Workshop GG Sustainability Best Practices Zero Waste Efforts, - - PDF document

Workshop GG

Sustainability Best Practices … Zero Waste Efforts, Trends & Regulations

Wednesday, March 22, 2017 11:15 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

Biographical Information Anna M. Maiuri, Member, Dickinson Wright PLLC 2600 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 300, Troy, MI 48084 248-433-7558 amaiuri@dickinsonwright.com

Anna Maiuri has over 23 years of experience practicing solely environmental law. During those 23 years, she has tackled issues related to all environmental media—land, water, air, and has extensive knowledge of the environmental laws and regulations that govern those media. She is particularly experienced in helping utility companies and manufacturers achieve regulatory compliance through effective negotiations with governmental regulators that result in cost- effective strategies that fulfill both the client's and the regulator's needs. Anna has saved her clients close to a million dollars in penalties through reasoned negotiations of various consent

• rders under the Clean Air Act, The Clean Water Act, CERCLA, Part 201 and other statutes and
• regulations. To each of her clients, Anna brings a comprehensive understanding of the various

environmental laws and regulations and how regulators interpret them. Anna also has extensive experience in complex matters including developing a strategy to address methane issues at a former municipal landfill, obtaining wetland determinations, and

• btaining a remedial action plan approval for installation of a public water system to resolve

claims associated with a county landfill. She also helps corporations, business owners and

• perators assess environmental liabilities when purchasing, selling or leasing assets both

across the country and around the world. Anna’s latest speaking engagement occurred on February 24, 2017 when she addressed a group of Arizona municipal attorneys on “Interesting Times: Changing Environmental Priorities under the New Trump Administration.” John Bradburn, Global Manager of Waste Reduction General Motors, 7174 S. Vassar Rd., Grand Blanc, MI 48439 john.bradburn@gm.com John is manager of global waste reduction at General Motors. In this role, he leads the company’s landfill-free initiative, which has resulted in 152 GM operations around the world that reuse, recycle, and convert to energy all waste from daily operations. John is an expert in waste reduction and recycling, and is dubbed GM's MacGyver for devising unconventional uses for everyday waste. He frequently mentors other companies pursuing zero-waste goals. John’s responsibilities also include directing GM’s design-for-the-environment program, implementing sustainable processes and technologies that reduce environmental impact and costs. John frequently speaks at various sustainability-focused events and has been recognized by the Society of Automotive Engineers with four Environmental Excellence in Transportation awards for material development and reuse and recycling projects. In 2015, John received the Presidential Lifetime Service Award from the Office of the President of the United States for sustainability services to youth. John has worked for GM for more than 37 years. He earned a Master of Science degree in hazardous waste management from Wayne State University in Detroit in 1995 and a Bachelor

• f Science degree in conservation from Northern Michigan University in 1978. He is a Certified

Hazardous Materials Manager.

Biographical Information Zane S. Hatahet Associate Attorney, Dickinson Wright PLLC 350 S. Main Street, Suite 300, Ann Arbor MI 48104 734-623-1931 Fax 844-670-6009 ZHatahet@dickinsonwright.com

Zane Hatahet practices in the Dickinson Wright’s Corporate Department. Mr. Hatahet advises

• n matters involving securities regulation, corporate finance & governance, banking, and

mergers & acquisitions. In addition, Mr. Hatahet, who was born in Detroit and spent part of his childhood growing up in Dubai, has a keen interest in energy law and environmental law. Prior to joining Dickinson Wright, Mr. Hatahet attended the University of Michigan Law School, where he gained experience working as a student attorney for the Unemployment Insurance Project, Environmental Law Clinic, and Low Income Taxpayers Clinic, and as a research assistant for J.J. Prescott, for whom he did research primarily regarding law & economics. He served as a Judicial Intern for Judge Julian Abele Cook, Jr. in Detroit in summer 2013, and he worked in- house at Marathon Petroleum Corporation in summer 2014. Todd Roeser, General Counsel, SRG Global, Inc. 800 Stephenson Highway, Troy, Michigan 48083 248-509-1110 troeser@srgglobal.com Todd Roeser is the General Counsel for SRG Global, one of the world’s largest manufacturers

