics in contaminated areas, conducted plant inspections and additional air- and water-pollution monitoring, disclosed company environmental documents in a public file, and conducted job training and recruitment in neighborhoods. An example of a Good Neighbor agreement is provided by actions taken in Faribault, Minnesota. Crown Cork & Seal went through a community, labor, and management negotiation process that resulted in the establishment of pollution-prevention measures at the facility. The citizens groups provided a technical adviser to assist in evaluating opportunities for pollution prevention. The company voluntarily disclosed information to the community regarding pollution-prevention technologies and opportunities. Nonregulatory Federal Programs

OCR for page 41
--> Industry can participate in many federal and state programs devoted to environmental objectives, such as pollution prevention, waste reduction, or energy efficiency. This section addresses some of the most well-known programs of this type and those that have the largest scope. Department of Energy The Department of Energy (DOE) has undertaken several initiatives. Part of the mission of the DOE Office of Industrial Technology (OIT) is to increase energy-use efficiency, enhance fuel flexibility, develop alternative energy sources, minimize waste, improve environmental quality, increase productivity, and create jobs. Key elements to accomplish those goals include cooperative and interdependent actions, such as partnerships, alliances, and teams between industry and government. OIT also emphasizes the importance of industry and government sharing values and implementing joint voluntary actions. OIT seeks partnerships that are not restricted to a single regulatory agency or a single industry, but cross-cutting partnerships among industries and multiple federal agencies, such as the Department of Commerce, EPA, the Department of Defense, and the National Science Foundation. OIT's approach includes promoting the development of advanced technology. Among the participants in collaborative efforts under way with DOE are Energy supply—Advanced turbine system: the Electric Power Research Institute, the Gas Research Institute, and a consortium of gas turbine manufacturers and utilities.

OCR for page 41
--> Process efficiency—Advanced process control: Bethlehem Steel, Westinghouse, U.S. Steel, North American Refractories, the National Institute of Science and Technology, LTV Steel, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Data Measurement Corporation, Inland Steel, Oak Ridge National Laboratories, and National Steel. Waste reduction—Carpet waste recycling: Allied Signal, Aristech, Plenco, and Interchem. DOE also sponsors voluntary programs such as Climate Challenge: A program with electrical utilities to return greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2000. Climate Wise: With EPA, a program to provide performance-based recognition for emissions reduction measures. Coalbed Methane Outreach: A joint EPA and DOE program to look at cost-effective reduction in emissions. Cool Communities: Community partnerships on strategic tree planting to decrease energy demand. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Information and Training Programs: Information for facility managers, architects, engineers, designers, builders, code officials and the financial community with goals of energy efficiency and cost savings. Golden Carrot Programs: With EPA, financial incentives to commercialize advanced energy-efficient technologies (e.g., pooled rebates across utilities to guarantee rebates). Motor Challenge: To verify and disseminate information on cost-savings potential of efficient industrial motors. NICE3: Joint with EPA to diffuse existing technologies to address pollution prevention and energy efficiency when new equipment is installed.

OCR for page 41
--> EPA's 33/50 Program The 33/50 program is an EPA-sponsored pollution reduction initiative that derives its name from its overall goals of reducing environmental releases and off-site transfers of 17 high-priority toxic chemicals by 33% by 1992 and 50% by 1995. The bench-mark against which the initiative is measured is the 1988 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) baseline of 1.5 billion pounds of pollutants. More than 1,200 US manufacturers are participating in the program. To participate, each company needed only to write a letter to EPA containing numerical reduction commitments. Participating companies could choose to reduce releases for all or some of the 33/50 chemicals and could select which of their facilities, if they have more than one, would participate in the program. In addition, participants could choose which environmental media to focus on (air, land, or water), although about 70% of the releases of 33/50 chemicals are into the air. Participation in the program did not change a firm's responsibilities for complying with environmental laws. EPA states that it does not give preferential treatment, relaxed regulatory oversight, or relaxed enforcement of EPA regulations to program participants. Commitments to achieve pollution reductions were voluntary and therefore not legally enforceable. EPA asked that participants attain these goals primarily by source reduction and recycling techniques. EPA reported that the program's goal of a 33% overall reduction in releases of the 33/50 chemicals by 1992 was surpassed by more than 100 million pounds. It is estimated that the 1995 goals also were achieved ahead of schedule.

OCR for page 41
--> Green Lights The U.S. EPA's Green Lights program was officially launched in 1991. The goal of the program is to prevent pollution by encouraging major U.S. institutions to use energy-efficient lighting. Lighting consumes about 25% of the electricity used nationwide, and much of that lighting is provided inefficiently. The Green Lights program offers an opportunity to increase the efficiency of lighting, prevent pollution from electricity generation, and reduce costs simultaneously. Lighting upgrades reduce electric bills and maintenance costs and increase lighting quality. Typically, investments in energy-efficient lighting are estimated to yield 20–30% rates of return per year. In the Green Lights program, institutions are asked to sign a memorandum of understanding with EPA. In that memorandum, the institution commits to install energy-efficient lighting in 90% of its space nationwide over 5 years when it is profitable and where lighting quality is maintained or improved. EPA, in turn, offers program participants a portfolio of technical support services to assist them in upgrading their buildings. A computerized decision support system developed by EPA provides Green Lights participants with a rapid way of surveying the lighting systems in their facilities, assessing their retrofit options, and selecting the best energy-efficient lighting upgrades. The decision support system software produces reports suitable for use by facility managers, financial staff, and senior management. EPA has established a national lighting product information program in conjunction with utilities and other organizations. This program provides brand name information so that purchasers will be able to choose appropriate products. In addition, it allows innovative products to be qualified rapidly, removing a significant barrier for new technologies.

