Fort Smith, Arkansas / November 19 - 21, 1996

Report by







Project Goals and Schedule
Status Report from UTEP
Regional Information Center Tools

Strategic Business Plan
Information Center Tools

Arkansas Mentor-Protege Program
Productivity Progress in the Poultry Industry
Team Building in Industry for P2
Manufacturing Extension Partnership
Innovations to Increase Competitiveness (I2C)
ISO 14000
Alliance Software for Environmental Applications


Arkansas Awards Presentations
Oklahoma Awards Nominations and Voting

New Mexico





The Roundtable meeting in Fort Smith was both a productive and pleasurable event. First, we were able to experience the beauty of the Arkansas countryside on our trek from the Little Rock Airport to Fort Smith. The changing leaf colors and crisp autumn weather were a nice bonus for many of us in the Southwest who don't have the full autumn seasonal experience in our home state. Fort Smith lent a good backdrop for the proceedings.

The meeting was productive in many respects. A lot of progress was made on the Clearinghouse project. First, we received an update on the project from Ken Zarker and UTEP representatives. Then, there were excellent benchmark reports from regional clearinghouse projects in the Northeast that are a couple of years ahead of us on establishing a regional listserver. These reports gave a good sense of what is possible.

Considerable progress was made in breakout sessions on the five-year strategic planning process and regional information center tools. The strategic planning group came up with specific strategies and action steps to get the project rolling over the next few months. Consensus was reached on a detailed implementation process and specific next steps. The tools group came up with a comprehensive list of Internet resources that they would like to access at the new website. This list will serve as a starting place to design an Internet site that will contain a one-stop, region-specific place for relevant information to P2 coordinators and other technical assistance providers.

Informative case studies and program presentations were given by a well-rounded mix of Arkansas and Oklahoma technical assistance providers and industry representatives. Whirlpool Corporation took good care of us by hosting an informative site visit and presentations, furnishing a comfortable meeting room and providing a good lunch. Whirlpool's waste reduction success since 1988 proved inspirational to the Roundtable--showing what can be done with a little hard work and top management support.

The highlight of the meeting was the well planned and attended Pollution Prevention Excellence Awards Reception hosted by the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce. Al Drinkwater did an outstanding job of coordinating the event, which was first class in terms of celebrating the accomplishments of large and small industry and municipalities in Arkansas. Media coverage and participation by state politicians also made the recognition program a huge success.

Commendations to Arkansas--and especially Al Drinkwater--for hosting this productive and pleasurable Region 6 Pollution Prevention Roundtable. We look forward to the Spring Roundtable in Oklahoma. Until then, let's keep those E-mail messages flying!


Project Goals and Schedule--Ken Zarker, TNRCC

The Clearinghouse Project seeks to help pollution prevention (P2) coordinators do their jobs easier by providing an electronic communications link within the region and with other programs nationwide. Region 6, responding to the need to improve information sharing among P2 coordinators, provided $50,000 to establish the Clearinghouse. Objectives are:

To develop uniform standards for case study formats.
To develop a five year business plan for the Clearinghouse.
To develop a P2 website.

A needs assessment survey was sent to P2 coordinators in government agencies and academic organizations in Region 6. Preliminary results indicated a medium to high interest in using the Internet. Currently, E-mail is the primary use and there are still agencies with no electronic access. Respondents were generally not willing or able to commit organizational resources to fund the network and indicated a preference for using federal funding for ongoing support of the project.

The survey was distributed to Roundtable participants. A show of hands indicated that the majority of the Roundtable have Internet access and actively use E-mail (i.e., check their mailboxes daily).

Status Report from UTEP

Conrad Saltero and Bob Gray, Texas Manufacturing Assistance Program, University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP)

Mr. Saltero demonstrated three basic design prototypes with the tentative title, Resource and Information for Pollution Prevention in the Southwest (RIPPS). He is currently developing the technology to administer the needs assessment survey on-line with the capability to provide automatically updated survey results.

According to Bob Gray, the project coordinator, a critical first step is setting standards by reviewing other websites and coordinating with other P2 sources and technology developers. The Northeast Waste Management Officials Association (NEWMOA) is the starting point for developing standards. The project's current goal is gaining a regional inventory of available resources for technical assistance providers. A second goal is to be consistent with the way information is presented by other resources. The following information technologies will be developed:

Website with E-mail listserver
Document P2 organizational infrastructure
Access to case study information
Inventory of available P2 information
On-line vendor database
On-line experts database
Critical issues include:

Making sure the information is of high quality.
Providing a complete inventory of available services and information.
Building in evaluation and impact analyses.
Hosting an Intranet site for information exchange and communication (i.e., an internal communication vehicle for Roundtable use).
Incorporating standards for data and tools integration.

Mr. Gray chairs a workgroup to develop technical standards for the National Roundtable. Project activities are:

Review of P2 related web sites
Review of P2 database structure and contents
Review of list serve design and function
Survey of needs
Organizational infrastructure development
Standards development

Feedback is solicited about what kind of product will best serve the Roundtable. The first feedback item came from Ken Zarker, who recommended a P2 Fun button. For example, a P2 problem could be posed with visitors to the site posting potential solutions.

Regional Information Center Tools
Great Lakes Pollution Prevention Roundtable (GLPPR)
-- Lisa Morrison

The Great Lakes Pollution Prevention Roundtable's new website is at http://www.hazard.uiuc.edu/wmrc/greatl. At this site, there are two main databases. TechInfo (www.hazard.uiuc.edu/wmrc/techinfo.html) is a one-stop source for P2 publications from EPA Regions 3, 4 and 5. VendInfo (www.hazard.uiuc.edu/wmrc/vendinfo.html) catalogs P2 equipment manufacturers and service providers by type of equipment and industrial process.

Other services include access to these listservers: P2Tech, P2Reg, P2Tech Archives and listservers managed by the National Pollution Prevention Roundtable (NPPR). Other resources found at the site are: the quarterly Link Newsletter, a calendar of events, information about the steering committee, workgroup information and links to other relevant P2 sites.

Ms. Morrison is list owner for three listservers which she checks three times daily. This takes about an hour-and-a-half total. She gave definitions of relevant terms and shared information about the Website development and management process.

A listserver is actually a piece of software that allows e-mail messages to be sent by subscribers to a single, central address. The people involved in managing a listserver are: a list owner who manages the content at the site through daily monitoring and a list administrator who maintains the software and hardware. These may be the same person or two.

There are several options for organizing the listserver:

Mail or Digest Option: In the mail option, messages are distributed as they are received by the listserver software. Messages are bundled and sent out as a single message in the digest option. For the digest option, bundling can be moderated (messages screened by list owner or moderator) or unmoderated (posted automatically by the software).

Open or closed list: In an open list, anyone can subscribe. The closed list, where the listowner subscribes people, is recommended.

Public or private: Either the list can be seen by anyone or only subscribers.

Archives: Archives are a permanent record of all e-mail addressed to the mailing list. With the right software, the archives can be organized by strings and searched.

A listserver can be set up by a unit with the software already in place. In this case, the list owner and administrator are not the same person (e.g., a university network). On the other hand, a listserver can be set up by the people administering the list using one of several software packages:

ListServe is a BITNET-based system. It is large and complicated.

List Processor is a Unix-based system. According to Ms. Morrison, it is also large and complicated.

Majordomo is a Unix-based system that is available in the public domain (available electronically from Great Circle Association). This relatively simple package is used by GLRPPR.

According to Lisa
Morrison, "Fifty
percent of the
information probably will
not be useful to you.
Get used to deleting it."

Gerald Nehman commented, "The Internet has the potential to make my job more successful, but in order to do this, the website needs to be very directed, making it a simple task to find information."

For Lisa Regenstein of NEWMOA, "The key is to make listservers very focused on a topic. The more focused the listserver, the more narrow the audience it will be appeal to. This helps keep the volume of messages more manageable.

To Frank Anderson's question about the feasibility of surveying industries over E-mail, Ms. Morrison states, "Industries are too busy--they don't yet see the value. Listservers are most important to technical assistance providers now."

Northeast Waste Management Officials Association (NEWMOA) --Lisa Regenstein

NEWMOA was initiated in 1989 with a three-year EPA grant. The organization exists to conduct regional P2 projects for six New England states, New York and New Jersey. Their mission is to enhance the ability of the NEWMOA member states to implement effective P2 programs. Activities include training, clearinghouse, regional roundtable meetings, development of reports and coordination of regional policies and programs. Before 1994, NEWMOA funded one person with an annual budget of $100,000. Now, their annual budget is about $500,000, which is provided by the different states and federal grants. NEWMOA's non-profit status gives them the ability to access different funding sources and act quickly to respond to members' needs.

The EPA PPIS funding program includes one million dollars to develop regional information centers--possibly $100,000 per region. However, the grants require a steep 50 percent match and information must be oriented to P2 not compliance
NEWMOA holds quarterly meetings for the Northeast Pollution Prevention Roundtable (NEPPR). These meetings are a forum for discussing program issues and coordinating regional activities. Recent activities focused on evaluation of P2 programs and determining how P2 programs can benefit from EPA performance partnership grants. They're also working on developing a unified stance on regulatory policies. measurement of progress.

NEPPR has several task groups. The Information Committee focuses on more effectively disseminating information. Short-term projects are also undertaken by sector-specific committees that disband once work is completed. A Training Committee focuses on what types of training are needed as a region.

NEWMOA has developed numerous training courses: technical workshops for state regulatory and nonregulatory staffs; introductory P2 training for permitters and inspectors; financial analysis dealing with total cost assessment; team-building and group problem solving to enhance staff capabilities to become change agents. They have also developed how-to guides for state employees to access information on the Internet. Technical transfer meetings to disseminate technical information are usually attended by around 300 people.

NEWMOA received a P2 Clearinghouse grant in 1994 to develop a model regional program with a five year strategic plan. This project has proved very valuable--allowing them to focus efforts on what they need to do and where to go for funding. The strategic plan allowed them to increase capacity for the project and tap into a wide variety of funding sources. Local databases are merged into regional then national databases. This allows industry-specific information to be collected and catalogued. Because different states and regions tend to contain specialized industrial sectors, the databases become expert systems about these specific sectors. Information is synthesized by sector. Metal finishing in the Northeast and printing from the Great Lakes are examples of sector data either currently or soon to be available. In addition to state P2 coordinators, NEWMOA's Clearinghouse includes vendors, consultants, businesses and local governments.