• f chrome plated plastic parts for the automotive, non-automotive transportation, consumer

goods, and commercial building products industries. In this role, Todd leads SRG Global’s legal capabilities in helping SRG Global create value while managing risk. Todd manages the company’s legal affairs, advises SRG Global’s senior management team on overall global business vision and strategy, and provides legal support to complete strategic business

• transactions. Todd also drafts, reviews and negotiates a variety of agreements for corporate

strategic objectives, manages legal affairs related to SRG Global’s joint ventures, and acts as counsel for mergers and acquisitions. Todd provides advice, counsel and training to advance SRG Global’s compliance initiatives around the world. Todd also serves as Assistant General Counsel for SRG Global’s parent company, Guardian Industries Corp., where he provides advice and counsel on various transactions for the divisions

• f the company. Todd has over 17 years of legal experience, 11 of them as in-house counsel for

manufacturing companies. Todd joined Guardian Industries as Assistant General Counsel in 2008 and SRG Global as its Legal Director in 2012. Todd began his career at the law firm of Miller Canfield, where he advised business clients on many strategic corporate endeavors including mergers, acquisitions and joint ventures. Prior to joining Guardian Industries and SRG Global, Todd served as corporate counsel at Freudenberg-NOK, an automotive manufacturing company, counseling leaders in structuring, negotiating, and completing transactions, acquisitions and divestitures. Todd also led legal negotiations in commercial transactions in both domestic and international settings, managed litigation, and designed and implemented legal processes and compliance systems to protect the company and manage risk. Todd earned a Bachelor’s of Science and a Doctorate of Law (J.D.) from the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Todd currently serves as a member of the Board of Governors

• n the OESA Legal Issues Council and volunteers at the North Oakland Headwaters Land

Conservancy.

Workshop GG Sustainability Best Practices: Zero Waste Efforts, Trends, and Regulations

2017 MEC Presentation Anna Maiuri & Zane Hatahet (Dickinson Wright) John Bradburn (GM) Todd Roeser (SRG Global)

Presentation Overview

• Introductions: Anna Maiuri – Member, Dickinson Wright PLLC – Presentation

Facilitator

• Co‐Presenter #1: Zane Hatahet – Associate Attorney, Dickinson Wright PLLC
• Co‐Presenter #2: John Bradburn – Global Manager of Waste Reduction Efforts,

GM

• Co‐Presenter #3: Todd Roeser – Legal Director, SRG Global
• Q&A Panel: Facilitated by Anna Maiuri

Overview of “Zero Waste”: Basic Concepts in Economics

• A Product’s Path Through the Economy
• A good way to think about consumption is in the following stages:
• Extraction  Production  Consumption  Disposal
• Linear Systems vs. Circular Systems
• In a linear system, resources are used and discarded.
• In a circular system, resources are used and then either recycled or reused.
• EXAMPLE: Imagine a car breaks down and cannot be repaired.
• Option 1: Drop the car off at a dump. This is a linear system; the car was used, and
• nce no longer useful, is abandoned.
• Option 2: Systematically take apart the car’s individual components and distribute

them to manufacturers across varying industries (e.g., steel, synthetics, glass, etc.). This is a circular system – the car may no longer be used as a car, but to the extent possible, its components are re‐purposed in different applications, thus keeping the materials of the car out of landfills and in the economy as various potential products.

The Different Dimensions of “Zero Waste”

• The Three “Rs” of “Zero Waste”:
• Recycle – salvage material that may be useful in another application,

re‐process it, and re‐introduce it into the economy.

• Reuse – salvage material and re‐introduce it into the economy;
• REDUCE – use less material, obviating the need for re‐use and / or

recycling.

• In the context of manufacturing, all three Rs are applicable.
• In any context, the primary “R” is to reduce – with less waste from the

beginning (due to more efficient product designs, more mindful consumption, and more prospective savings in the long term), industries and individuals help to solve the problem of excessive waste before it starts.

Definitions & Standards

• So, what is “Zero Waste”?
• At this time, companies ultimately make this determination

individually, which means “zero waste” does not have a single definition.

• Most companies, however, start with 90%+ of materials not being sent

to landfills and not being incinerated.

