United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance
(2221-A)
EPA310-R-99-001
January 1999
&EPA
Profile of Local
Government Operations
The Government Series
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
GENERAL INFORMATION
This report is one in a series of volumes published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to provide information of general interest regarding environmental issues associated with
specific industrial sectors. Science Applications International Corporation (McLean, VA)
developed this document under contract. The Local Government Workgroup of the National
Pollution Prevention Roundtable developed the pollution prevention sections that appear in
Chapter 3 and Appendix C of this document. This publication may be purchased from the
Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. The following page lists the
available sector notebooks and document numbers.
All telephone orders should be directed to:
Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, DC 20402
(202)512-1800
FAX (202) 512-2250
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., EST, M-F
Using the form provided at the end of this document, all mail orders should be directed to:
U.S. Government Printing Office
P.O. Box 371954
Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954
Complimentary volumes are available to certain groups or subscribers, including public and
academic libraries; federal, state, and local governments; and the media from EPA's National
Center for Environmental Publications and Information at (800) 490-9198. For further
information, and for answers to questions pertaining to these documents, please refer to the
contact names and numbers provided within this volume.
Electronic versions of all sector notebooks are available via Internet on the Enviro$en$e World
Wide Web at http://www.epa.gov/oeca/sector/index.html. Enviro$ense is a free, public,
environmental exchange system operated by EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance and Office of Research and Development. The Network allows regulators, the
regulated community, technical experts, and the general public to share information regarding:
pollution prevention and innovative technologies; environmental enforcement and compliance
assistance; laws, executive orders, regulations, and policies; points of contact for services and
equipment; and other related topics. The Network welcomes receipt of environmental messages,
information, and data from any public or private person or organization. Direct technical
questions to the "Feedback" button on the bottom of the web page.
January 1999 i General Information
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
SECTOR NOTEBOOK CONTACTS
The Sector Notebooks were developed by the EPA's Office of Compliance. Direct general questions
about the Sector Notebook Project to:
Seth Heminway, Coordinator, Sector Notebook Project
US EPA Office of Compliance
401MS1, SW(2223-A)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 564-7017
Questions and comments regarding the individual documents should be directed to the specialists listed
below. See the Notebook web page at: www.epa.gov/oeca/sector for the most recent titles and staff
contacts.
Document Number
EPA/310-R-95-001.
EPA/310-R-95-002.
EPA/310-R-95-003.
EPA/310-R-95-004.
EPA/310-R-95-005.
EPA/310-R-95-006.
EPA/310-R-95-007.
EPA/310-R-95-008.
EPA/310-R-95-009.
EPA/310-R-95-010.
EPA/310-R-95-011.
EPA/310-R-95-012.
EPA/310-R-95-013.
EPA/310-R-95-014.
EPA/310-R-95-015.
EPA/310-R-95-016.
EPA/310-R-95-017.
EPA/310-R-95-018.
EPA/310-R-97-001.
EPA/310-R-97-002.
EPA/310-R-97-003.
EPA/310-R-97-004.
EPA/310-R-97-005.
EPA/310-R-97-006.
EPA/310-R-97-007.
EPA/310-R-97-008.
EPA/310-R-97-009.
EPA/310-R-97-010.
EPA/310-R-98-001.
Industry
Profile of the Dry Cleaning Industry
Profile of the Electronics and Computer Industry*
Profile of the Wood Furniture and Fixtures Industry
Profile of the Inorganic Chemical Industry*
Profile of the Iron and Steel Industry
Profile of the Lumber and Wood Products Industry
Profile of the Fabricated Metal Products Industry*
Profile of the Metal Mining Industry
Profile of the Motor Vehicle Assembly Industry
Profile of the Nonferrous Metals Industry
Profile of the Non-Fuel, Non-Metal Mining Industry
Profile of the Organic Chemical Industry*
Profile of the Petroleum Refining Industry
Profile of the Printing Industry
Profile of the Pulp and Paper Industry
Profile of the Rubber and Plastic Industry
Profile of the Stone, Clay, Glass, and Concrete Ind.
Profile of the Transportation Equipment Cleaning Ind. Virginia Lathrop
Profile of the Air Transportation Industry Virginia Lathrop
Profile of the Ground Transportation Industry Virginia Lathrop
Profile of the Water Transportation Industry Virginia Lathrop
Profile of the Metal Casting Industry Steve Hoover
Profile of the Pharmaceuticals Industry Emily Chow
Profile of the Plastic Resin and Man-made Fiber Ind. Sally Sasnett
Profile of the Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation Industry
Rafael Sanchez
Profile of the Shipbuilding and Repair Industry
Profile of the Textile Industry
Sector Notebook Data Refresh-1997
Profile of the Aerospace Industry
Contact
Joyce Chandler
Steve Hoover
Bob Marshall
Walter DeRieux
Maria Malave
Seth Heminway
Scott Throwe
Maria Malave
Anthony Raia
Debbie Thomas
Rob Lischinsky
Walter DeRieux
Tom Ripp
Ginger Gotliffe
Seth Heminway
Robert Tolpa
Scott Throwe
Phone (202)
564-7073
564-7007
564-7021
564-7067
564-7027
564-7017
564-7013
564-5027
564-6045
564-5041
564-2628
564-7067
564-7003
564-7072
564-7017
564-2337
564-7013
564-7057
564-7057
564-7057
564-7057
564-7007
564-7071
564-7074
Anthony Raia
Belinda Breidenbach
Seth Heminway
Anthony Raia
564-7028
564-6045
564-7022
564-7017
564-6045
Government Series
EPA/310-R-99-001. Profile of Local Government Operations
* Spanish translations available.