NEWMOA has found that they work more effectively on a regional basis with multi-media projects. A current regional multi-media project is entitled Hazardous Air Pollution Prevention (HAP2). The project contains four studies on how to conform to standards in different sectors. Two of the sectors being studied are wood finishing and pulp and paper. Another project involves mercury reduction research.

Future challenges include seeking an integration of P2 in state regulatory programs and better coordination between regulatory and non-regulatory programs. Thinking on a regional level involves consideration of difficult issues, but it becomes easier over time as capacity is built. It is important to build institutional knowledge as an ongoing resource to provide service to the region.

Evaluation Feedback
Good presentations.
Good & informative info. on other clearinghouse activities. Technical difficulties caused delays.
General concepts were well presented. But, specific examples of P2 info. dissemination thru website would be instructive. Also, how will this directly benefit private companies?
Great facilitation from Lisa R. & the input from these other regional reps. was invaluable. The Region 6 Clearinghouse should prove to be a very exciting and valuable resource for Reg. 6 programs.
Introductions were a good idea.
Good review--too bad we couldn't have a computer link set up to show the web pages real time. It might be better to start the roundtable with more inspirational stuff and save the "working group" items for later, when we've had a chance to get in the groove.
Good explanations of "list server."


Strategic Business Plan

Discussion focused on the purpose of the planning process, implementation and next steps. First, the question was posed to the group, "What is the purpose of this planning process?" The following responses were recorded:

1. Identify areas of interest so that we are in a position to take advantage of upcoming opportunities. Develop a road map. This will help us focus on grant RFPs when they come up and recognize which opportunities we should take advantage of.

2. Develop other sources of funding. PPIS money may run out.

3. Secure state buy-in to the regional planning process.

4. Identify areas of mutual interest.

5. Create a highly interactive planning process.

6. Projects need to be highly environmental results-oriented.

7. Each strategic issue has to define the evaluation process that will be employed.

8. Seek to develop international links in Latin America.

9. Make decisions on organizational structure (e.g., media, sectors, agency).

10. Promote state P2 strategic planning and provide guidance to the states on what to include in their plans.

11. Develop partnerships with groups that are well funded and have areas of expertise that provide leverage opportunities.

12. Groups should be involved outside of P2 to be participants in the planning process. These groups include:


State government (governor's office, commissioners, regulators, media programs and enforcement)

Trade associations (e.g., chemical, printers, poultry)


Local government

Small Business Development Centers
Agricultural Extension agencies

Economic development departments

Mexican counterparts

Consultants and vendors

Federal installations

Health officials


Chambers of Commerce

Next, discussion centered on defining the implementation process and detailing next steps. The group recommended the following process and action steps:


1. Draft a one-page introduction of what we want to do and ask from persons involved in the process.

2. Develop one-on-one contact with individuals who may be included.

3. Seek approval from key commissioners who will sponsor the process.

4. Look at the inventory of P2 projects in the region and compile a list of already articulated goals (e.g., Oklahoma is working on a strategic plan).

5. Develop a list of people who we think can be involved in the planning project.

6. Some ideas for logistics:

One approach to the "process" is to hold an intensive meeting (several days) where we work together through a brainstorming exercise to develop a product ("boot camp" approach).

Could adjourn the above meeting and have someone assigned to develop the plan.

Follow-up meeting would be to develop the work plan and assign responsibilities (Note: Our next roundtable will follow the National Roundtable in Denver on April 2-4).

Hold a meeting of technical assistance providers at the same time as the planning meeting, allowing interaction with the planners.

Next Steps:

1. Identify key people in each state (by end of this Roundtable).

2. Key persons need to develop a list of persons who will be invited to the planning meeting by December 15th.

3. Hold a conference call on December 17th to:

Okay one-page invitation.

Discuss strategies for invitations.

Select the facilitator.

Discuss the participant package.

4. Send out invitations in early January.

5. Schedule meeting in early March.

6. Develop a participant package for advance distribution by late January.

7. Plan presentation for the National Roundtable.

8. Select facilitator.

Other Questions to Address:

Where do we want to be with no constraints or financial limit in five years?

What are the issues that we need to address to meet these goals?

What specific projects can we develop that will give us opportunities to work on?

Follow-up Breakout

On Thursday, while the nominations committee met to consider nominations for the upcoming Oklahoma P2 Excellence Awards, a second breakout was held to discuss the beginning committee work (detailed above). Clarification was made about some of the action steps. This second group reached consensus that the objective of the first meeting (in early March) was to develop guidance for state strategic plan development. Key Roundtable representatives from each state should be designated prior to the end of this Roundtable. Prior to the December 17th conference call, each state should have a list of key stakeholders who should be invited to participate in the strategic plan development.

The group discussed the advantages of developing a five-year plan. They decided that the strategic plan at the regional level has the potential to be a strong document to use to:

Trigger a paradigm shift in environmental protection activities, sending a signal to agencies to put money and commitment into avoidance instead of focusing singularly on compliance "bean-counting."

Provide the mechanism to integrate all the different programs (e.g., solid waste, hazardous waste, water, air) into the P2 scheme.

Provide a strong document to support proposals for funds separate from traditional P2 funding within EPA, other federal agencies, states and other organizations. The plan can provide evidence of how a proposed project fits into the overall P2 scheme, enabling non-traditional funding requests such as going after solid waste money when the opportunity presents itself (e.g., when discretionary program funds are up for grabs, but response must be done within a very short time frame).

Identify all the stakeholders that are out there within each state in order to expand the influence of P2 and provoke participation into P2 initiatives by a wider audience.

Provide an alternative way to evaluate programs--give new criteria.

Information Center Tools

Group discussion focused on the question: "What kind of information tools are available and what are the needs specific to this group?"

One benefit of developing a regional listserver over using an existing site like P2Tech is that it provides the ability to discuss region-specific issues. However, success depends on people within the region making a commitment to exchange information and send responses to the listserver.

The listserver medium will be provided by UTEP, under a two-year contract. Currently, funding is being sought to make it an ongoing program. It is important to make the site representative of all relevant groups, not just P2 coordinators. Stakeholders include government regulatory agencies, technical assistance providers (e.g., TMAC), universities with technical assistance programs, small businesses and industries. Industry associations are an important link to the industrial sector.

The site has the potential to become an important resource for the industry sectors strongly represented within the region. Areas of focus include oil, gas and pipeline industries; agriculture; pulp and paper; electric power generation; electronics; food processing; and marine transport.

Archives can be an important source of information for the clearinghouse, providing a mechanism for return contact with visitors to the site and a way to determine areas of interest via a list of frequently-asked questions.

The group identified the following list of important information resources they would find useful:

Technical fact sheets.

Vendor database (Accuracy of information can be improved by development within all the regions, then incorporating the information within the national vendor database present at the Envirosense site).

New and emerging technologies, including R&D projects and contact persons.

Good descriptions of SIC codes and IPC codes (industry process codes).

Funding opportunities (see Seattle PPRC site).

Frequently-asked questions (from archive).

Trade Association/Journals.

Experts Database containing listings of technical experts within the region.

Bibliographic information.

Four considerations for the region were identified:

Focus on the region. Make information primarily region-specific.

Be consistent with indexing. This involves using the same or most widely-used technical terms whenever possible.

Utilize search engines. Access to national information through a good search engine is desirable. However, it would be helpful to be able to limit a search to the region.

Consider technology constraints. Users with older computers (386s and 486s) may have difficulty loading lengthy documents and graphics. A text only button would allow users to opt out of downloading graphics. It is important to make graphics optimal, since they are an important information tool. A zip function may be useful to consider.

Evaluation Feedback
Good work groups; business plan facilitation was great!
Case study action team did identify important issues.
Time well spent: a clearer picture of purpose and structure of regional website.
With the help of some superb facilitation we were able to accomplish some really necessary planning. This process should enable the most efficient method to becoming functional.
It was hard to hear Lisa over the other group that met at the front of the room. Perhaps we need separate rooms for breakout sessions? I needed info. on case study preparation. I was disappointed that no breakout session was held on case studies.
Very good discussion--we need to keep people like Lisa Morrison in the loop on this project!
We could have used more time for this and it should have been in separate rooms. Voices from the other group was distracting.
Good discussion of what's available software-wise.


Arkansas Mentor-Protégé Program

Bob Graham, Arkansas Small Business Ombudsman and Randy Thurman, Arkansas Environmental Federation (AEF)

The mentor program began in March, 1996. It is considered a model for the successful teaming of government and private industry to protect the environment. The Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology (ADPCE) and AEF provide joint sponsorship. This foundation encourages voluntary compliance among small business. There are sixty AEF mentors that provide voluntary technical advice to smaller companies. ADPCE recruits protégé companies for the program. Mentors provide their services at no cost. These are usually larger manufacturing companies that recognize the impact compliance costs have on bottom line performance. It is to the mentor companies' advantage to help get smaller companies into compliance in order to level the playing field. These companies also gain a public image benefit. The program has first targeted the metal fabricating sector because trust exists between this sector and the sponsoring organizations. There are 249 companies within this industrial sector that have expressed an interest in the program. Networking within the program is done on a regional level. The Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation has provided $160,000 in financial support over three years to the program.

Bob Lawson is Project Coordinator for the Mentor-Protégé Partnership program. The current project objective is to achieve 90% compliance by the 249 protégé companies within the metal fabricating sector, potentially impacting 11,205 jobs. The desired outcome will be a greater level of environmental regulatory compliance by Arkansas small businesses resulting in a cleaner environment for us all.

Criteria for small businesses joining the program are:

Less than 100 employees.
Not subject to multiple enforcement actions.
No past criminal investigations.
Not currently being investigated by the enforcement agency.

The program will be expanded beyond metal fabricators to include lumber and wood products (including furniture and fixtures); food and kindred products; stone, clay and glass products; and printing and publishing (industrial machinery and equipment industries are also included with metal fabricators).

One advantage of the program is that it provides a good opportunity to exchange information that the state agency cannot. For example, mentor companies can recommend brand name equipment or specific vendors that can lead to an improved manufacturing process and quicker solutions to problems.

Evaluation Feedback
Great program--good presentation. Needed a better tie to P2.
A good presentation--however, focus on P2 was not evident--rather focus was on reg. compliance.
This is best program presented to roundtable in three years. Provided good ideas for other voluntary programs.
Great idea! It's good to see it actually getting off the ground.
Concept is innovative and it makes good sense--perhaps we could encourage all member states to consider this idea.
It would have been good to have more specific examples of assistance to protégés.
Good overview of program by Jody; excellent presentation by Randy.