Definitions & Standards (Continued)

• Why the emphasis on diverting from landfills and / or incineration?
• Sending materials to a landfill is unsustainable and undesirable for a number of

clear reasons: lack of space; lack of incentives to improve product designs, consumption habits, and system efficiencies; material decomposition leading to greenhouse gas emissions; run‐off or permeation of toxic liquids that can taint water sources; etc.

• Similarly, destroying waste (usually by burning it) creates problems as it solves

them – primarily, it creates air pollution and leaves behind residue that cannot be easily recycled or repurposed.

• From a legal perspective, federal and state laws (e.g., the Federal Clean Air Act,
• r “CAA”) regulate permissible emissions levels (i.e., how much pollution is

permissible), and companies should be very mindful to avoid fines and lawsuits from the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Justice. The same concept is true for material run‐off and impacts on water supplies in the case of burying waste (e.g., potential exposure under the Federal Clean Water Act and state parallels).

Definitions & Standards (Continued)

• Increasingly, a core trend is that the definition is getting narrower and more
• controlled. For instance, the 90%+ diversion from landfill goal really is a “must

have” for companies seeking zero waste compliance; besides, from a corporate competition and bench‐marking perspective, companies want to raise the bar, so companies are more concerned with getting to 97% or 98% diversion (or at least 1% better than their closest peers).

• Further, since companies are inclined to want a level playing field with regard to

zero waste competitiveness, measuring points are more consistent; for instance, the 90% diversion statistic essentially must be measured on a facility‐specific level, geographic‐area level, or corporate‐wide level (i.e., consistency in zero waste calculations is a “must have” for zero waste reporting to be considered credible).

Definitions & Standards (Continued)

• Companies do not need to start from scratch with a definition. Just like any field of

inquiry in science or engineering, knowledge is built upon knowledge, which ultimately leads to progress.

• To clarify, companies are learning from each other, even cross‐industry, and save

money by sharing ideas and cutting down time that would otherwise be spent re‐ inventing the wheel.

• For example, Subaru of Indiana Automotive, Inc. (“SIA”) agreed to allow

Smuckers and Colgate‐Palmolive to tour its zero‐waste facilities in Indiana and provided consultation to them.

• Cross‐industry consultation works because, though car companies make cars

and though jam companies make jam, all those companies: i) have employees consuming food and throwing some amount of it away each day; ii) use energy to operate their facilities, machinery, computer systems, etc.; and iii) can translate their use of resources into uniform statistics to measure performance.

• Also, there are now independent organizations that promulgate standards, provide

certification, etc. in the pursuit of zero waste, like ZWIA.

Independent Organizations: ZWIA

• ZWIA, the Zero Waste International Alliance, provides a comprehensive

framework for companies seeking zero‐waste certification.

• Though rigorous, ZWIA’s framework allows any company from any industry to

pursue and attain certification in its Zero Waste Business Recognition Program.

• ZWIA’s guidelines are summarized as follows:

1. Adopt the goal of zero waste to landfill, incineration, or the environment; 2. Adopt corporate policy of zero waste that uses ZWIA’s definition of “Zero Waste,” which is: i) all discarded materials are resources; ii) resources should not be burned or buried; and iii) goal is zero air, water, and land emissions; 3. Achieve 90% diversion for one facility, for a geographic area, or corporate‐wide; 4. Meet all national, state, and local solid waste and recycling laws and regulations; 5. Commit in writing to reductions of remainders (sludge, residue, etc.); 6. Submit summary of zero‐waste initiatives that can be published on ZWIA & national affiliate websites; and 7. Submit data annually to national affiliates.

Independent Organizations: ZWIA (Continued)

• A note on “national affiliates”: ZWIA is indeed an international
• rganization, which is why one organization per country gets the distinction
• f being that country’s “national affiliate” of ZWIA.
• In the US, that organization is GRRN, the Grassroots Recycling Network.

GRRN’s website provides excellent resources for companies seeking to pursue zero waste. GRRN also offers customized, on‐site trainings and workshops for companies.