John Dombrowski 564-7036
January 1998
11
Sector Notebook Contacts
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Summary of the Sector Notebook Project 1-1
1.2 Providing Comments 1-2
1.3 Adapting Notebooks to Particular Needs 1-2
1.4 Why Were Local Governments Included in the Sector Notebook Project? 1-2
2. OVERVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 2-1
2.1 Approaches for Providing Services 2-2
2.2 Organizational Structures 2-5
2.3 Financial Overview 2-5
2.4 Public Participation 2-6
3. LOCAL GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 3-1
3.1 Pollution Prevention and Compliance Assistance 3-1
3.1.1 Benefits of Pollution Prevention 3-2
3.1.2 Implementation of Pollution Prevention at the Local Government Level ... 3-2
3.2 Purchasing Practices That Encourage Regulatory Compliance
and Pollution Prevention 3-5
3.2.1 Typical Products Purchased by Local Government and Environmentally
Preferable Product Alternatives 3-5
3.2.2 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities 3-7
3.3 Construction/Property Management 3-10
3.3.1 General Activities 3-10
3.3.2 Roads/Bridges/Tunnels 3-12
3.3.3 Buildings 3-16
3.3.4 Outdoor Recreation Facilities (including stadiums and golf courses) 3-21
3.3.5 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance 3-24
3.3.6 Pollution Prevention in Construction and Maintenance 3-24
3.3.7 Success Stories 3-26
3.4 Pesticide/Vector Management 3-29
3.4.1 Purchasing Pesticides 3-30
3.4.2 Applying Pesticides 3-31
3.4.3 Storing Pesticides 3-34
3.4.4 Disposing of Pesticides 3-36
3.4.5 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance 3-36
January 1999 iii Table of Contents
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.4.6 Pollution Prevention in Pesticide Management 3-37
3.4.7 Success Stories 3-40
3.5 Public Safety 3-42
3.5.1 Emergency Planning 3-42
3.5.2 Fire Protection and Emergency Response 3-45
3.5.3 Police Protection 3-48
3.5.4 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance 3-51
3.5.5 Pollution Prevention and Public Safety 3-51
3.6 Solid Waste Management 3-55
3.6.1 Collecting and Storing Municipal Solid Waste 3-56
3.6.2 Recycling and Composting 3-58
3.6.3 Source Reduction 3-61
3.6.4 Disposal 3-61
3.6.5 Household Hazardous Waste Collection and Storage 3-63
3.6.6 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance 3-64
3.6.7 Other Operations That May Be Regulated 3-64
3.6.8 Pollution Prevention in Solid Waste Management Operations 3-64
3.7 WastewaterManagement 3-68
3.7.1 Operation and Maintenance of Sewer Systems 3-70
3.7.2 Wastewater Treatment 3-73
3.7.3 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance 3-81
3.7.4 Other Operations That May Be Regulated 3-81
3.7.5 Pollution Prevention in Wastewater Management 3-81
3.7.6 Success Story 3-83
3.8 Water Resources Management 3-84
3.8.1 Surface Water Protection 3-85
3.8.2 Groundwater (Wellhead) Protection 3-88
3.8.3 Pollution Prevention and Water Resources Management 3-90
3.8.4 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities 3-91
3.8.5 Success Stories 3-94
3.9 Water Supply 3-97
3.9.1 Water Treatment 3-98
3.9.2 Water Distribution System Operation and Maintenance 3-103
3.9.3 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance 3-106
3.9.4 Pollution Prevention in Water Supply 3-106
3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance 3-111
3.10.1 Vehicle Repair Shops 3-111
3.10.2 Fueling Stations 3-115
3.10.3 Purchasing 3-116
January 1999 iv Table of Contents
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.10.4 Pollution Prevention in Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance 3-116
3.10.5 Success Story 3-122
3.11 Local Government Regulatory Programs 3-123
3.11.1 PretreatmentPrograms 3-124
3.11.2 Air Pollution Control 3-125
3.11.3 Land Use Planning/Zoning 3-126
3.11.4 Pollution Prevention in Air Pollution Programs and Pretreatment
Programs 3-126
3.11.5 Pollution Prevention in Land Use Planning & Zoning
and Brownfield Redevelopment 3-129
4. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS 4-1
4.1 Clean Air Act 4-1
4.2 Clean Water Act 4-4
4.3 Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 4-8
4.4 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 4-9
4.5 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act 4-10
4.6 Endangered Species Act 4-11
4.7 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act 4-13
4.8 National Environmental Policy Act 4-14
4.9 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 4-15
4.10 Rivers and Harbors Act 4-19
4.11 Safe Drinking Water Act 4-19
4.12 Toxic Substances Control Act 4-21
5. COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT HISTORY 5-1
5.1 Compliance and Enforcement Data Definitions 5-2
5.1.1 General Definitions 5-2
5.1.2 Data Table Column Heading Definitions 5-3
5.2 Local Government Compliance History 5-5
6. REVIEW OF MAJOR LEGAL ACTIONS 6-1
6.1 Selected Enforcement Cases 6-1
6.2 Supplemental Environmental Projects 6-4
7. COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES AND INITIATIVES 7-1
7.1 EPA Initiatives and Voluntary Programs 7-1
7.2 U.S. Department of Agriculture Initiatives and Voluntary Programs 7-9
7.3 Summary of National Associations 7-11
January 1999 v Table of Contents
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
APPENDIX A. STATISCAL OVERVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS A-l
APPENDIX B. OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION B-l
APPENDIX C. EXAMPLES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT POLLUTION PREVENTION
AND PURCHASING PROJECTS C-l
APPENDIX D. STATUTORY MATRIX OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
AND ASSOCIATED ACTIVITIES D-l
APPENDIX E. EXAMPLES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS VIOLATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
LAWS (1992-1997) E-l
REFERENCES R-l
January 1999
VI
Table of Contents
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 2-1. Number of Local Governments by Type, 1992 2-2
Exhibit 2-2. Number of Local Governments in Each State, 1992 2-3
Exhibit 3-1. Typical Products Purchased by Local Governments and Environmentally
Preferred Alternatives 3-6
Exhibit 3-2. Construction and Maintenance 3-11
Exhibit 3-3. Pesticide Management 3-30
Exhibit 3-4. Public Safety 3-43
Exhibit 3-5. Examples of Typical Photoprocessing Wastes 3-49
Exhibit 3-6. Solid Waste Management 3-57
Exhibit 3-7. Wastewater Management 3-69
Exhibit 3-8. Water Supply 3-98
Exhibit 3-9. Chemicals Used in Water Supply Activities 3-101
Exhibit 3-10. Vehicle Maintenance Activities 3-111
Exhibit 3-11. Vehicle Repair Shop Activities 3-112
Exhibit 5-1. Five-Year Inspection and Enforcement Summary by Statute for Local
Government SIC Groups 5-7
Exhibit 5-2. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 4941 - Water Supply 5-8
Exhibit 5-3. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 4952 - Sewer Systems 5-9
Exhibit 5-4. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 4953 - Refuse Systems 5-10
Exhibit 5-5. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 4959 - Sanitary Services, not Elsewhere
Classified 5-11
Exhibit 5-6. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 7999 - Amusement and Recreation Services,
not Elsewhere Classified 5-12
Exhibit 5-7. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 8211 - Elementary and Secondary Schools . . . 5-13
Exhibit 5-8. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 8231 - Libraries 5-14
Exhibit 5-9. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9211 - Police Protection 5-15
Exhibit 5.10. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9224 - Fire Protection 5-16
Exhibit 5-11. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9229 - Public Order and Safety, not
Elsewhere Classified 5-17
January 1999
vn
List of Exhibits
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit 5-12. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9411 - Administration of Education
Programs 5-18