OCR for page 41
--> EPA also helps Green Lights partners identify financing resources for improvements. Green Lights partners receive a computerized directory of financing and incentive programs offered by electric utilities, lighting-management companies, banks, and financing companies. The database is updated and distributed on a regular basis. Energy Star Energy Star began in June 1992 as a program for manufacturers of computer monitors and printers. The program is a joint EPA and Department of Energy (DOE) initiative that encourages the use of efficient technologies to reduce energy use in commercial buildings. The first Energy Star awards recently were awarded to companies that made outstanding efforts in manufacturing energy-efficient computers, monitors, and printers. EPA announced results in a recent report indicating that more than 40% of personal computers and 85% of printers sold in the United States from July 1993 to June 1994 were meeting Energy Star requirements. A new category for fax machines was launched in July 1995. WasteWi$e WasteWi$e is a EPA program that focuses on ways that companies can save money through municipal solid-waste reductions. Avoiding waste generation reduces the burden on disposal facilities, conserves natural resources, and often reduces pollution. The program seeks to reduce the amount of material disposed in dumpsters; it does not include hazardous waste, industrial solid waste, or materials recycled in manufacturing processes.

OCR for page 41
--> To participate in WasteWi$e, companies commit to achieving reduction goals in three areas: (1) reducing waste generation, such as office paper, food scraps, packaging, corrugated cardboard and wood pallets; (2) collecting recyclables that might otherwise end up in a landfill; and (3) buying or manufacturing products with recycled content. EPA provides technical assistance via a hotline and electronic bulletin board, publications, and regular program updates. Successful waste-reduction efforts are highlighted in EPA documents, business magazines, environmental journals, and trade publications. Companies involved may use the WasteWi$e logo in their advertising to highlight participation in environmental initiatives. Climate-Wi$e Climate-Wi$e is sponsored by EPA to stimulate greenhouse-gas reductions across all sectors of the economy. Under the President's Climate Change Action Plan, Climate-Wi$e participants are challenged to find creative ways to limit, reduce, or mitigate greenhouse gases. Strategies include process changes, raw-material substitutions, carbon sequestration, and other emission-reduction actions. Design for the Environment EPA's Design for the Environment (DfE) program is intended to promote pollution prevention, energy efficiency, and resource conservation through partnerships with specific industry sectors and professional and academic groups. DfE encourages businesses

OCR for page 41
--> to incorporate environmental considerations early into the design of products, processes, and technical-management systems. DfF's industry cooperative projects include dry-cleaning, printing, and computer-workstation companies. ''Cleaner technology substitutes assessments'' (CTSAs) are designed to help companies sort cost and performance profiles of new ways to do business. Regulatory Federal Programs Several federal programs have been developed with the intent to provide more flexible approaches so that industry might comply with existing regulations in a more cost-effective way. Two such programs are discussed in this section. Common Sense Initiative Begun in 1993, EPA's Common Sense Initiative is intended to be a holistic version of environmental policy as compared with the traditional pollutant-by-pollutant approach for specific environmental media. Approximately 40 projects are under way in six industry sectors: automobile manufacturing, computers and electronics, iron and steel, metal finishing, petroleum refining, and printing. Projects are conducted by groups made up of representatives from industry; environmental organizations; environmental justice and community organizations; labor; and federal, state, and local governments. The teams are attempting to develop consensus-based alternatives to traditional approaches to environmental protection. The projects include efforts to reduce duplicative reporting requirements, streamline the permits process, improve community

OCR for page 41
--> involvement in environmental decision-making, find incentives for and eliminate barriers to pollution prevention. Project XL Project XL (excellence and leadership) was begun in 1995 through a presidential initiative to develop innovative strategies intended to achieve more effective and less expensive results than traditional regulatory approaches. EPA is conducting the experimental program to seek projects that result in innovative strategies that can involve processes, technologies, or management practices. Each project involves the granting of regulatory flexibility by EPA in exchange for an enforceable commitment by a regulated entity to achieve superior environmental benefits than would have been attained through full compliance with regulations. EPA is in the process of developing guidelines to resolve among other issues, what is meant by "superior environmental performance." A company wanting to participate in the project must first submit a proposal to EPA that contains the idea for how a facility will be able to reduce its regulatory burden while also reducing its pollution below regulatory or permit levels. After EPA approves the plan, the company begins negotiations with all affected stakeholders, including EPA, state and local environmental agencies, and community organizations. EPA reports that about 14 facilities are in the process of negotiating a final agreement between EPA and the company or community (Chemical and Engineering News 1996).