Independent Organizations: ZWIA (Continued)

• Aside from the 90%+ goal ZWIA sets as the bar for compliance, ZWIA

adopted the following narrative definition of “zero waste,” which GRRN’s website identifies as the internationally accepted, peer‐reviewed definition, as of November 2004:

• "Zero Waste is a goal that is ethical, economical, efficient and visionary,

to guide people in changing their lifestyles and practices to emulate sustainable natural cycles, where all discarded materials are designed to become resources for others to use. Zero Waste means designing and managing products and processes to systematically avoid and eliminate the volume and toxicity of waste and materials, conserve and recover all resources, and not burn or bury them. Implementing Zero Waste will eliminate all discharges to land, water or air that are a threat to planetary, human, animal or plant health."

Other Independent Campaigns & Organizations

• USZWBC, the US Zero Waste Business Council, works with the Earth Resource

Foundation (“ERF”), GRRN, and ZWIA to identify and support businesses in pursuit

• f zero waste compliance.
• Its primary work is with GRRN – it is working with GRRN to implement ZWIA’s Zero Waste

Business Recognition Program in the U.S.

• COOL 2012, which was the Compostable Organics Out of Landfills by 2012

campaign.

• The problem identified by this campaign is the delivery to landfills of organic

compostables, including discarded food, paper, and yard materials. Due to their organic nature, these materials decompose anaerobically (without oxygen), and produce methane gas, a greenhouse gas that COOL 2012 cites as being 72 times more potent than CO2 over a 20‐year period (meaning landfills emit the equivalent of 20% of U.S. coal‐fired power plants each year).

• NOTE: While they may not be the first companies that come to mind in the zero waste

conversation, tech companies – particularly those that work only in software and internet / social media development, without physical widgets – matter just as much as heavy industry companies. Tech / software companies, like Microsoft: i) employ thousands of individuals who eat lunch every day and use bathrooms and facilities; ii) use electricity and resources just to keep server systems up‐and‐running; and iii) will have needs (at some point) to upgrade office equipment, computer systems, furniture, etc., or to expand corporate campuses – all tasks that will create waste management problems.

Other Independent Campaigns & Organizations

• LEED, which is the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design group.
• LEED certifies all buildings (from homes to offices) at all levels (from planning, to building, to
• perations post‐construction). Levels of recognition include: Certified, Silver, Gold, and

Platinum.

• The LEED emphasis is on reduced energy and water consumption, as well as reduced

greenhouse gas emissions.

• In the context of buildings, construction, and facilities maintenance, the appeal of certification

from a group like LEED is the streamlining of performance metrics that will allow companies to earn tax credits, like those (formerly*) available from Section 179D of the Federal Tax Code (originally added as a sustainable building tax credit under the Energy Policy Act in 2005).

• Generally speaking (as applied to efficiency measurements for new construction, existing

buildings, core & shell, and commercial interiors), silver LEED certification or better is required for the Section 179D tax credit.

• Ultimately, the tax credit translates to $1.80 per square foot (though lesser amounts are

granted for lesser achievements). This peak credit requires a reduction in total energy and power consumption by 50%, as measured by a building’s interior lighting, building envelope, and heating / cooling / ventilation / hot water (“HVAC”) systems.

• *According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s website, the 179D credit program expired on

12/31/2016. The DOE has a calculator to help companies determine the extent of their cost savings, and potential eligibility for a tax credit for buildings built and put into use before 12/31/2016.

The Current Status of Section 179D

• Regarding the status of Section 179D of the Federal Tax Code, a January 2017 article from the

Capital Review Group (“CRG”) highlighted that three separate bills have been introduced to extend Section 179D. The following text is directly from the CRG website:

• H.R. 6361. Sponsored by Rep. Alan Grayson (D‐FL) and introduced in the House of

Representatives on November 17, 2016, this bill would extend §179D through December 31, 2018.

• H.R. 6360. This bill was also introduced by Rep. Alan Grayson, but would only extend the

deduction for one year—through December 31, 2017. At the time of this writing, no further action has been taken on either H.R. 6360 or 6361.