Exhibit 5-13. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9511 - Air and Water Resource and Solid
Waste Management 5-19
Exhibit 5-14. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9512 - Land, Mineral, Wildlife, and Forest
Conservation 5-20
Exhibit 5-15. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9531 - Administration of Housing Programs . 5-21
Exhibit 5-16. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9532 - Administration of Urban Planning
and Community and Rural Development 5-22
Exhibit 5-17. Five-Year Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary for Local
Government Sector SIC Code 9651- Regulation, Licensing, and
Inspection of Miscellaneous Commercial Sites 5-23
Exhibit 5-18. SDWIS Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Summary Information
Reported for Local Government-Owned Public Water Systems 5-24
Exhibit 6-1. Examples of Supplemental Environmental Projects - Local Government
Sector 6-5
January 1999
Vlll
List of Exhibits
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
LIST OF ACRONYMS
AGO Administrative Consent Order
AST Aboveground Storage Tank
AHERA Asbestos Hazards Emergency Response Act
BIF Boiler and Industrial Furnace
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAA Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
CACO Consent Agreement/Consent Order
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CSQG Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CSO Combined Sewer Overflow
CSS Combined Sewer Systems
CWA Clean Water Act
CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act
CZARA Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments
EA Environmental Assessment
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
ELP Environmental Leadership Program
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
ESA Endangered Species Act
FACA Federal Advisory Committee Act
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
FR Federal Register
FWPCA Federal Water Pollution Control Act
FWS Fish and Wildlife Service
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant (CAA)
HSWA Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
LDR Land Disposal Restrictions (RCRA)
LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology (CAA)
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal
MFS Marine Fisheries Service
MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
NAA Nonattainment Area
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAA)
NCP National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
January 1999
IX
List of Acronyms
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NO V Noti ce of Vi ol ati on
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (CWA)
NPL National Priorities List
NSPS New Source Performance Standards (CAA)
OAR Office of Air and Radiation
OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
OPA Oil Pollution Act
OPPTS Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
OSW Office of Solid Waste
OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
OW Office of Water
P2 Pollution Prevention
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl
PMN Premanufacture Notice
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works
PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration
PSM Process Safety Management
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SEP Supplemental Environmental Project
SERC State Emergency Response Commission
SIC Standard Industrial Classification
SIP State Implementation Plan
SOX Sulfur Oxides
SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflow
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
TOD Transit-Oriented Development
TRI Toxic Release Inventory
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TSD Treatment, Storage, and Disposal
TSS Total Suspended Solids
UIC Underground Injection Control (SDWA)
UST Underground Storage Tank (RCRA)
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOE Variance or Exemption
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
January 1999
List of Acronyms
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 SUMMARY OF THE SECTOR NOTEBOOK PROJECT
Environmental policies based upon comprehensive analysis of air, water and land pollution (such
as economic sector, and community-based approaches) are becoming an important supplement to
traditional single-media approaches to environmental protection. Environmental regulatory
agencies are beginning to embrace comprehensive, multi-statute solutions to facility permitting,
compliance assurance, education/outreach, research, and regulatory development issues. The
central concepts driving the new policy direction are that pollutant releases to each
environmental medium (air, water and land) affect each other, and that environmental strategies
must actively identify and address these interrelationships by designing policies for the "whole"
facility. One way to achieve a whole facility focus is to design environmental policies for similar
industrial facilities. By doing so, environmental concerns that are common to the manufacturing
of similar products can be addressed in a comprehensive manner. Recognition of the need to
develop the industrial "sector-based" approach within the EPA Office of Compliance led to the
creation of this document.
The Sector Notebook Project was initiated by the Office of Compliance within the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) to provide its staff and managers with
summary information for eighteen specific industrial sectors. As other EPA offices, states, the
regulated community, environmental groups, and the public became interested in this project, the
scope of the original project was expanded. The ability to design comprehensive, common sense
environmental protection measures for specific industries is dependent on knowledge of several
interrelated topics. For the purposes of this project, the key elements chosen for inclusion are:
general industry information (economic and geographic); a description of industrial processes;
pollution outputs; pollution prevention opportunities; Federal statutory and regulatory
framework; compliance history; and a description of partnerships that have been formed between
regulatory agencies, the regulated community and the public.
For any given industry, each topic listed above could alone be the subject of a lengthy volume.
However, in order to produce a manageable document, this project focuses on providing
summary information for each topic. This format provides the reader with a synopsis of each
issue, and references where more in-depth information is available. Text within each profile was
researched from a variety of sources, and was usually condensed from more detailed sources
pertaining to specific topics. This approach allows for a wide coverage of activities that can be
further explored based upon the references listed at the end of this profile. As a check on the
January 1999 1-1 Introduction
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
information included, each notebook went through an external document review process. The
Office of Compliance appreciates the efforts of all those that participated in this process and
enabled us to develop more complete, accurate and up-to-date summaries. Many of those who
reviewed this notebook are listed in Chapter 7 and may be sources of additional information.
The individuals and groups on this list do not necessarily concur with all statements within this
notebook.
1.2 PROVIDING COMMENTS
OECA's Office of Compliance plans to periodically review and update the notebooks and will
make these updates available both in hard copy and electronically. If you have any comments on
the existing notebook, or if you would like to provide additional information, please send a hard
copy and computer disk to the EPA Office of Compliance, Sector Notebook Project (2223-A),
401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460. Comments can also be sent via the web page or to
notebook@epamail.epa.gov.