"Less feed goes out the
back door."

P2 strategies in feed mills include grain dust control, spill prevention procedures, good housekeeping practices, liquid ingredient tanks, returnable tote tanks (500 pound capacity) and management of runoff. Dead bird disposal options include freezers, composters or incinerators. Tyson has about 16 thousand pounds of dead birds per year. Freezers maintain carcasses until transport to rendering plants. Composters turn dead birds into nutrient-rich ingredient. Incinerators are preferred over land disposal.

Water quality technicians devise litter management plans for farmers and producers. These plans are making a huge impact on managing litter a a nutrient resource: one technician's plan can impact 17,387 acres with the waste from 7.6 million birds. Litter is also marketed as organic fertilizers and cattle feeds.

The poultry industry has made great strides in p2 through saved water and reduced waste at processing plants; increased efficiency in live production, improved litter management, development of alternative markets for byproducts, and improved dead bird disposal.

Evaluation Feedback
Great presentation.
Enlightening presentation.
More than I ever wanted to know about chickens!
Good presentation.
Speaker very articulated--shows the possibilities for P2 implementation in all sorts of industries. The use of local examples should be kept on our agendas.

Team Building in Industry for P2

Garnett Wise, Riverside Furniture Company

Riverside Furniture Company has 1500 employees who manufacture household furniture from low-end to high-quality oak pieces. Development of a quality improvement team at Riverside was initially based on Phillip Crosby and Associates' method: Quality Improvement Process (QIP). QIP defines quality as "conformance to the customers' requirements." Quality improvement teams are at each of the ten facilities. The teams are responsible for quality measurement, recognition and awareness and problem solving. Natural growth led to corporate-wide teams. Smaller teams were formed to address short-term projects. These are dissolved when their task is completed. Riverside's corporate P2 efforts have largely come from the Finish Improvement Team (FIT). FIT was initially established to develop and implement finish quality standards through standard methods and application techniques and training. FIT has since been challenged with addressing VOC reduction, HAP reductions and improving transfer efficiencies--all while maintaining quality. They don't call it pollution prevention, but the result of the process improvements is P2.

Mr. Wise summarized these reasons for Riverside's team success at P2:

It was a natural progression for the FIT to address air emission reductions since virtually all the emissions are from surface coating operations.

Many P2 projects have provided direct benefits to team members.

FIT is supported by upper management. FIT has proven itself by implementing material/cost savings, quality improvements and defect reduction.

The team is largely autonomous now, operating separate from the quality improvement process. One area of important achievement was in stain operations. The team succeeded in changing conventional-type stain spray guns to high volume/low pressure (HVLP) models. There were about 120 guns. The operators actually liked the new guns better once they learned how to use them. A corresponding spray gun needle and tip replacement program (these cost 75 to 100 dollars per set) yielded big cost savings by flow testing the equipment before replacement. Increased solid content of clearcoats led to decreased solvent content and a better coat. Extensive, ongoing testing of reformulated coating materials with reduced HAP content involves substituting solvents that are not on the HAP list. Emissions are less toxic.

Team Do's:

Teams should only be formed for a specific reason and then disbanded when task completed.

Teams must have specific priorities. Every team should consider drafting a mission statement. Any objective should at least break even, in terms of costs and benefits to the organization--can't just have a goal of "preventing pollution" needs to be specific and consider costs and benefits of the task.

Define roles and responsibilities of team members.

Assign specific tasks to individuals (not just to the group).

Agree on a specific timetable for completion of tasks. If it's important enough to assign a team, then it's important enough to set dates for completion.

Avoid competing priorities. For example, a person might perceive that his job is on the line.

Avoid conflicts with team members' regular job duties. If somebody is already overloaded, they're judged on their job performance not team performance, so the committee will suffer.

"Nothing breeds success like success." Strive for small victories, no matter how small. Set small sub-goals that are attainable.

Designate a qualified team leader--one who can control meetings and disruptive individuals; keep the committee on task.

Keep minutes of meetings; write down agreements, goals, tasks, timetables.

Hold team members accountable for completing their assigned tasks.

The team leader must strive to involve all team members in discussions. There is a place on the team for everybody--from the floor sweeper on up--but they need to be brought in by the team leader.

Team Don'ts:

Don't hold meetings without an agenda; it could be more harmful than not meeting at all.

Don't set unattainable goals.

Don't choose team members that can't influence meeting the team's objectives.

Mr. Wise's Recommended Reading List:

The One Minute Manager Builds High Performing Teams by Kenneth Blanchard, Donald Carew, Eunice Parisi-Carew from William & Morrow Co. Inc.

How to Run Successful Meetings in Half the Time
by Milo Frank from Simon & Shuster.
Q: "How do you celebrate your victories?"

A: "We publish success stories in the company newsletter, telling who was involved. Riverside has won two P2 awards--we make sure they make it in the newspaper and newsletter."

Q: "Have the solutions come from inside or outside?"

A: "The big stuff has come from outside. Suppliers have been involved to come up with chemical reformulations on coatings and also with needles and tips and spray gun changes."

Q: "Do you share cost savings with the team?"

A: "No. Not too many companies do."

Q: "How is attendance at meetings?"

A: "It goes in spurts. Our team leader is everybody's boss or their bosses' boss. We only meet every six weeks because all the major goals have been accomplished. We make phone calls to remind people. Our committees are active, which helps."


Evaluation Feedback
Good presentation. Needed better connection to P2.
This type of presentation should be a part of every roundtable. Industry perspective is very important.
Content good and relevant.
Good presentation--again, keep local company presentations on the agendas.
Good step-by-step presentation!

Manufacturing Extension Partnership

Kelly Lyon, Marketing Manager and Representative

Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) is a national system of community and state-based nonprofit organizations and related services that provide small manufacturers access to public and private resources information, and expertise, to increase their use of manufacturing practices, technologies. Funding is administered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Every state has at least one MEP Center. There are 60 MEPs nationwide and in Puerto Rico that have been selected and funded upon a competitive, merit-based process. Now that all 50 states have MEPs, NIST will focus on increasing support and assistance to the centers. MEP in Arkansas is called the Arkansas Manufacturing Extension Network ("the Network"). It was started in 1983.

Network partners include the Arkansas Industrial Development Commission (AIDC), Arkansas Science & Technology Authority (ASTA), universities, community colleges and other technical assistance providers. One of the partners, Westark Community College brings in $500,000 in training revenue annually. They are leaders in ISO-9000 training in the state. The Network is managed by the ASTA. ASTA is the fiduciary and hosts the Network's central offices. The Network was designed by utilizing information gained from a FY 92 survey of Arkansas manufacturers, FY93 focus groups in geographic industry concentrations and AIDC's FY94 ISO-9000 needs survey, actual requests for technical assistance and 1993 and 1995 surveys of wood manufacturers. Network resources include the 14 partner organizations, 59 MEP centers, NIST MEP, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA Mid-Continent Technology Transfer Center, the Internet, private consultants, state and federal agencies and labs and the National Center for Technology Transfer.

Network services are provided by seven experienced engineers who conduct free initial on-site consultations for manufacturers. After initial consultation, a service agreement may be negotiated for additional services. After the service agreement, services are provided at a moderate cost. Examples of services are process improvements, structural design, plant layout, quality, packaging, P2, environmental compliance, market development, business systems and management, human resources and electronic data interchange. Field engineers are strategically located in different geographic sectors of the state in order to best meet regional needs. The Network's central toll free number is 1-800-400-6934.

According to Dianne Wilkins, Oklahoma's MEP uses the broker-agent model. There are no field engineers in Oklahoma--MEPs serve as a conduit between manufacturers and service providers. There are twenty-five broker agents across the state; many are located at vocational technical training centers. There are specialists for aerospace, plastics, printed circuit boards and electronics. These are part of the Department of Commerce. NIST offered grants for integration of P2 into the MEPs. Oklahoma MEP received $50,000. ODEQ trains broker agents to do audits. P2 was not part of their mission goals when the alliance was formed. P2 is integrated into process improvement training to get the brokers to include P2. One-hundred fifty audits need to be done in two years. Brokers are encouraged to focus on process improvement, leaving compliance assistance to the ODEQ customer service department. The alliance is in the fourth of six years and are not yet self-sufficient. Dianne believes the broker agent role needs to be redefined in order for them to become self-sufficient.

Evaluation Feedback
Good presentation. Needed better connection to P2.
This is definitely an area for cooperation and collaboration.
I had not heard of this before. With so many groups involved with P2, I get concerned about excessive overlap and coordination of efforts.
Network partners good concept.

Innovations to Increase Competitiveness

Dr. Charles Urdy, Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) and Graduate Students from UT-Austin's LBJ School of Public Affairs

LCRA has the goal of transferring energy-saving technology to their customers. The Innovations to Increase Competitiveness Program (I2C) is a joint venture with the UT-Austin LBJ School of Public Affairs. Eight graduate students who are not from an environmental or P2 background developed the program.

I2C goals are to improve efficiency, conserve energy and reduce waste. Reducing wastes provides important company benefits: improving bottom line performance and reducing company liability. Anything that is not product is waste--the key is to minimize that waste wherever possible. Steps in getting started include: (1) overcoming barriers; (2) know true costs and (3) identify wastes. Top management support provides resources, group effort and incentives. Relevant costs that must be calculated are: supply and product costs, disposal costs and liability insurance costs. One LCRA facility saved $2,668 per year by substituting citrus for a solvent. The LCRA helps with experience, resources, technical assistance and site assessments.

A web site that is part of LCRA's homepage, within the community service section, promotes the I2C program. The goal of the web site is to provide money-saving ideas for businesses. Pages include information about accessing LCRA technical experts, recommended action steps and announcement of workshops and seminars.

This program also does not use the term, "pollution prevention". They are trying to speak the language of industry in order to communicate in terms they relate to.
Evaluation Feedback
Excellent effort by students. LCRA's efforts are impressive.
Good to see examples such as this. But, it was difficult to see visuals on screen. Note: possibly think about "exhibits" at roundtable meeting with time set aside so members can visit and get "close-up" look at these types of programs.

