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 |