1.3 ADAPTING NOTEBOOKS TO PARTICULAR NEEDS
The scope of the sector described in this notebook approximates the national occurrence of
entities within the sector. In many instances, entities within specific geographic regions or states
may have unique characteristics that are not fully captured in these profiles. The Office of
Compliance encourages state and local environmental agencies and other groups to supplement
or re-package the information included in this notebook to include more specific information that
may be available. Additionally, interested states may want to supplement the "Summary of
Applicable Federal Statutes and Regulations" chapter with state and local requirements.
Compliance or technical assistance providers may also want to develop the "Pollution
Prevention" sections in more detail. Please contact the appropriate specialist listed on the
opening page of this notebook if your office is interested in assisting us in the further
development of the information or policies addressed within this volume. If you are interested in
assisting in the development of new notebooks, please contact the Office of Compliance at 202-
564-2395.
1.4 WHY WERE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS INCLUDED IN THE SECTOR NOTEBOOK PROJECT?
To date, the sector notebook project has focused exclusively on specific sectors of private
industry, such as iron and steel, printing, and pulp and paper. However, the project is now
expanding its scope to include government-managed and operated sectors. This
January 1999 1-2 Introduction
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
It is at the local, community, and neighborhood
level that environmental problems often originate
and must be resolved. Engaging local leaders
and communities in the effort to meet future
environmental challenges is critical to achieving
successful outcomes. EPA realizes that local
governments must be empowered to fully realize
their stewardship responsibilities, and we are
working to ensure that local governments have
access to the information, expertise, and
resources necessary to build comprehensive,
long-term environmental solutions at the local
level.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Strategic Plan
notebook-Profile of Local Government
Operations-represents the first notebook to
be included in the new Government Series.
Over the past few years, EPA has been
working closely with local governments to
address their impacts on the environment, as
well as to understand their operations and
ability to achieve environmental compliance.
As a result of this working relationship, EPA
has developed and implemented many
policies and programs that focus specifically
on local governments, especially small local governments. These policies and programs are
designed to encourage compliance by offering both assistance and incentives to local
governments.
The purpose of this document is to provide EPA personnel with the additional information
needed to effectively work with and, as necessary, regulate the local government sector. Equally
important, however, the document is designed to assist local governments in achieving
environmental compliance. The intent of this document is to give the reader a better
understanding of the different types of local governments, the operations those governments
provide that have the potential to significantly affect the environment, the potential
environmental impacts of those operations, the regulatory requirements with which local
governments must comply, and potential pollution prevention opportunities.
The cumulative environmental aspects and impacts that could result from activities managed or
operated by local governments (e.g., wastewater treatment, solid waste management), combined
with the large number of local governments in the United States, enhances the need for this type
of tool.
Like other EPA sector notebooks, this document presents overview information and data on all
aspects of local governments. In addition to this introductory chapter, the document comprises
six chapters:
Chapter 2 presents an overview of local governments, including the types, numbers, and
sizes of local governments in the United States.
January 1999
1-2
Introduction
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Chapter 3 identifies the major operations conducted by local governments and presents
pollution prevention opportunities for each.
Chapter 4 provides an overview of the federal statutes and regulations that may affect
local governments.
Chapter 5 presents compliance and enforcement data on local governments.
Chapter 6 examines major legal actions that have been taken against local governments.
Chapter 7 provides information on voluntary programs designed for and available to
local governments. It also identifies associations and organizations that may be relevant
to local governments.
Chapter 3, which is the heart of this profile, focuses on eight specific areas of operation that local
governments are commonly responsible for conducting:
Construction/property management
Pesticide/vector management
Public safety
Solid waste management
Wastewater management
Water resources management
Water supply
Vehicle/equipment maintenance.
Although this list may not include all operations conducted by local governments, it is
representative of the operations that present the most significant environmental aspects and
impacts. This document intentionally omits other operations with significant environmental
aspects and impacts, such as power generation and transportation, because they are the subjects
of other EPA sector notebooks. (Page ii of this profile provides more information on the power
generation and transportation sector notebooks.)
It should be noted that while federal and state agencies regulate local government operations,
local governments also play the role of the regulator in many environmental programs. Several
programs may be developed at the federal and state levels, but are delegated to local governments
to implement and regulate. Chapter 3 also discusses this aspect of local governments.
January 1999 1-4 Introduction
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
2. OVERVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
There are three distinct layers of government within the United Statesthe federal government,
state governments, and local governments. Local governments are distinguished from the federal
and state governments in that their authority is defined in state constitutions and by state law.
According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, there are four distinct types of local governments:
County GovernmentsEstablished to provide general government, often as a direct
extension of the state government. Counties cover all of the land area in the U.S.
(County governments are legally designated as "boroughs" in Alaska and "parishes" in
Louisiana.)
Subcounty GovernmentsInclude both municipal and township governments.l
Subcounties are established to provide for direct rule in a local area. Subcounties
provide general government for a defined area that is generally smaller than a county.
Special DistrictsAuthorized by state law to provide only one, or a limited number of,
designated functions. These districts have sufficient administrative and fiscal autonomy
to be recognized as separate governments. They are generally referred to as districts,
authorities, boards, or commissions.
School DistrictsProvide public elementary, secondary, and/or higher education.
These districts, like special districts, have sufficient autonomy to qualify as separate
governments.
As shown in Exhibit 2-1, the United States had
nearly 85,000 local governments in 1992.
Subcounties represented the largest percentage of
local governments (42 percent), while counties
accounted for the smallest percentage (4 percent).
The disbursement of local governments across the
50 states varies considerably, from 125 in Rhode
Island to 6,722 in Illinois. This variance is
For the purposes of this document...
The term local government means all of the
government units described in the opening
paragraph of this chapter (i.e., county,
subcounty, special district, and school
district). The term subcounty refers to
municipalities and towns/townships
combined.
1 Municipalities include those governments designated as cities, boroughs (except in Alaska), towns (except in
some New England states, Minnesota, New York, and Wisconsin), and villages. Townships include those
governments designated as towns in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York,
Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin, as well as townships in other states.
January 1999
2-1
Overview of Local Governments
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
primarily attributable to the legal structure established in each state for the formation of local
governments. Other characteristics of the state, such as population and geographic size, may also
affect the numbers. Exhibit 2-2 provides the number of local governments in each state.
Exhibit 2-1. Number of Local Governments by Type, 1992
Type of Local Government
County governments
Subcounty governments
-19,279 Municipalities (53.6%)
-15,656 Townships (46.4%)
School districts
Special districts
Total
Number
3,043
35,935
14,422
31,555
84,955
Source: 1992 Census of Governments. Government Organization, Volume 1, Number 1, Table
3.