ISO 1400--Dan Wilson, Wilson Consulting Group, Tulsa, Oklahoma

Mr. Wilson is a member of the Technical Assistance Committee for ISO 14000 and the Oklahoma chairman of the Air and Waste Management Association. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) was founded in 1947 to promote the development of international manufacturing, trade and communication standards. This organization is comprised of more than 110 countries. The American representative is the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). All ISO standards are voluntary. However, some countries, industries and companies have adopted particular ISO standards as requirements for doing business.

From the U. S. perspective, ISO standards are completely voluntary, but some countries have adopted the standards as a component of their regulatory scheme. This may be a barrier in getting the standards implemented in the U. S. There is uncertainty about how ISO will be incorporated in EPA programs.

Other national and international standards of environmental performance preceded ISO 14000. These drivers for ISO 14000 originated from the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA), European Communities and the British Standards Institute. The Responsible Care program was developed by the CMA as a guide to assist the chemical industry in achieving continuous improvement in its responsible management of chemicals. The original program was developed in 1988 and has now been adopted by all CMA member companies. The European Union's Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) came about as a broad range of guidelines for business management and audit conduct in 1990. Environmental management is one component. BS7750 is the British standard for environmental management systems. It came about in 1992 for three reasons:

Increased public pressure for improved management of environmental issues.

Passage of the UK Environmental Protection Act in 1990.

Response to early draft of the EU's EMAS.

ISO 14000 is a market-driven standard. The primary motivation is in the marketplace. There are markets that people will not have access to unless they integrate ISO 14000. Other benefits for U. S. businesses are:

Improved regulatory compliance.

Reduction in liability and risk.

Value added benefits related to regulatory compliance (i.e., reduction of liability associated with non-compliance). When a company adopts the standard, EPA generally looks at it as a proactive response to environmental management.

Pollution prevention and waste reduction.

Desire to profit in the market for "green" products. It can be used as an integral part of the marketing scheme.

Improved internal management methods.

Pressure from shareholder groups. There are groups of stocks lumped together in portfolios of green investments based on companies' strong environmental stances.

Community goodwill.

Interest in attracting a high-quality workforce.

Improved standing with insurance companies. Adoption of the standard may ultimately drive down liability insurance costs and improve ability to get good insurance coverage.

ISO 14000 is structured in two subprograms. Environmental Management Systems includes environmental performance evaluation and environmental auditing. The other component is Life Cycle Assessment, which includes environmental labeling and environmental aspects in product standards. See Appendix B, Structure of ISO 14000 for a graphic representation of the organizational chart and other descriptive tables showing breakdowns of the standards.

ISO standards are very general in nature. In some cases, ANSI has gone beyond the ISO standards. Currently, environmental auditing certification under ISO standards is available in Britain and should be available within the year in the U. S. The entire 14000 standard is a work in progress. There are study groups set up to evaluate the merits and benefits for the need for a standard. Then, there is a six-step process before the standard is adopted. Currently, most of the standards are at the first stage of the process. The ISO standard takes the ASTM standard for environmental site assessments a step further, looking at how the business is operated as a starting point.

Self Declaration Environmental Claims were pushed by the U. S. to incorporate the ability for companies to self-declare that requirements for the standards have been met. European companies thought this was ridiculous--a way to avoid admitting problems.

It is the intent that most of the standards come to a vote by the latter part of 1997, but several committees have come to an impasse for four to five months, so there is uncertainty about when this will be finalized.

Environmental Management Systems (EMS)

EMS describes an organization's management structure that addresses both the short-term and long-term impact of its products, services, and processes on the environment. An EMS is essential to an organization's ability to anticipate and meet growing environmental performance expectations. The ISO standards on safety requirements were voted down at the last conference in Oslo. There is a disparity between the way the U. S. treats safety and the rest of the world does. Therefore, it's not feasible at this time to develop an international standard. It's a cultural difference. European companies take more of a family responsibility for their employees so safety standards are justified on the basis of social responsibility.

In general, environmental management systems should:

Establish an environmental policy.

Determine the environmental aspects associated with the organization's activities, products and services.

Develop management and employee commitment and accountability for the protection of the environment.

Have a champion present in top management in order to implement an EMS.

Implement environmental planning throughout all organization activities.

Establish a clearly-defined process for meeting targeted performance levels.

Provide the resources required to achieve targeted performance levels (via training).

Develop and implement an emergency preparedness and response program

Establish a system of operational control and maintenance to ensure continuing high levels of system performance (evaluate-implement-re-evaluate company performance).

Evaluate environmental performance against the policy, objectives and targets and seek improvement where appropriate (via audit process).

Establish a management review/audit of the EMS to identify opportunities for improvement of the system and resulting environmental performance.

Establish and maintain appropriate communications with internal and external interested parties.

Encourage contractors and suppliers to establish an EMS.

Adopting ISO 9000 was customer-driven. Suppliers were required to adopt the standards by their customers. In the same way, ISO 14000 will require passing down the standard to suppliers in order to meet goals. ISO 9000 gave companies the ability to know their processes like they had never been able to before, enabling them to incorporate management controls.

The impact will be greater in European and Asian markets over the next five years than in the U. S. For example, the Zurich Airport has required any carrier landing there to have either ISO 14000 or EMAS certification. U. S. participation will be driven by the desire to participate in European and Asian markets. Adopting ISO 14000 is more of a disincentive than an incentive--if firms don't adopt it, in the future they may be excluded from some international markets they desire to enter. Surveys have indicated that U. S. companies are not currently embracing it, but are taking a wait-and-see attitude. European and Asian companies, on the other hand, are taking a more proactive perspective.

It's a sticky thing. If U. S. companies cannot compete with a company in Mexico if they adopt the standard, then why do it," asked Mike Miller.

Al Drinkwater commented, "From a practical standpoint, the U. S. has the toughest environmental standards in the world. This is a barrier in terms of cost for U. S. companies to adopt the standard. Private businesses want their suppliers to deliver the highest quality products at the lowest price possible--and ISO 14000 may or may not enter into that equation."

Evaluation Feedback
Good presentation. Good discussion.
Good, informative presentation.
Very worthwhile--I was not familiar with ISO 14000 but now have a better understanding. Possibly could have spent more time on how P2 is integrated.
Good presentation.
We already heard about this at the last meeting.
Good speaker, good presentation. Handouts--so-so.
Very good presentation--a lot of good discussion about ISO 14000. I believe the economic realities of this program should be explained in presentations like this. There is some misinformation out there concerning this program.
Dan gave good overview of ISO 14000 standards development; answered all questions professionally.

Alliance Software for Environmental Applications

Sonja Wilson, Wilson Consulting Group

Wilson Consulting Group provides an electronic tool to manage their clients' chemical usage called On-line Chemical Management Services. They are now looking for ways that vendors can electronically submit MSDS data to them to incorporate in their system. The on-line system provides MSDS management, chemical management, SARA Title III reports and "What If" capabilities for assessing impact of permits. Clients dial up to access up-to-date information about chemicals and specific information for their facility. The system maintains information about chemicals, health and safety information and related environmental regulatory information. The advantages of providing this on-line instead of on-site software is that manufacturing facilities have not been very successful at implementing and maintaining software due to uncommitted management, limited staff, frequent shifts in responsibility and lack of internal expertise on regulations.

Wilson Consulting views themselves as the steward of the facilities' information. Common databases of chemicals and product MSDS are used by all of the on-line facilities so up-to-date information is immediately available for all. Most importantly, facilities can focus on chemical management instead of information management. Three stores of information in the system are 1) chemical information, 2) MSDS and 3) facility annual inventory and usage amounts. On average, clients had previously misreported up to 50 per cent (in one case 250 per cent) of their inventories.

In addition to the on-line service, the system provides the client a trigger report of hazardous materials inventory and usage. There are regulatory and management uses for this information. The report shows management which chemicals need to be targeted for reduction. Organizing the information in this way takes the emphasis away from regulatory reporting to management action. Firms are encouraged to maintain MSDS information on site, cross-referenced with the system code numbers. Physical inventories at the facilities are taken annually to input facility data. The goal is to manage their information in a meaningful way so the facilities can manage their chemicals in a meaningful way.

Evaluation Feedback
Very interesting service--probably a good addition to "experts" list on Reg. 6 website.
Good presentation--good potential for use in P2.
Wrong presentation. This one should have been skipped.
Sonja did a great job.
Interesting presentation--this is the sort of tool people need to use in evaluating their plant processes. As we identify this sort of tool, we need to share them with the group.
Interesting, but very company focused.


Brian Gahr, Division Vice President and Scott Horton, Environmental Manager, Whirlpool Corporation, Fort Smith Division

Facility operations include metal stamping, welding, preparation and painting; insulation foaming; plastic molding; and vast assembly operations. There are three major assembly lines for refrigerators and additional assembly areas for trash compactors and icemakers. The facility covers 1.3 million square feet. Side-by-side refrigerators and trash compactors are the primary products. There are over 3,100 employees. About half live in Oklahoma and the other half in Arkansas.

Pollution Prevention Strategy

Whirlpool's pollution prevention management strategy was initiated in 1988. The strategy provides for the preservation of resources while protecting the environment. Objectives are:

Eliminate/reduce hazardous chemical usage.

Install new process equipment to reduce waste generation.

Modify older process systems to route previous waste streams into recyclable streams.

Establish multiple recycling programs.

Whirlpool has started about ten different recycling programs at this site over the last five years. By following this strategy, the Fort Smith Division has achieved significant reductions in water usage, air emissions and generation of solid and hazardous wastes. They have received numerous awards.

Major process changes and reductions in waste resource usage have been incorporated since 1988 (see Appendix C for detailed comparisons). One major change in 1989 was the elimination of painting operations for the cabinets. Instead, pre-painted steel is used. This has resulted in greater efficiency with no reduction in product quality. In 1993 and 1994, the facility underwent a massive conversion from CFCs to HCFCs in their foaming operations (one year before required by the Montreal Protocol).

Reductions in these waste streams were reported from 1988 to 1995:

Water usage went down 72.7 per cent.

Solid wastes were reduced 85.8 percent--from 17 million to 2.5 million pounds. Cost savings are tracked on individual waste streams. Some waste reductions only break even. Corrugated cardboard and pallets are examples.

Toxicity reductions were 95.4 per cent--from 1.2 million to 55 thousand pounds in hazardous substances. Four substances were eliminated, four reduced and one (oil) was recycled.

Air emission reductions totaled 82.5 per cent during those seven years.

