TABLE OF CONTENTS
OVERVIEW
CLEARINGHOUSE PROJECT
UPDATE
Project Goals and Schedule
Status Report from UTEP
Regional Information Center Tools
INFORMATION
CLEARINGHOUSE BREAKOUT SESSIONS
Strategic Business
Plan
Information Center Tools
PROGRAM
PRESENTATIONS
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
WHIRLPOOL SITE
VISIT
POLLUTION PREVENTION
AWARDS
Arkansas Awards Presentations
Oklahoma Awards Nominations
and Voting
STATE PROGRAM UPDATES
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
FEDERAL
AND NATIONAL ROUNDTABLE PROGRAM UPDATES
BUSINESS WRAP-UP
AND CONCLUSION
LIST OF
PARTICIPANTS
OVERVIEW
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!
CLEARINGHOUSE PROJECT UPDATE
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."
INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE BREAKOUT
SESSIONS
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:
Industry
State government (governor's office, commissioners,
regulators, media programs and enforcement)
Trade associations (e.g., chemical, printers,
poultry)
NGOs
Local government
Small Business
Development Centers |
Agricultural Extension agencies
Economic development departments
Mexican
counterparts
Consultants and vendors
Federal
installations
Health officials
Legislators
Chambers of
Commerce |
Next, discussion centered on defining the implementation process and
detailing next steps. The group recommended the following process and action
steps:
Implementation:
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.
PROGRAM
PRESENTATIONS
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.
WHIRLPOOL SITE
VISIT
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.
POLLUTION PREVENTION AWARDS
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.
Excellent.
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
STATE PROGRAM
UPDATES
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 AND NATIONAL ROUNDTABLE
PROGRAM UPDATES
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:
Education
Training and Learning
Facility Planning
Information
and Technology Transfer
International
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. |
BUSINESS WRAP-UP AND CONCLUSION
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...
LIST OF
PARTICIPANTS
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
Oklahoma
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
OK DEQ
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 |
Texas
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 |