Although these are four discrete types of local government, it is important to note that
subcounties, special districts, and school districts can be located within a county, yet still
maintain their autonomy for specified functions. For example, a subcounty, school district and
special district could all be located within one county. The Census Bureau would count this
situation as four local governments. In 1992, each county in the United States had an average of
27 local governments. Appendix A provides more detailed information on the number and types
of local governments in the United States.
The remainder of this chapter discusses the provision of services, organizational structures, and
financial conduct of local governments, as well as the importance of public participation to local
government.
2.1 APPROACHES FOR PROVIDING SERVICES
As mentioned in Chapter 1, local governments provide a wide assortment of services to their
populations. These services are as diverse as the local governments providing them. The
January 1999
2-2
Overview of Local Governments
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
h.
CM
in
i
IE
U)
Q.
X
I
T
^>
U)
S
V
U)
3
U
re
U)
U)
re
J]
\ \c
\ \
CM
C
J2
v
D
O
U.
CM
i
|
tj
0)
c
c
o
V\
in
1
a)
ซ
S
z
in
CM
ware -
re
a)
Q
9
D
C
_re
re
S
CM
d
d
o\
^H
a?
s
a
0)
o
O
13
u
o
h-1
5t-
o
s
s
Z
.o
2
January 1999
2-3
Overview of Local Governments
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
mechanisms through which local governments provide the services are also diverse. A local
government usually provides services through two distinct mechanisms:
Through its own employees
Through a contract.
A county, for example, may hire and retain its own personnel and equipment (e.g., dumpsters,
trucks) to collect solid waste within its boundaries. In contrast, a county may negotiate a contract
with a private waste management company to collect solid waste. Through either of these
mechanisms, the local government is providing the service. It should be noted, too, that even
though a local government may not actually conduct the operation (e.g., collect solid waste) and
contracts it to a private company, the local government is still ultimately responsible for the
environmental performance of that operation and contractor. For this reason, local governments
should be aware of the environmental requirements of all operations whether they actually
conduct them or not.
In addition to the two methods of providing service discussed above, a local government may
allow private companies to compete for the business rather than provide the service itself. For
example, a county may decide to allow several private waste management companies to compete
for business from commercial and residential customers. In this type of scenario, the local
government is not responsible for the environmental performance of the private waste
management companies.
In situations where the local government does not, or cannot, provide services, another option is
to establish a special district. Special districts are local government units that perform one or
more specific services that are not being supplied by other government units. Special districts are
known by a variety of titles, including districts, authorities, boards, and commissions. A majority
of special districts are established to perform a single function, but some have been given
authority to provide several, usually related large-scale services, such as water supply,
wastewater treatment, or solid waste management. They may exist within the boundaries of a
single city, across city and county boundaries, or across state lines.
Examples of special districts include the Tennessee Valley Authority, which provides water,
electricity, and flood control services in the southeast; the Port Authority of New York/New
Jersey, which provides transportation services in New York and New Jersey; and the Sanitary
District of Decatur, which manages the sanitary sewer system in parts of several local
governments in Illinois.
January 1999 2-4 Overview of Local Governments
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Special districts are the fastest growing local government unit in the United States for various
reasons. Special districts can often provide a service more efficiently, because their boundaries
can be tailored to provide services where they are specifically required. In addition, special
districts are independent financial entities and are able to levy user fees or special assessments,
rather than rely on taxes or municipal bonds to fund their services.
2.2 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Most local governments have some basic organizational structures, however, the variations in
these structures are as numerous as the local governments themselves. For counties, the principal
governing body is usually a county board, which may also be referred to as a board of county
commissioners or county commission. The county board often appoints a county administrator
or manager whose responsibilities may include appointing county officials, supervising all
county offices and departments, and executing regulations. At the subcounty level, various
government structures are possible, the most common of which are listed below:
Commission
Council-mayor
Council-manager.
In each of these forms of government, the commissions/councils and mayors/managers have
clearly defined roles and responsibilities, ranging from passing local ordinances to overseeing
specific departments to developing and approving budgets. Special districts, like both counties
and subcounties, can be organized in a variety of ways, depending on the type of special district
and the types of services they provide.
Appendix A presents more information on the organization of local governments and typical
organizational structures.
2.3 FINANCIAL OVERVIEW
From a financial standpoint, a local government operates like any business, organization, or
household. It has cash inflow and outflow, savings accounts, investments, and debt. It also has a
defined system for managing its finances and controlling its assets, liabilities, and capital.
Appendix A examines these financial components of local governments. Specifically, the
appendix provides information on a local government's budget process, revenue generation,
expenditures, cash and security holdings, and debt and debt transactions.
January 1999 2-5 Overview of Local Governments
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
2.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Public participation is a critical component in a local government's efforts to comply with
environmental regulations because it adds a layer of accountability to the performance of the
local government. Public participation ensures that citizens are informed of environmental issues
affecting them and involved in decision-making processes from the outset, which helps avoid
conflicts, misunderstandings, and any consequent potential delays in operations. Public
participation involves various activities that can be divided into two basic categories: 1) public
outreach and education and 2) public involvement. Public outreach and education tools are
designed to increase the public's awareness, in this case, of environmental issues pertaining to
local government operations. Public involvement tools are designed not only to inform the
public, but also to encourage activism and involve the public in decision-making processes.
Public involvement also is important in fostering good relationships and open communication
among citizens, operators of local government facilities, local governments, and other
stakeholders. Appendix B describes the tools in each of these categories.
January 1999 2-6 Overview of Local Governments
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3. LOCAL GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
Local governments, regardless of size, location, or demographic factors, are responsible for
providing a variety of services (i.e., operations) to their populations. This chapter identifies and
examines some of the services and the specific day-to-day activities that occur within each. The
purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of the operations and activities, present the
environmental aspects and impacts of the operations/activities, and identify the environmental
requirements to which these operations/activities may be subject. Chapter 4 and Appendix D
present additional information on the specific environmental requirements.
It should be noted that the following sections are not exhaustive discussions of every aspect of
the specific operations. Instead, the sections attempt to highlight the activities with the greatest
potential to impact the environment. Other related activities, while not directly discussed in this
chapter, are identified in the regulatory matrix that is included as Appendix D to this profile.