Recycling Activities

Recycling makes the greatest impact at the lowest capital cost. It's usually a matter of tracking and segregating wastes. They average around 40 million pounds a year of recycled materials including papers, plastic, scrap metals, wood, plastics, solvents, copper, aluminum and oil. The switch from CFCs in 1994 required a change in foam insulation used. This is reflected in the increased amount of plastic recycled in 1994. Employment level stayed the same during this period and the production rates fluctuated, but these have not been correlated with these figures in their analysis. Total recycling activity went up in 1994 due to process changes associated with the elimination of CFCs. Production volume also increased slightly during that year. Productivity generally increased during this time. Recycled, reground plastic is used at a ration anywhere from 50-50 with virgin plastics up to 95-5, but no less than 50-50.

One significant reduction in solid waste is the result of requesting that suppliers replace wood carts with plastic carts. They still receive some parts in wooden KDs and skids, but the number has drastically decreased. Wood pallets are loaded on a flat bed and sold to produce flower bed mulch. Corrugated cardboard is compacted and baled for recycling.

Q: "Have you done anything to try to make your product more effective out in the world where it's used to produce less waste?"

A: "Life-cycle analysis for refrigerators are complicated. Design disassembly is being worked on, but it's complex to separate the materials. Washing machines and dryers produce minimal damage during production compared to life-cycle costs (energy). Whirlpool's product development division is working on this. HCFC use represents a lower impact."

Q: "What kind of employee involvement do you have?"

A: "Mainly ad hoc committees and labor management committees. We're looking for a fair way to administer recognition program, but there is none in place."

Whirlpool's Fort Smith Division was named the winner of the Region 6 Pollution Prevention Excellence Award in the large facility category at the reception given Wednesday night by the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce.

According to EPA's Frank Anderson, "Whirlpool has
far exceeded their 33-50 goals of 50 percent reduction-- they are far ahead of schedule."

Q: Are you ISO 9000 registered?

A: "No, but some plants are registered. I don't know if our manpower would allow us to do it right now. Would a management system like that help institute P2 projects?"

Dianne Wilkins answered, "It's extremely easy to incorporate a P2 management program
within quality management programs--it just fits right in."

Q: "Have you been recognized for your product's energy efficiency?"

A: "There was a Super-Efficient Refrigeration Product contest that Whirlpool won one year--energy consumption savings over a lifetime for a quarter million refrigerators is huge."


Evaluation Feedback
Great P2 program. Visuals needed to be better. Tour was great; hospitality, lunch was great.
Excellent tour--the facility demonstrated environmental initiatives beyond compliance. Good food!
Very interesting tour. But could have included a look at waste management in the plant (e.g., hazardous waste accumulation area). Lunch very good. Thanks!
Gracious hosts, good facilities. This plant exemplified the benefits of P2. Good lunch thanks to Whirlpool.
Tour was good; lunch was good.
An excellent presentation. The only shortfall in the presentation were some of the slides were unreadable. Tours like this one are the highlights of these meetings. Keep them in the agenda.
Whirlpool gave an excellent presentation, summary of their P2 activities, good tour of facility--although P2 was not pointed out specifically.


Arkansas Awards Presentations

Al Drinkwater, AIDC

An Awards Reception was hosted by the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday evening. It was well attended by award recipients in both the public and private sectors, Roundtable participants, area politicians and local reporters. Al Drinkwater emceed the event with Jim VonGremp, the Executive Director of Government Operations (for the State of Arkansas) presenting the awards. Awards were accepted by top management representatives from each of the companies. Nominated companies that did not win the top award were presented a certificate. Each nominee organization had a group of three to four employees attending the reception.

Programs recognized as nominees and/or winners were:

Arkansas Eastman Division, Eastman Chemical Company.
Baxter Healthcare Corporation.
Darling Store Fixtures.
Lennox Industries, Inc.
Southern Steel and Wire Co.
Arkansas Environmental Federation.
Independence County Recycling Program.
Sevier County Farm-A-Syst Program.
Riverside Furniture Corporation, Plant 7.
Whirlpool Corporation Fort Smith Division.

Evaluation Feedback
Very good format. We should try to repeat this at future meetings. Also, the participation of high level government officials was valuable.
Nice reception from Chamber. Al did a great job as emcee and as organizer. Plaques were nice. Hope we do as well in Oklahoma next year.
Excellent program. Each company was recognized for its efforts. Atmosphere was great--I prefer the informal atmosphere preceding the awards. The enthusiasm and interest on the part of awardees speaks volumes. Having governmental representation is very important.

Oklahoma Awards Nominations and Voting

Dianne Wilkins on behalf of the Nomination Committee

The roundtable will recognize the following programs:

Large manufacturing: Nominees were Dayton Tire and Webco (pressure steel tubing); winner is Dayton Tire.

Small manufacturing: Nominees were Empire Castings and VAC Corporation; winner is VAC Corporation. They do printed circuit boards.

Agricultural: Greenleaf Nurseries, (in OK, TX, LA--they treat and reuse runoff water) was the only nomination and therefore the winner.

Oil and Gas: Two large nominations were AMOCO and OXY. Amoco is the winner.

Public non-profit: Metropolitan Environmental Trust, Tulsa is the winner. They host recycling days.
Public Government: Tinker AFB had numerous nominations. The will be given an umbrella award for all their P2 activities. City of Gymond will be given an award for their land application of treated wastewater.

All nominations will be given some form of recognition like Arkansas did this time. Dianne is going to try to incorporate state awards at the same ceremony. Gary Johnson moved that the recommendations be accepted as presented. Ken Zarker seconded the motion. The group unanimously voted to accept award recommendations from the committees.

There was discussion about ways of documenting the process of soliciting nominations, evaluating the submittals and how the awardees were selected. There needs to be a continuity for the process because the Roundtable group is dynamic. Dianne will provide a report to document the processing of the nominations. The winners also need to be listed in a recognition section of the Webpage.

Evaluation Feedback
Recognition should be taken more seriously.
OK. Weren't very many people left to participate by Thursday a.m. Found this discouraging


Arkansas--Al Drinkwater

The Arkansas Industrial Development Commission (AIDC), the Arkansas Science and Technology Authority (ASTA) and Westark Community College have received a grant from Region 6 to train Arkansas Manufacturing Extension Network (the Network) engineers on how to conduct a pollution prevention opportunity assessment. Westark Community College will be developing the curriculum with assistance from AIDC and oversight from EPA. Existing resources such as the environmental curriculum developed by NIST and EPA for use by the MEPs will be examined along with other pollution prevention training resources. Westark Community College is the lead trainer for Network engineers and other service providers with the Network organization.

After engineers in the Network have been trained in P2 opportunity assessments, they will be responsible for conducting a series of assessments in manufacturing facilities. The assessments will be followed up with a written report with specific recommendations for reducing waste.

The written assessments will be evaluated by AIDC and ASTA for content. All manufacturing facilities that receive an assessment will be interviewed by AIDC within six months after the assessment. Each manufacturing facility will be asked if they have implemented the recommended P2 activities. If not, plant officials will be asked the reasons for not implementing the recommendations.

The entire process of the assessment and its fate regarding implementation of waste reduction practices will be evaluated with a goal of improving the process of training the engineers and improving the way results are obtained as a result of the Network/manufacturer contact in a P2 opportunity assessment. The Network engineers will follow up with targeted class offerings related to P2 as it becomes better understood what information is most needed and can be practicably delivered.

Louisiana--Gary Johnson and Mike Miller, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ)

Louisiana Green Challenge 2000

Louisiana Green Challenge 2000 is a voluntary partnership program encouraging prevention and recycling among non-industrial small and medium sized businesses. This companion program to the EPA's Wastewise Program is a low budget program--the key to it's effectiveness. Green seal given to businesses who commit to reduction and recycling goals. A ten minute video was produced for $20,000, financed by LDEQ and Freeport McMoran Company. The video will be used to help market recycling and local coordinators will be trained in how to use the video effectively.

Mike Miller's primary interest is in hazardous waste permitting. He is looking for ways of integrating P2 into permitting process. The waste minimization program for the Hazardous Waste Division is not well-defined at present. Current efforts are centered on gathering information in order to build consensus for the program.

The Baton Rouge Zoo Project is being facilitated by administrator's funds in the amount of $50,000 that will be parlayed into $140,000 to put in a wastewater reuse system. This project will save them several thousand dollars in water cost annually. An artificial marsh and boardwalk will be part of the project, providing an aesthetic benefit.

Currently, 29 companies have pledged reductions of 26.5 million pounds of TRI chemicals and 507,500 tons of hazardous wastes through calendar year 2000, compared with base years 1994/1995, as part of the Environmental Leadership Pollution Prevention Program. The objective of this program is to achieve measurable environmental results through cooperative efforts that promote voluntary commitments on the part of business and industry.

There is a hurdle in moving Project XL forward in Louisiana since there is no legal framework to allow for regulatory relief. This drives home the point that many states like Louisiana don't even have the legal framework for P2. There is no provision for confidentiality, regulatory flexibility or audit protection. This is a problem if anyone feels we're tweaking the laws to give anyone advantage.

LDEQ's POTW outreach has one problem: keeping munitions out of the garbage at Fort Polk. They have a demonstration battle once a month. There is a concern that soldiers might leave grenades in the garbage.

...advises Rod Hendrick, "You can compost TNT wastes as long as you stir it gently."

New Mexico --Judy Kowalski

The New Mexico Environmental Alliance (NMEA) is getting a new P2 coordinator: Pat Gallager, P2 Coordinator for Wyoming. These are the main projects completed over the last six months:

Conducted quarterly meetings of the Industry Advisory Council to guide the conduct of the P2 program.

Conducted fifteen P2 assessments of small manufacturers: metal fabricators, wood manufacturers, printers and food processors. Electronics manufacturers showed no interest.

Worked with the New Mexico Environment Department staff to develop the concept for the Green Zia Environmental Excellence program. Funding was obtained in the amount of $50,000.

Conducted a P2 video teleconference training for printers in Albuquerque, Artesia, Clovis and Santa Fe.

Developed and conducted multi media training for auto repair and maintenance facilities done in partnership with wastewater treatment facility in Santa Fe. Every auto repair shop in town was invited in person. They did a walk through of a shop. Another one is scheduled in January in Las Cruces. They have found the auto repair shops were the most interested in P2 (even though the economic development folks didn't think they were a very good target).