• H.R. 6376. A bipartisan effort sponsored by Rep. David Reichert (R‐WA) and co‐sponsored by
• Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D‐OR), Rep. Tom Reed (R‐NY), and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D‐MD), this

bill proposes an expansion of the §179D deduction. Previously, tax‐exempt governmental entities could allocate their deductions to the primary designers of qualifying energy efficiency

• measures. This has allowed architects, engineers, contractors, and other designers to

significantly reduce their tax burdens based on projects they have performed on public

• buildings. If enacted into law, H.R. 6376 would also allow 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations to

allocate their deductions to primary designers. In addition, the bill states that partnerships and S corporations would be eligible to receive an allocation of the §179D deduction—which would extend this valuable incentive to many additional small and medium‐sized businesses. H.R. 6376 has been enthusiastically endorsed by the American Institute of Architects (AIA).

The Implications of Varying “Zero‐Waste” Approaches

• A quick note on the politics of zero waste: GRRN, acting under the auspices of ZWIA,

firmly advocates for clean and renewable energies and practices, like solar and wind

• energy. In many states, garbage is incinerated and, in the process, energy is

harnessed.

• According to GRRN’s website, Companies incinerating and producing energy

through incineration have had lobbyists and lawyers pursue legal and tax recognition of this practice as a “green energy” practice.

• Companies deciding to pursue such practices should carefully consider the

implications of doing so with regard to eligibility for recognition from entities like GRRN and ZWIA. These groups argue that incentivizing incineration of waste as “green energy” production is antithetical to the zero‐waste philosophy, as it leads to the destruction of resources (recall that part of subscribing to ZWIA’s definition of “zero waste” is viewing all waste as resources) and pollution, even if energy is created.

• Bottom line: each company must choose for itself the right programs and initiatives

to pursue, but choices that cross into the realm of green energy and zero waste are subject to the surrounding politics.

Why “Zero Waste” Matters: Benefits and Incentives

• On a basic level, the foundation of any sound zero‐waste program is a commitment to

the overall reduction of waste. The reduction of waste, of course, presents a clear cost‐savings upfront (and direct benefit to the environment).

• An emphasis on reduction (e.g., in materials or energy used to manufacture a product)

for the sake of cost savings, however, over‐simplifies the overall benefits – and costs –

• f implementing a zero‐waste program.
• Zero‐waste programs themselves cost money to implement, including significant

investments in infrastructure, machinery, and talent that collectively make a zero‐ waste program work.

Why “Zero Waste” Matters: Benefits and Incentives

• From a financial perspective, the first number of real significance is a company’s net

profit or net loss when everything is factored into the equation (i.e., a program costs a company X dollars to run, and it allowed the company to recognize Y dollars in material and energy savings).

• However, these calculations truly are more complex than how much is spent and how

much is saved (on energy, materials, etc.), as the broader impact of being a “green” company and demonstrating commitment to environmental stewardship ultimately alters the public’s perception of the company, and the decision of members of the public to patronize a company by investing in its products, services, and brand.

• For example, Subaru of Indiana knew, as of May 2015, that its zero‐waste program

cost it about $7.5 million annually, but it estimates its gains at $11.5 million annually, with the $4 million differential reflecting not only how much it saved, but also how much it earned from new or continuing business from customers, who factored the company’s “green” profile into their decisions to buy the cars.

A Logical “Zero Waste” Approach

1. Data management is the first practical step in approaching a zero‐waste program: companies should determine what their consumption habits are (even in the context of design) to create a starting point from which to build. 2. The second practical step is to identify and secure all “low‐hanging fruit” (i.e., resolving the easiest, highest‐return problems first). 3. Once a company knows the extent of its waste profile and plans to resolve the primary issues, it should then seek creative solutions from its employees and / or start the corporate benchmarking process of learning from peers.

• GM, for instance, came up with the solution of using old oil booms (plastic

devices that are used to control oil spills) in components for the Chevy Volt. GM also found a way to compress polystyrene foam packaging into pellets, process the pellets with polymers, and make soles for shoes.

• In another practical approach, Subaru aims to design car parts from their

inception that are easily recyclable and re‐usable (i.e., even if the components are newly‐manufactured, they are designed with thought given to how they can be used once a car breaks down).

• “Zero waste” efforts strongly benefit from re‐thinking manufacturing itself.