A significant aspect of all of the operations presented in this chapter is pollution prevention. Not
only does pollution prevention result in less waste that must undergo treatment and disposal, it
also plays an important role in helping local governments achieve compliance. For these reasons,
this chapter begins with an overview of pollution prevention and its relationship with
compliance. This chapter also includes a section on purchasing and its relationship with
pollution prevention and compliance. In addition, each section on a specific operation discusses
pollution prevention practices and presents a case study.
3.1 POLLUTION PREVENTION AND COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE
Pollution prevention, also known as source reduction, is any practice that eliminates or reduces
pollution at its source. Pollution prevention is achieved through material substitutions, process
changes, and the more efficient use of natural resources (e.g., raw materials, energy, water, and
other resources). Through pollution prevention, the use and production of hazardous substances
can be minimized, thereby protecting human health, strengthening economic well-being, and
preserving the environment.
Pollution knows no boundaries. Pollution originating in the air, on the land, in the water, and
even on the other side of the world can eventually impact every living thing. Pollution prevention
can be applied across these environmental media (i.e., air, water, and land) and addresses both
point source and nonpoint source pollution. Point source pollution includes industrial and
January 1999 3-1 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
manufacturing wastes; nonpoint source pollution originates from automobiles, construction,
agricultural runoff, and so forth.
3.1.1 Benefits of Pollution Prevention
Pollution prevention practices are one of the best ways for localities to meet compliance
standards. Information on the waste streams and pollution prevention tips and strategies are
included with each local government operation in this chapter.
These strategies can:
Lead local organizations to meet compliance standards
Improve practices and procedures to ensure continued compliance
Move local organizations beyond these environmental compliance thresholds.
Many of the pollution prevention tips contained in this profile are cost effective procedures that
not only save precious environmental resources but also money.
Pollution prevention measures often:
Inherently save money in production and material costs
Many times lead to increased regulatory compliance and exemption from penalty fees
Lead to reduction in disposal costs
Reduce risk of employee exposure to hazardous waste by creating safer working
conditions.
3.1.2 Implementation of Pollution Prevention at the Local Government Level
Local governments across the United States have integrated pollution prevention into their
different agencies using many methods. Currently, pollution prevention practices are used at the
local level in the following areas: wastewater pretreatment and septic tank programs; watershed
and groundwater protection programs; educational activities targeted at residents; technical
assistance and compliance assistance to local businesses and industries; partnership activities
between government agencies; and in-house practices of municipal and county facilities.
Appendix C contains four examples of successful pollution prevention programs implemented at
the local level.
January 1999 3-2 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.1.2.1 Purchasing and Procurement Opportunities
Local governments can incorporate environmental and health factors into purchasing decisions.
Through revised purchasing procedures, local governments and other organizations can avoid
potentially harmful chemicals, reduce the risk of accidental injuries, and move toward
compliance. More information on purchasing and procurement procedures is located in the next
section of the profile.
3.1.2.2 Other Pollution Prevention Practices to Move Beyond Compliance
Aside from practicing pollution prevention to achieve compliance, local government
organizations can use pollution prevention to improve workplace productivity and efficiency.
Many pollution prevention practices in the office save time, energy, natural resources and money.
There are many ways agencies can practice energy efficiency and reduce air emissions and
energy consumption while saving money. The following list presents selected tips that address
general office practices:
Purchase Energy Efficient Products and Equipment. By looking for the Energy
Starฎ label on appliances, computers, printers, copiers, light fixtures, and heating and
cooling equipment you can reduce your energy bill by 30 percent and your electric
lighting charges by 50 percent while cutting pollution.
Turn Unused Appliances and Equipment Off. Turn off equipment (e.g., computers,
printers, copiers) and lights at night and on weekends, and unplug appliances when they
are not in use.
Use Natural Lighting or, When Not Practical, Fluorescent Lighting. Design
buildings and offices to maximize natural lighting, thereby decreasing energy usage. If
lighting is needed, consider using fluorescent lighting. By replacing lamps and light
fixtures with energy conserving fluorescent bulbs, you will save 75 percent of the
energy used with incandescent bulbs. If you currently have fluorescent lighting,
consider using a more efficient type that has an electronic ballast that burns cooler.
Caution: Remember to properly dispose of fluorescent bulbs.
Reduce Paper Usage and Increase Electronic Mail. By double siding copies, reusing
single-sided paper (e.g., for receiving faxes, taking notes), using electronic mail, and
January 1999 3-3 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
circulating documents with routing slips, an organization can save a significant amount
of energy and natural resources. One ton of waste paper saves enough energy to power
an average home for 6 months.
Reduce Usage of Packaging and Shipping Materials. By using boxes and envelopes
suited to the size of your mailings, you can reduce large quantities of materials - both in
the packaging itself as well as the packing materials. When packaging is necessary,
reuse old newspaper or purchase packaging materials that do not contain polystyrene or
other plastics.
Resources
"Preventing Pollution in our Cities and Counties: A Compendium of Case Studies," NPPR,
NACo, NACCHO and U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1995.
U.S. EPA Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse, 401 M Street, SW (7409),
Washington, DC 20460 (http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/p2home)
Enviro$en$e, U.S. EPA Operations Research Development Division, 401 M Street, SW (MC-
8722R), Washington, DC 20460 (http://www.epa.gov/envirosense)
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable, 2000 P Street NW, Suite 708, Washington, DC 20036
(http://www.p2.org)
National Association of Counties, 440 First Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001
(http://www.naco.org)
National Association of City and County Health Departments, 440 First Street NW, Suite 450,
Washington, DC 20001
U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1620 I Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006
(http://www.usmayors.org/uscm)
American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 801,
Washington, DC 20036 (http://aceee.org)
January 1999 3-4 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.2 PURCHASING PRACTICES THAT ENCOURAGE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE AND
POLLUTION PREVENTION
Local governments use numerous products to perform public services. Product manufacturing
(including raw material extraction), transportation, use, and disposal can generate byproducts that
stress local and global environmental resources, as well as pose health threats to product users
and the public. By incorporating environmental and health criteria into purchasing
specifications, local governments can avoid the use of potentially harmful chemicals, reduce the
risk of accidents and toxic releases, and more easily achieve regulatory compliance. Localities
are also discovering they can save money by reducing the amount of hazardous materials they
handle and by purchasing energy efficient equipment.