The small business assistance program has been working on a trigger manual for printers and wood furniture manufacturing and general manufacturing--funded by a grant with Texas and Oklahoma. This program also puts on training for wood finishing manufacturing.

Received a grant from DOE to set up industrial assessments centers.

Oklahoma--Dianne Wilkins

ODEQ has entered into a Performance Partnership agreement with EPA. The document is four pages long. EPA's evaluation of past performance was used as criteria for setting up the partnership agreement. Guiding principles include:

Management driven by state goals and objectives.
Separate but co-equal responsibilities.
Elimination of duplication of effort.

EPA will be provided complete electronic access to DEQ databases. DEQ roles include:

Permit review and determination.
Facility inspection.
Administrative and civil law enforcement.
Customer services and assistance.
Targeted outreach and compliance.
Compliance assistance.
nvironmental education.

The four last points are where P2 plays a really big role.

EPA roles include:

Permit peer review.
Criminal enforcement.
Training of DEQ personnel.
Cooperative setting of standards.

DEQ decided that a problem in trying to accomplish agency goals was that employees weren't sure how what they were doing fit into agency goals. A focus document was drafted that takes each division and each employee and ties that employee's duty to a specific agency goal. This focus will change the method by which employees are evaluated, making them tied to specific goals.

Rules are being looked at to make them more understandable, written in plain language. The P2 Program is looking for ways to incorporate P2 into the rules during this process. Oklahoma will not be moving toward multi-media permitting. Instead, they're working on simplifying and uniforming the permitting process. Permits are being divided into three tiers. They are working on process, making it simpler to do. Permits are risk-based.

The P2 Program has two grants. One is to develop a Statewide Strategy. They just completed survey of national programs and state agencies to find out what the state is doing for P2. As a result, they came across two organizations: the Environmental Communication Forum (which coordinates environmental activities between agencies through quarterly meetings of agency heads) and the Whole Basin Planning Committee (which has grant money for water shed protection and GIS work involving several agencies). Dianne appointed herself to both committees and got herself on the agendas to incorporate P2 into their activities. For example, whole basin planning needs to incorporate P2 at the front end. A report on the survey is not yet completed by the university.

The other grant is for improved targeting of P2 activities in the state. Release information is supposed to be overlaid with GIS information about the state to come up with different strategies for different parts of the state. A Biennial Report acquired for the state was combined with information from EPA and initial surveys of 125 manufacturers. A database is being set up. It has been a difficult undertaking.

Outreach includes training for school bus drivers, auto repair and refinishing, Green County Health & Safety at Muskogee (environmental & safety professionals), ongoing wastewater operator certification, POTW training for the City of Henryetta, Del City, small business development coordinators at ODVTE (vocational training).

An update on Mercruiser: "Come January they will get rid of their last hazardous waste stream."

Other activities include:

ISO 14000 activities.

On-site waste reduction opportunity assessments for paint manufacturing, trailer manufacturing, metal fabricating, plating, auto repair and refinishing.

Development of a Compliance Assistance and Waste Reduction Manual;

P4 - Imation (spin-off of 3M)--a project to come up with flexible permit to allow them to do P2 activities.

Putting together a compendium of training manuals, materials at the national level.

Coming attractions include in-house training of CAP, P2 integration to local environmental specialists, ODVTE superintendents training, P2 & Recycling in March and continued work with the Alliance.

Texas--Bart Sims

Railroad Commission of Texas - Oil and Gas Division Waste Minimization Program

The Waste Minimization Program has a new manager: Paul Whitehead joined the Commission on November 4. Paul will provide valuable help in moving the program forward and promoting waste minimization in the oil and gas industry.

The primary activity of the program during the past six months has been providing assistance to oil and gas operators through workshops, seminars and responses to requests. We believe the workshops were effective in promoting waste minimization, particularly in that a large portion of the attendees were field personnel from small independent oil and gas companies. Additionally, waste minimization concepts were presented at four Water Protection Seminars conducted at various locations in the state. Many participants at the workshops and seminars responded by requesting additional waste minimization assistance.

We continue to respond to phone calls from operators requesting waste minimization assistance. Approximately 80 requests from oil and gas operators were handled during the past six months. Also, we responded to requests from other state and federal agencies for information and products available from our program. These agencies were the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, the New Mexico Environmental Department, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and EPA Region 8.
Our plans for the future include developing waste minimization workshops that are tailored to each of the specific operations associated with exploration, development, production and transportation of crude oil and natural gas. We also plan to develop and publish operation-specific technical assistance workbooks for use in these workshops.

The WasteMin software has been delivered to approximately 90 operators. Also, 22 operators have obtained WasteMin by downloading it from our electronic bulletin board service, Cross-ties (38 operators have accessed information from Cross-ties). Oil and gas industry interest in the software continues to grow as it is promoted at our workshops and seminars.

Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA)

Mark Johnson

LCRA has completed our three year P2 Pilot Project goal of developing a pilot P2 program for electric utilities. All elements of the program were implemented in the three year period. These elements are:

Set a P2 policy.
Establish P2 goals.
Obtain management commitment.
Develop P2 teams.
Brainstorm to develop ideas.
Make recommendations.
Implement projects.

As a result of these efforts, 47 out of 53 project recommendations have been implemented. These have led to the following accomplishments:

Hazardous waste has been reduced by 67 per cent using FY 93 as a base year.

Utility stack emissions have been reduced by 9 per cent since 1992, despite a 15 to 30 per cent increase in generation.

LCRA saved $1.4 million.

Three final reports are available for the pilot project:

LCRA P2 Workplan
P2 Projects and Pilot Studies
Measurements, Results and Recommendation

Other activities include:

An ongoing project with electrotechnology review and continued pilot testing of technologies at plants.

Teamed up with UT Austin's LBJ School to provide P2 assistance to customers and suppliers.

Put together a Texas-Bangladesh initiative to provide in-kind service to transfer P2, also in partnership with UT.

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) Office of Pollution Prevention and Recycling (OPPR)

Ken Zarker

Economic Benefits of Recycling - Recycling has created more than 20,000 jobs and added $3 billion to the state's economy according to a recent study by Roy F. Weston, Inc. which documents the economic benefits of recycling in Texas. Communities and workplaces are saving money and landfill space through innovative recycling programs. Last year, CLEAN CITIES 2000 members documented a savings of $10 million in solid waste disposal costs, thus saving tax payer dollars and increasing the life of their landfills.

Fiscal 1996 End-of-Year Results - Several Pollution Prevention and Conservation Section programs showed that they exceeded the LAR requirements for FY 1996. Reports compiled in August showed the following results:

The Engineering and Technical Assistance Team exceeded its LAR deliverables in FY1996, conducting 34 Site Assistance Visits in Texas and Mexican border states.

During the past three years SAVS have helped public and private facilities save $22.3 million by reducing their energy use by 18 million, wastewater generation by 315 million gallons a year, VOC emissions by 176,000 lbs a year, and hazardous waste generation by 35,000 tons a year.

Pollution Prevention and Conservation Section staff have traveled across Texas giving presentations on source reduction and waste minimization, providing technical training and information to 9,000 individuals. This is considerably in excess of the Section's FY1996 LAR requirement of presentations to 3,000 individuals.

The new Clean Texas Star Program also exceeded its FY1996 LAR by recruiting 1,500 Texas institutions to voluntarily reduce their non-hazardous waste generation by at least 25 percent by the year 2000. The LAR requires 650 new members, and the program set an informal goal of 1,000 members. Both goals have been reached and exceeded. The newest group of facilities to join the program are 10 power plants of Houston Lighting and Power. The San Antonio District of the U.S. Postal Service also signed up 647 local postal facilities from all over South Texas to be Clean Texas Star members.

Environmental Education Joins OPPR - Join us in welcoming the K-12 Education Team of the TNRCC to the OPPR. Each year, almost 10,000 students and parents benefit from the efforts of the K-12 Education Team (Barbara Henry, Sue Bumpous, Eunice Hefty and Mary Kelly) through their legislative mandate to provide municipal solid waste curriculum for schools. Additionally, they manage the Teaching Environmental Sciences Program which provides teacher training and graduate-level credit for elementary teachers interested in environmental science and education.

Texas P2 Partnership Results - The second military pollution prevention conference was held at Biggs Army Air Base at Fort Bliss and resulted in 20 new projects, including joint site assistance visits, recycling initiatives, DoD procurement and military specification reform, and the possibility of DoD participation in the Small Town Environmental Program (STEP). Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Sherri Goodman praised the partnership as a model for state-federal cooperation on pollution prevention and TNRCC Executive Director Dan Pearson presented Clean Texas Star certificates to representatives of 14 Texas military installations. Over 150 participants from the TNRCC, Department of Defense, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, U.S. Coast Guard, Texas National Guard and several Texas-based military installations attended the conference which will highlighted in a new video about the partnership.

CLEAN CITIES 2000 Members Save $10 Million - Chairman McBee reported that CLEAN CITIES 2000 members reduced their municipal solid waste disposal by 336,000 tons in 1995, thus saving taxpayers nearly $10 million in disposal costs. Clean Cities 2000, with 63 member cities, involves over six million Texans who are working to cut waste disposal in half by the year 2000. The first CLEAN CITIES annual meeting and conference drew over 175 people and featured awards presentations in five categories and recognition for six new CLEAN CITIES 2000 members.

Governor Bush Proclaims Texas Recycles Day - Governor George Bush issued a proclamation declaring November 15, 1996 as Texas Recycles Day. HEB Grocery and the Steel Recycling Institute ran a "Super Recycling Sweepstakes" promotion at 40 San Antonio area HEB stores. Editorial board meeting were set up with the Austin American Statesman, the San Antonio Express News and The Dallas Morning News to discuss recycling and Texas Recycles Day.

First "SWAP Meet" held with the City of Big Spring - Seven representatives from the City of Big Spring, Big Spring Proud Citizens, and the public met with OPPR staff to assess their current waste management system and evaluate their options for increased waste reduction. The session prepared Big Spring to apply for membership in Clean Cities 2000 and develop a Clean Cities Plan of Action. Additional SWAP meets are planned for El Paso and the City of Dallas.

Local Government P2 - In partnership with the City of Austin and the Tennessee Valley Authority, the OPPR co-sponsored a two-day Waste Assessment Workshop for evaluating non-residential waste. The workshop featured classroom instruction and included on-site waste assessment training at several Austin businesses, hotels, auto shops, and a hospital. This provided training for our staff as well as recycling coordinators from 15 cities, 5 COGs, and a university.