John Bradburn

GM Global Manager of Waste Reduction

Stuff, Things and People Working to Grow Economies and Communities

GM Sustainability Goals

• All manuf. sites will have a wildlife habitat certification or

equivalent (where feasible)

• GM will utilize 125 MW of renewable energy sources
• Reduce energy intensity by 20% (baseline 2010)
• Reduce carbon intensity by 20% (baseline 2010)
• Reduce total waste by 40% (baseline 2010)
• Reduce water intensity by 15% (baseline 2010)
• Reduce VOC intensity by 10% (baseline 2010)
• 100 mfg. sites and 50 non‐manufacturing sites are landfill‐

free

Sustainable Materials Management

SMM is an umbrella program for the following sustainability activities:

• Design for the Environment (DfE)
• Global By‐product Management
• Beneficial Reuse Process
• Circular Economy
• Landfill Free

Canada 6 United States 48 Mexico 17 Argentina 3 United Kingdom 5 France 1 Germ any 9 Poland 3 Austria 1 Spain 2 I ndia 5 China 11 Thailand 4 South Korea 17

North Am erica 7 1 Asia Pacific 3 8 Europe 2 3 South Am erica 1 5 Africa 5

GM’s 1 5 2 LANDFI LL-FREE FACI LI TI ES

Brazil 9 Ecuador 2 I taly 1 Uzbekistan 1 Hungary 1 Egypt 1 South Africa 4 Colom bia 1

Design for the Environment (DfE)

• The DfE mission is to integrate life‐cycle

environmental considerations into product development, material selection, manufacturing processes in order to reduce product and facility impacts, minimize costs, as well as promote environmental sustainability.

Mission To establish one global process to leverage all manufacturing by‐ product materials (waste), maximize values and reduce the environmental impacts of GM

Global By‐Product Management

Business Case and Bottom Line Benefits

All companies should set a goal to generate 0 revenue, have 0 costs from by‐products

Vehicle Component Recovery

• By-Products Strategy Included earmarking minor

dents and scratched components into CCA Outlet Shop on a multi-facility basis to enhance financial value

Calls to Action

Leading and Sharing Innovation Creating an Industry Change

What can be done with this parking lot to improve people’s health

International trade impacts material and methodology choices

You can start with this

Add This

Shipping Crates = Raised Urban Garden Beds

1,600 shipping crates from Orion

Assembly turned into raised beds in Detroit Provides nearby residents and soup kitchens with nutritious, locally grown food

Don’t view things as they are, but what they can become

http://www.generalmotors.green/product/pub lic/us/en/GMGreen/home.detail.html/content /Pages/news/us/en/gm_green/2017/0301‐do‐ your‐part‐video.html

Overseas, a common alternativ e

Clean Tech (Wash + Flake)

Palmett

• (Fiber)

W.T. Burnett (Fleece) Rogers Foam (Die Cut)

EXO‐S manifold cover)

GM plant CAMI, Ramos, CCA (Vehicle Assy.)

FSG (Filter Media) In Flint ‐ New Life Center

The Empowerment plan (Coats for homeless) GM Plants (Air filters) Detroit, Flint & International Distribution Detroit / Flint (Home insulation)

Scrap

GM Rochester, scrap insulation UniFi (Chips)

States per color:

MI NC QC O N NY Orion Assy.

WTC Flint Tool & Die GM Ren Cen Flint

Powertrai n

City of Flint

(Sort & Bail) schupan (Sort & Bail) Hamtramc k recycling

CAMI

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Sustainability & EHS Symposium

Duke Energy Convention Center Cincinnati Ohio March 21, 22, 2017

41

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Who We Are

42

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Supplier: Automotive products

43 43

Body Side

 Body side moldings  Fuel filler systems  Claddings  Rocker panels  Wheel flares/arches  Wheel covers  Door handles

Front & Rear End

 Grilles  Emblems & nameplates  Front fascia appliqués  Liftgate moldings  Spoilers  Rear appliqués

Green House

 Ditch moldings  Window surround moldings  Cowls  A, B, C, D pillars  Belt moldings

Accents

 Center consoles  Instrument panel, Overhead, Seat trim, Door panel accents  Steering wheel trim components  Interior assemblies