Presidential Executive Order 13101 (which strengthens Executive Order 12873) "Greening the
Government Through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal Acquisition," has directed
federal agencies to increase their demand for recycled content products and other
environmentally preferable products and services. Many local and state governments have
voluntarily adopted policies that support the Executive Order and have increased their
procurement of recycled products and products that are less hazardous, non-toxic, energy
efficient, and that generate less waste.
3.2.1 Typical Products Purchased by Local Governments and Environmentally
Preferable Product Alternatives
The composition of wastes and the types of emissions generated by local governments is directly
affected by the products they purchase. Choosing environmentally-preferable alternatives to
products that are considered hazardous, or that contribute to wastes covered under environmental
regulations, is a preventative strategy available to any agency involved in product requisition.
Please refer to the accompanying local government operations in this profile for specific wastes
generated and pollution prevention opportunities.
Exhibit 3-1 presents products that may be purchased by local governments and includes
environmentally preferred alternatives to consider. This does not constitute an endorsement of
any particular products. All products should be researched and tested.
January 1999 3-5 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit 3-1. Typical Products Purchased by Local Governments and Environmentally-
Preferred Alternatives
Department/Operation
Products Purchased
Environmentally-Preferred
Alternatives
Construction/Property
Management
Construction Site Fill/Base
Material (stone, dirt, etc.)
Structural Building Materials
Electrical Equipment
Adhesives
Petroleum-Based Solvents and
Cleaners
Petroleum-Based Paints
Fill/Base Containing Recycled
Materials (recycled concrete, glass,
or asphalt)
Recycled Content Building Materials
Energy-Efficient Equipment and
Building Design (low-mercury
fluorescent lights; energy efficient
HVAC)
Vegetable-Based Adhesives
Vegetable/Citrus-Based Solvents
Water-Based Low VOC Paints
Vector/Pest Management
Chemical Pesticides and
Herbicides
Integrated Pest Management
(mechanical, physical, and biological
pest control techniques; least-
hazardous chemical options)
Public Safety
Fire Response and Suppression
Mercury Batteries
Mercury Thermometers
Lead Bullets
Ozone-Safe Fire Extinguishers
Mercury-Free and Rechargeable
Batteries
Mercury-Free Thermometers
Ceramic Bullets (for firing range use
only)
Solid Waste
Management
Vehicle Fuel (gasoline, diesel
fuel)
Recycling Bins and Residential
Trash Cans
Alternative Fuels (natural gas,
propane, solar generated electricity)
Recycled Content Recycling Bins and
Trash Cans
January 1999
5-6
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Department/Operation
Products Purchased
Environmentally-Preferred
Alternatives
Waste water
Management
Chlorine, Hypochlorite
Petroleum-Based Lubricants
Petroleum-Based Solvents
Ultraviolet Osmosis
Vegetable-Based Lubricants
Vegetable/Citrus-Based Solvents;
Aqueous-Based Parts Washers
Vehicle/Equipment
Maintenance
Petroleum-Based and
Chlorinated Solvents (parts
washers, brake cleaners)
Automotive Fluids
Tires
Aqueous-Based Cleaners; Microbial
Agents; Vegetable/Citrus-Based
Solvents; Aerosol-free Cleaners
Recycled Automotive Fluids (re-
refined motor oil and recycled
propylene glycol antifreeze)
Retread Tires; Tires with Maximum
Durability
Printing
Petroleum-Based Inks
Perchloroethylene; Petroleum
Distillates (blanket washes)
Soy/Vegetable-Based Inks; Water-
Washable Ink Systems
Vegetable Ester Solvents; Terpene-
Based Solvents
Administrative Activities
Electronic Office Equipment
Office Furniture
Paper Supplies; Paper Use
Toner Cartridges
Energy-Efficient Office Equipment
Refurbished Furniture
Post-Consumer Recycled Content,
Chlorine-Free Paper; Double-Sided
Copying; Reuse of Scrap Paper
Remanufactured Toner Cartridges
3.2.2 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
The following list highlights selected strategies for preventing pollution through purchasing
practices:
Pass a purchasing policy that promotes the integration of environmental and health
criteria in all product specifications.
January 1999
5-7
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Form an interdepartmental committee to investigate environmental purchasing
opportunities.
Educate the entire staff about health effects associated with chemicals commonly
contained in the products they use, or are exposed to, and provide information on
alternatives. Prompt users to choose environmentally preferable products.
Involve product end-users throughout the decision-making process, request that vendors
perform product demonstrations for staff, and compare products.
Choose one department/operation at a time to incorporate environmentally preferable
products. Review final product specifications with product user or operation supervisor
to ensure that their needs are satisfied.
Review all purchases and product Material Safety Data Sheets for potential
environmental and health impacts associated with products being purchased.
Avoid purchasing products that are potentially harmful to the user, public, or environment
(e.g., contain known or suspected carcinogens and other toxic ingredients).
Prevent the generation of hazardous wastes in operations by eliminating products that
contain hazardous ingredients.
Participate in cooperative purchasing ventures with other jurisdictions, your state, and
vendors to increase availability of environmentally preferable products and reduce
internal costs associated with the formal bid process.
When researching environmental purchasing, utilize resources and expertise available
from vendors, manufacturers, government agencies, non-profit and other organizations.
Consider environmental and health impacts associated with a product's life cycle prior to
drafting bid specifications ("product life cycle" includes raw material extraction or
development, product manufacturing, transportation to market, product use, and
disposal).
Implement waste reduction activities (e.g., implement lease agreements that require
vendors to take responsibility for products as they become obsolete; require prospective
January 1999 3-8 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
bidders to avoid excess paper and packaging in their bid and proposal submittals such as
avoiding plastic covers and dividers, using both sides of paper, and using post-consumer
recycled content paper; specify copiers and printers with double-sided printing
capabilities; etc.)
Begin an energy conservation program and invest in energy-efficient equipment and
building design (specify EPA "Energy Star" certified equipment and require equipment
installers to activate efficiency features upon product installation).
Appendix C presents information on a local government that significantly reduced pollution by
implementing carefully chosen purchasing operations.
Resources
National Association of Counties (NACo) Environmental Purchasing Project, 440 First Street,
NW, Washington, DC 20001; phone: (202) 393-6226,
(www.naco. org/programs/environ/pur chase, cfm).