Consolidated Reporting - TNRCC has received an EPA grant ($95,000) to design an innovative approach for reporting, data management, and public access to environmental information. The project will develop a user-friendly electronic reporting and data access system that provides timely, meaningful, and accurate information. The project will benefit the regulated community by consolidating duplicative reporting requirements. The public will benefit through greater access to facility-level environmental information presented in non-technical, understandable terms. Initially, this innovation will be tested at computer and electronics manufacturing facilities, in conjunction with the Common Sense Initiative.

Pollution Prevention in Regional Offices - The OPPR and Field Operations Division completed a pilot project in three regional Offices to integrate pollution prevention opportunities into the inspection process. Over 60 inspectors were trained at the Beaumont, Arlington, and El Paso field offices and resulted in a pilot project whereby inspectors, as appropriate, can provide the regulated community with referral information describing OPPR's technical assistance programs. In one example, the OPPR received a technical assistance request from a hazardous waste generator seeking solvent alternatives. This provided the OPPR an opportunity to work with the generator that will result in the facility generating less waste and becoming a Small Quantity Generator.

"Big D" JOINS CLEAN CITIES 2000 - The City of Dallas joins 63 other cities to become the largest member city in Texas reaching over six million Texans. In 1995, CLEAN CITIES 2000 members diverted more than 363, 000 tons of solid waste from landfills and saved an estimated $10 million in disposal costs.

TNRCC TO REDUCE WASTE GENERATION BY 75% - Chairman Barry McBee kicked off the TNRCC's own Permanent Pollution Prevention Program (P4) training with more than 20 volunteer staff from all parts of the agency, including Regional Offices to review agency business practices related to material usage, waste generation, energy and water consumption and to look for ways the agency can reduce environmental impacts through changing its processes, as well as purchasing more recycled products. The agency also committed to become a Clean Texas Star member and reduce its disposal of nonhazardous waste by 75%. Two training sessions were provided and five working teams have been created: Reduce Consumption, Campus Operations, Recycling & Reuse Opportunities Expansion, Awareness, and Regions.

P2 Border Summit - OPPR met with four Mexican states interested in developing voluntary pollution prevention programs of their own. This historical meeting will lay the ground work for future pollution prevention work along the border between Texas and Mexico. The Mexican State of Nuevo Leon is planning a follow-up visit to TNRCC to discuss their project ideas in November. Nuevo Leon also asked the TNRCC to provide feedback on potential joint projects under the auspices of their environmental strategic plan.

P2 Mentoring Takes Hold - OPPR presented its newly-developed "Train the Supplier" 5-step pollution prevention program to Texas Instruments, which is considering how to encourage its suppliers to do pollution prevention. The Dallas event provided training to TI staff, staff from the Texas Manufacturing Assistance Center, as well as staff from the Bill Priest Center, a Dallas-based manufacturing assistance center.

OFFICE BUILDING RECYCLING - Staff is working with Trammell Crow, a major commercial real estate company with major office complexes, to partner with the TNRCC to conduct waste audits, review existing recycling and waste handling programs, and provide training for property managers at Trammell Crow properties in the Dallas area. Properties include high-rise multi-tenant offices, warehouse/showrooms, specialty market centers(Infomart, World Trade Center, Apparel Mart), hotels (Anatole), and others.

OPPR Awarded Jobs Through Recycling Grant - OPPR received a $100,000 grant from EPA to establish the Recycling Markets Information System (RMIS). This grant will assist the OPPR update the Recycle Texas and Recycling Resource data bases and provide a Geographic Information System (GIS) component to assist with recycling market development.

Border Recycling Growing - The Fourth Bi-national Border Waste Reduction/Recycling Workshop was held in Ciudad Juarez to continue effort to build recycling capacity along the border. Organized by the OPPR with assistance from the State of Chihuahua's Environmental Protection Agency and the City of El Paso and Ciudad Juarez, the resulted in new discussions about a city-wide used oil recycling program in Ciudad Juarez.

One Million Households - The Clean Texas Reporter television series is now in two new markets - Corpus Christi and Waco beginning this month. With six markets subscribing to the CLEAN TEXAS Reporter, the series now reaches more than 1 million households with environmental information and consumer tips.

Texas Cleanup Time - Lake and River Cleanups held at Lake Tawakoni, Lake Proctor, Town Lake and the Rio Grande River involved over 1,425 volunteers and resulted in 42.33 tons of debris collected. In addition, at the Lake Tawakoni Cleanup, 21 tons of scrap metal, 303 tires, 72 batteries and 100 gallons of used oil were collected and at the Lake Proctor Cleanup, scouts planted 250 trees and built 33 wildlife habitat units. Texas Country Cleanups in Victoria, DeKalb, Greenville, Denton, Vernon, Wellington, and Bushland in October, resulted in collection of 3,215 empty pesticide containers, 1,923 automobile tires plus 313 large tires, 2,815 gallons of used oil, 4,140 used oil filters, and 228 batteries. Agricultural Waste Pesticide events in Denton, Vernon, and Bushland resulted in collection of approximately 63.5 tons of waste pesticides. A total of 257 people participated in the Texas Country Cleanups and 213 brought in waste pesticides.

Master Composter Sprouts New Initiatives - Several new projects resulted from the recent CLEAN TEXAS 2000 Master Composter Course held at McKinney Falls State Park. Ten "master composters" from the Austin area reached over 2,400 people during Texas Recycles Day composting bin sales project held at Home Depot. Additionally, a new composting demonstration site will be established at the Zilker Gardens in Austin that will be viewed by thousands of visitors each year. The Texas Department of Transportation and TNRCC have begun discussions on developing mulch specifications to help control erosion along Texas highways.

CYBER Exchange - The RENEW materials exchange reports its first successful exchange via the on-line version of its catalog. Mentor HS provided 800 pounds of surplus polyethylene sheeting to a Dallas area firm that wraps and sells fireplace logs to convenience stores. Mentor found the firm by using the RENEW on-line catalog.

BorderWatch - The OPPR was notified that it will receive a $190,000 grant from EPA Region VI to fund border related pollution prevention and recycling training and technical assistance programs for the next two years.
Evaluation Feedback
Good information exchange. May need to do breakouts after updates for program discussion.
Arkansas--good; Oklahoma--visuals not good/equipment did not function correctly (long); New Mexico--good.
Went okay this time. Still need to control time used by each presenter.
It seems that we are all moving. Let's see how we can continue to help each other achieve our goals.
Arkansas--good; Oklahoma--great; Louisiana--OK; New Mexico--OK; Texas--Where was Ken?
This was late getting started. I really enjoyed Dianne's presentation. They are really trying hard to integrate P2 into other state programs.


Federal Programs --Linda Thompson and Joy Tibuni

PPIS grant funding. The first cut of the '97 guidance for PPIS grant funding came out last week. The focus is shifting because the EPA feels it has accomplished the original goals. The evaluation criteria to tie projects to performance partnership grants could be a problem for state agencies and universities that don't get program grants because part of the PPG is to form performance partnership agreements. PPGs are a combination of categorical grants (e.g., RCRA, air). It is uncertain how strong this criteria will be made. Linda will clarify this with them. As soon as these blanks are filled in, Linda will send a draft version to everyone. It looks like EPA will not cut the funding amount. The Environmental Justice-Pollution Prevention (EJ-P2) grants pot is expanding. It was $280,000 two years ago. It is now up to $500,000 in the region now. That federal register notice will be out the latter part of December. PPIS grant guidance should be out in December and the funding amounts should stay about the same. It will probably still be 50-50 match, but there has been some talk about a 75-25 match.

Q: "Are there going to be discretionary funds this year?"
A: "Probably, but everyone will be trying to get part of the pot."

Linda Thompson advised, "You can send me a proposal at any time so that I will have it on file whenever discretionary funds come available. Sometimes I only have a three day turnaround."

Bart Sims added, "One big advantage to using discretionary funds is the 5 per cent match instead of 50."

Q.. from Ken Zarker:

What might this group do to promote more visibility for P2 in other programs?

How can we incorporate measurable results instead of traditional bean-counting?

How can P2 be given a place at the table when PPGs are negotiated?

Where does P2 fit into the PPG process?

How do they get to the table?

A: The process adopted at this point is that each of the division directors has been assigned a state. It has been up to the state to opt in to this. Agreements have been signed with Texas and Oklahoma. Any other agency needs to work out a deal with the state and then money can pass through. With block grants to the state, negotiations will be worked out among the different agencies in the state. The state tells the EPA which grant moneys they want included in the PPG. It's selling point is its flexibility within the state.

There is a need to discuss P2 performance measures. There is also a need to have other programs integrate P2 into their activities. There is a need to show that P2 indicators are good measures for all these programs. Dianne Wilkins advised, "Figure out what the state agency goals and objectives are and make sure that the P2 strategic plan addresses those. We need to strategically plan how to show the state programs how P2 accomplishes their goals--make ourselves fit into the programs."

Joy Tibuni is asking for preproposals for EPA's international program. California is on call, but New Mexico and Texas need to be also. Border 21 grants are $40,000 each. The are supposed to go to NGOs or grass-roots groups. Pass on this information. You may contact Border Offices or Joy for criteria. Deadline for preproposals will probably be mid-January for Border 21.
Evaluation Feedback
Grants: good info; suggest retaining on agenda.
Always good to get the federal view.
Grants information is number one priority.
Good info. on grant funding.

National P2 Roundtable (NPPR) --Tyrone Foster

NPPR's next main annual conference is scheduled for April 2 - 4, 1997 in Denver, Colorado. NPPR is working on forming new international partnerships. Currently, work is underway to form an Asian partnership. New publications include:

The Source: The Ultimate Guide to State P2 Legislation
The P2 Yellow Pages*
The Directory of Industrial P2 Expertise*
Preventing Pollution in Our Cities and Counties

The two publications marked with an asterisk are available on NPPR's website in abbreviated form. NPPR has four listservers: NPPR P2 Policy (nppr@great-lakes.net) has 350 subscribers. The P2 Tech listserver (p2tech@greatl-lakes.net) has 371 subscribers. P2 Trainer (P2trainer@great-lakes.net) has 115 subscribers. P2 Reg (p2reg@great-lakes.net) has 117 subscribers.