Integrated Systems

 Active grille shutters  Integrille™

INTERIOR SUB SYSTEMS EXTERIOR

Other

 Roof appliqués  Vents

Download our SRG Global Gallery on your phone or tablet Android phone: iPhone:

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Capabilities

44

Any finish in any technology you want

Metal Stamping and Roll Forming Metal Stamping and Roll Forming Injection Molding Injection Molding

Core Manufacturing Capabilities

Assembly Assembly Painting Painting Chrome Plating Chrome Plating

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Global footprint

45

3,620 people 1,465 people 515 people

NORTH AMERICA

Troy, MI

Numbers based on January 2016

EUROPE ASIA PACIFIC

5,600 employees 13 Manufacturing facilities 10 Technical Commercial Offices 3 Advanced Development Centers 19 million vehicles have been

equipped with our parts

Manufacturing facilities Advanced Development Centers Technical Commercial Offices Alliances/ JV World Headquarters Expansions in progress

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Sustainability

46

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

• Sustainability. The journey.

Where did we start?

47

April 1, 2010 - Begins 4 year EPA and DOJ Criminal Investigation Dawn Raid: 26 Agents storm SRG Global Farmington Criminal Allegation: Intentional violation of CWA: bypass, falsification of records, tampering with samples, other.

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

• Sustainability. The journey.

How do we get there?

48

• Vision
• Culture
• Execution
• Measure (Accounability)

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Vision

49

SRG Global employees are committed to maintaining a safe and healthy work place, striving for zero injuries, and operating in a manner that is environmentally and socially responsible, using resources more efficiently to create value for our customers, the company, and society. We continuously improve EH&S performance through strong leadership and participation at all levels in the organization

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Culture

50

We have a STRONG CULTURE focused on creating LONG- TERM VALUE in what we do and how we do it Shared COMPANY VALUES and BELIEFS guide INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIORS

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

• Top down / leader lead
• Real investment by the company in environmental

sustainability (lead by example)

• Hiring based on virtues (not just talent)
• Incentives – monetary and other
• Included society and the environment in purpose of the

company – value creation

• Employee fulfilment

Culture

51

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Culture

52

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited 53

 Look beyond what we already know – the essence of creating value  Take action beyond what is required  Embrace entrepreneurship, going beyond daily responsibilities  Set our own high standards for sustainability beyond what society requires us to do  Pursue operations excellence beyond industry standards  Create innovative solutions beyond the needs of our customers and consumers

We are a forward-thinking, innovative company that looks to create value for our customers and society, by striving every day to:

53

In all we do, we go

Culture

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Culture

54

Focus on New Awards Program - Competition Recognize teams and individuals

• Focus on Principle 3, Value Creation:
• “. . . Pursuing safety and environmental

excellence, eliminating waste, optimizing and innovating.”

• Improve integration with operations, energy efficiency

and sustainability

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Execution - Innovation approach

55

MEGATRENDS provide the opportunities that SRG Global has classified into 5 main innovation pillars

Embedding functionality and cutting edge technology into our products Custom engineering for quality, durability and consumer preferences Creating sustainable, safe, and compliant products, processes and applications Doing more with less… energy, weight, fuel consumption Expanding and improving processes and operations

SRG GLOBAL OPPORTUNITIES

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

SRG Global Suzhou Case Study

56

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

Value Creation, Fulfillment: Celebrating Success

Culture: EHS Excellence Competition - Silver

57

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

• Measurements

– Normalized and standard across plants/regions – Easily obtainable through integrated business systems

• Accountability in the right place

– Not just EHS responsibility – Operations responsibility

Areas of improvement and lessons learned:

58

Confidential Information. Disclosure or duplication without SRG Global consent is prohibited

ALL facilities are Certified for Environmental Management

Hazardous waste reduction through acid recycling

9 facilities over 80% landfill avoidance

Nearly 99% total recycling rate in Liria (Spain) facility Over 90% of Copper and Nickel recycled (except 1 plant) Over 95% of Chrome recycled

98% of waste Plastic recycled

• Sustainability. The journey.

Where we are today?

Continually looking for ways to create value for society