NPPR has eight workgroups that target specific areas in P2. These workgroups are:


Training and Learning

Facility Planning

Information and Technology Transfer


ISO 14000

Local Government

Regulatory Integration

Technology Research
Q: How does the Roundtable work in Washington for our interests?

A: NPPR representatives meet individually with congressmen, attend appropriations committees, work with the President's Council on Sustainable Development, advise the President on ways to incorporate P2 in federal programs, and sends a newsletter to government officials on Capitol Hill.


During the Whirlpool site visit, the Roundtable agreed to look into writing a letter for Whirlpool to DOE: regarding taking a position about energy efficiency compliance standards. Logistics for writing this letter were discussed: How? What letterhead? It was suggested that the National Roundtable letterhead could be used. However, other problems were discussed: We are not an entity. We have no bylaws. We're not officially an organization. NEWMOA is coming from a structured organization. Al Drinkwater commented that we don't have to be an entity in order to conduct business, but the key issue is that we have a lot of various interests around the table and does writing a letter like this support these interests? Also, the representatives at this Roundtable are not full representatives for each of the states. We have not individually been given the authority to make this type of decision. Al Drinkwater will draft a letter and send it out to state agencies or whoever is interested. He will also send it to the National Roundtable and let them send a letter. This would at least fulfill our commitment to Whirlpool to send a letter.

The date for the next meeting in Oklahoma was tentatively set for the week of May 5. Ken Zarker suggested trying to get it down to 1 1/2 days. There seemed to be consensus for starting at 1:00 pm on Tuesday and wrapping the meeting up by Thursday at 1:00 pm.

Five Year Strategic Plan: Remember to mark down December 17th conference call. Identify key people in each state. Ken will send out an e-mail. The deadline for names is December 15th. The current state contacts will be used as representative for each state. These are:

Louisiana: Patrick Devillier.

New Mexico: Judy Kowalski.

Oklahoma: Dianne Wilkins.
Arkansas: Al Drinkwater.

Texas: Ken Zarker.

Texas needs to know a fall date as soon as possible. Ken will propose a date. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 am so that the group could embark on their return van trip to Little Rock to make connecting flights to their home states.

Evaluation Feedback
To the question, "Did the meeting measure up to your expectations?", the seven participants who responded to the summary evaluation all said "yes" with these reasons given:

A good mixture of roundtable business and new information from P2 projects.
Site tour and the presentations.
Obtained some good ideas from presentations on first day. Also, session on Region website (clearinghouse) was very constructive.
Input from other interests/organizations.
Got a lot of business accomplished.
Good mix of meetings and tours and breakout sessions.
I had a wonderful time. The schedule was relaxing & informative. The awards presentation was excellent!!
The roundtable fell short of expectations by...
As in past, we need participation by oil and gas regulatory agency representatives from ALL states in region.
I really want to change the focus of the site visits.
Would have liked to hear input on case studies.
Whirlpool: should have done a P2 assessment...
And, suggestions for the next meeting are...
Would like to see us perform a site inspection in Oklahoma.
Have "exhibits" with time set aside so members can visit and get close-up look at innovative programs.
Separate rooms for breakout sessions would be conducive to better meetings.
Establish and publish (to participants) goals of meeting... On page 1 of this agenda...



Jack C. Boles, Jr.
Coop. Extension, U. of A.
P. O. Box 391
Little Rock, AR 72003
Phone: 501/671-2281
FAX: 501/671-2185
E-mail: jboles@uaex.edu
Ed Davis
Arkansas Industrial Dev. Commission
One Capitol Mall
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: 501/682-7322
FAX: 501/682-2703
E-mail: edavis@aidc.state.ar.us
Alford Drinkwater
Arkansas Industrial Dev. Commission
One Capitol Mall
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: 501/682-7325
FAX: 501/682-2703
E-mail: adrinkwater@aidc.state.ar.us
Constance Gwinn
C.R.G. Inc., Solid Waste
38 W. Trenton
Fayetteville, AR 72702
Phone: 501/443-2700
FAX: 501/443-5036
E-mail: cgwinn@crg.com
Scott Horton
Whirlpool Corp., Environmental Control
P. O. Box 17001
Ft. Smith, AR 72917-7001
Phone: 501/648-2698
FAX: 501/648-2431
E-mail: jerryshorton@email.whirlpool.com
Kelly Lyon
Ark. Manufacturing Extension Network
100 Main, Suite 450
Little Rock, AR 72116
Phone: 501/324-9006
FAX: 501/324-9012
E-mail: khlyon@asta.state.ar.us
Kym Patterson
Arkansas Industrial Dev. Commission
One State Capitol Mall
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: 501/682-7332
FAX: 501/682-2703
E-mail: kpatterson@aidc.state.ar.us
Garnett Wise
Env. Mgr., Riverside Furniture Corp.
P. O. Box 1427
Ft. Smith, AR 72902
Phone: 501/785-8173
FAX: 501/785-8149
E-mail: garnwise@aol


Rodney Hendrick
LSU Agric. Center, LA Coop. Extension
P. O. Box 25100
Baton Rouge, LA 70894-5100
Phone: 504/388-6998
FAX: 504/388-2478
E-mail: rhendrick@agctr.lsu.edu
Gary Johnson
Louisiana DEQ, Office of the Secretary
P. O. Box 82263
Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2263
Phone: 504/765-0739
FAX: 504/765-0742
E-mail: garyj@deq.state.la.us
Mike Miller
Louisiana DEQ, Haz. Waste Division
P. O. Box 82178
Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2178
Phone: 504/765-0272
FAX: 504/765-0612
E-mail: mikem@deq.state.la.us

New Mexico

Judy Kowalski
Energy Minerals & Natural Resource Dept.
P. O. Box 1948
Santa Fe, NM 87504
Phone: 505/827-7474
FAX: 505/827-3903
E-mail: jkowalski@emnrdsf.state.nm.us


Joe Camperson
OK DEQ, CSD, Pollution Prevention
1000 NE 10th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73117-1212
Phone: 405/271-1400
FAX: 405/271-1317
Doug Hamilton
OSU, Biosystems & Agric. Engineering
226 Ag Hall
Stillwater, OK 74708
Phone: 405/744-7089
FAX: 405/744-5069
E-mail: dhamilt@agen.okstate.edu
Leisa Smith
OK DEQ, Pollution Prevention
1000 NE 10th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73117-1212
Phone: 800/869-1400
Fax: 405/271-1400
Jeff Welsh
ODEQ-CAP, Customer Services
1000 NE 10th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73117-1212
Phone: 405/271-1400
FAX: 405/271-7339
Dianne Wilkins
1000 NE 10th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73117-1212
Phone: 405/271-1400
E-mail: Dianne.Wilkins@oklaosf.state.ok.us
Dan and Sonja Wilson
Wilson Consulting Group
8908 S. Yule, Ste. 415
Tulsa, OK 74137
Phone: 918/491-9223
FAX: 918/491-9348
E-mail: wilsoncon@ionet.net


Frank Anderson
EPA Region 6, R. G./Toxics 6TPT
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214/665-7592
Dr. A. B. M. Badruzzaman
Visiting Faculty
UT-Austin, LBJ School of Public Affairs
Austin, TX 78712
Rachel Feit
UT-Austin, LBJ School of Public Affairs
3914 Ave. D. Apt. #104
Austin, TX 78751
Phone: 512/454-4878
E-mail: 1pas322@uts.cc.utexas.edu
Lou Rene Garcia
UT-Arlington, EITT/SWEET Center
406 Summit Ave.
Arlington, TX 76019
Phone: 817/272-2915
FAX: 817/272-2921
E-mail: lrgarcia@uta.edu
Bob Gray
UT-El Paso, TMAC
500 West University, Rm. 400
El Paso, TX 79968
Phone: 915/747-6271
FAX: 915/747-6271
E-mail: bob@utep.edu
Gretchen Himel
UT-Austin, LBJ School of Public Affairs
2336 Douglas St., #923
Austin, TX 78741
E-mail: 1pas267@uts.cc.utexas.edu
Mark Johnson
Lower Colorado River Authority, P2
P. O. Box 220
Austin, TX 78767
Phone: 512/473-3200
FAX: 512/473-4066
E-mail: mark.johnson@lcra.org
Gerald Nehman
UT-Arlington, EITT
P. O. Box 19050
Arlington, TX 76019
Phone: 817/272-2300
FAX: 817/272-5653
E-mail: nehman@uta.edu
Rhonda Pherigo
UT-Arlington, EITT
P. O. Box 19050
Arlington, TX 76019
Phone: 817/272-2300
FAX: 817/272-5653
E-mail: pherigo@uta.edu
Bart Sims
Railroad Commission of Texas, Oil & Gas P. O. Box 12967
Austin, TX 78711-2967
Phone: 512/463-5405
FAX: 512/463-6780
E-mail: simsb@rrc.state.tx.us
Conrad Soltero
UT-El Paso, IM3
500 W. University Ave., Burges Hall 400
El Paso, TX 79968
Phone: 915/747-5930
FAX: 915/747-5437
E-mail: conrad@utep.edu
Linda Thompson
EPA Region 6 (6EN-XP) P2/Grants
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Phone: 214/665-6568
FAX: 214/665-7446
E-mail: thompson.linda@epamail.epa.gov
Joy Tibuni
EPA Region 6 P2, U.S./Mexico
1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214/665-8036
FAX: 214/665-7446
E-mail: tibuni.joy@epamail.epa.gov
Kelly D. Trish
UT-Austin LBJ School of Public Affairs
Drawer Y
Austin, TX 78712
E-mail: 1pas246@uts.cc.utexas.edu
Charles Urdy
Lower Colorado River Authority, P2
P. O. Box 220
Austin, TX 78767
Phone: 512/473-3265
FAX: 512/473-4066
E-mail: charles.urdy@lcra.org
Yuri I. Vergeles
UT-Austin LBJ School of Public Affairs
1071 Clayton Ln., #1517
Austin, TX 78723
Phone: 512/471-4962
FAX: 512/471-1835
E-mail: y.vergeles@mail.utexas.edu
Sarah Wheat
UT-Austin LBJ School of Public Affairs
804 West Lynn Street
Austin, TX 78703
Phone: 512/476-3753
E-mail: 1pas230@uts.cc.utexas.edu
Ken Zarker
TNRCC, Office of P2 & Recycling
P. O. Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711
Phone: 512/239-3145
FAX: 512/239-3165
E-mail: kzarker@tnrcc.state.tx.us