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Listserve (EPPNET). Established and maintained by the
Northeast Recycling Council (802) 254-3636. To subscribe to EPPNET, send an e-mail
message to {lyris@aladdin.webrover.com) with SUBSCRIBE EPPNET
on the subject line or in the body of the message.
U.S. EPA Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program, U.S. EPA (7409), 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460 (http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/epp).
U.S. EPA and DOE Energy Star Program, U.S. EPA (6202J), 401 M Street, SW, Washington,
DC 20460 (888) 782-7937, (http://www.epa.gov/appdstar/buildings.html).
Office Green Buying Guide and Choose Green Reports: Green Seal, 1400 16th Street, NW,
Suite 300, Washington, DC 20036-2215; phone: (202) 588-8400, (www.greenseal.org).
Scientific Certification Systems, 1939 Harrison Street, Suite 400, Oakland, CA, 94612; phone:
(510) 832-1415, (www.scsl.com/).
January 1999 3-9 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Toxic Turnaround - A Guide to Reducing Pollution for Local Governments, Environmental
Health Coalition, 1717 Kettner Blvd., Suite 100, San Diego, CA; phone: (619) 235-0281,
(www. environmentalhealth. org).
Sustainable Building Technical Manual - Green Building Design, Construction, and Operations,
Public Technology, Inc. (PTI), the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), U.S. DOE, and
U.S. EPA; printed copies available for purchase from PTI at (301) 490-2188, and from
USGBC at USGBC-SF, 90 New Montgomery Street, Suite 1001, San Francisco, CA 94105.
Environmental Purchasing Model Resolutions from Local Governments, National Association of
Counties, 440 First Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20001; phone: (202) 393-6226,
(www.naco. org/programs/environ/purchase. cfm).
"Pollution Prevention Questionnaire for Municipal Departments" and "Procurement
Recommendations Applicable to Multiple City Departments and Agencies," Environmental
Defense Fund, 1875 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 1016, Washington, DC 20009; phone
(202) 387-3500; contact Lois Epstein (Lois_Epstein@edforg).
3.3 CONSTRUCTION/PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT
As shown in Exhibit 3-2, local governments
may be responsible for constructing and
maintaining roads, bridges, tunnels, buildings,
treatment plants, and landfills, as well as for
renovating and demolishing buildings.
Construction and maintenance activities, which
typically involve planning, coordination, and
oversight by the local government, are essential to the infrastructure for transportation,
administration, public services (e.g., wastewater treatment), and, in some cases, housing.
3.3.1 General Activities
Several administrative activities can affect the severity of environmental impacts, as well as
relevant regulatory burdens on the construction and maintenance of local government facilities.
The following list presents some of these activities:
January 1999
5-10
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Zoning. Zoning decisions that allow an increase in the total impervious area of the local
government's jurisdiction lead to increased storm water runoff, often causing increased
erosion, degraded water quality, and the need for the local government to install new
controls or best management practices (BMPs) to comply with its National Pollutant
Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES) storm water permit. By considering the
Exhibit 3-2. Construction and Maintenance
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
1
r
New
Construction
1
r
Maintenance
and Renovation
1
r
Traffic
Management
1
r
New
Construction
1
r
Maintenance
and Repair
^ r
Renovation
and Demolition
impacts prior to making the zoning decisions, the local government can either prepare for
the impact of those decisions (e.g., concurrently construct storm water catch basins while
allowing construction of a new commercial parking lot) or decide that the cost of the
zoning decision is greater than the benefit.
Coordination. Many agencies within the local government are often required to directly
coordinate their efforts in order to comply with existing permits. BMPs included as part
of a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) NPDES permit condition for a combined
sewer system often require street sweeping on a regular basis. The POTW may be
ultimately responsible for permit compliance, but the local government street
maintenance department may be needed to ensure that the permit conditions are met (e.g.,
the streets get swept every 2 weeks).
Planning and Design. Whenever a local government is planning and designing a
construction project, a local government should apply the concept of an environmental
January 1999
5-11
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
management system. That is, the local government should evaluate the environmental
aspects and impacts of the project and establish procedures to minimize the impacts.
Monitoring Contractors. In many cases, local governments hire contractors to assist or
manage local government operations, such as monitoring or well sampling, solid waste
disposal, or vehicle maintenance. Local governments must develop reporting or
monitoring methods, therefore, to ensure that contractor operations comply with all
regulations that apply to the local government.
3.3.2 Roads/Bridges/Tunnels
Local government activities related to roads, bridges, and tunnels include new construction,
maintenance of existing infrastructure, and traffic management. Because these activities could
affect the environment, they may be subject to environmental laws and regulations, as indicated
in the following list.
New constructionClean Water Act (CWA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), Rivers and
Harbors Act, Clean Air Act (CAA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Maintenance and renovationRCRA, CAA, and CWA
Traffic maintenanceCAA
3.3.2.1 New Construction
Construction of new roads, bridges, or tunnels generally involves clearing land, constructing the
new structure, and disposing of construction waste.
Clearing Land for Construction. Clearing land involves the removal of vegetation and existing
structures to prepare a site for construction. Clearing land can impact the environment by:
Reducing the structural safety of land (e.g., making it more susceptible to erosion,
landslides, or floods)
Harming aquatic resources (particularly wetlands) and endangered species
January 1999 3-12 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Increasing soil erosion and sedimentation caused by the removal of vegetation
Increasing the flow to storm sewer systems leading to increased potential for downstream
flooding and increased stream bank erosion in receiving waters.
Additional impacts of construction include dust/odors from construction traffic, air emissions,
noise, and vibration from construction equipment.
New construction may directly affect wetlands through the placement of fill for grading purposes.
Sediment from construction sites may also affect the hydrologic capacity of wetlands. Wetland
losses may increase downstream flooding and may impact a wide variety of aquatic and upland
species. If impacting aquatic areas, such as wetlands, and endangered species habitat, local
governments must obtain a special permit before beginning a construction project. The U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulates any dredging and general construction in, over, and
under navigable waters of the United States under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. The
Corps also regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the United States,
which include wetlands. These wetland activities are regulated under Section 404 of the CWA
and may require a Section 404 permit. In addition, controlling construction site discharges
(particularly storm water runoff) is regulated under the storm water provisions of EPA's NPDES
permitting program, as well as local erosion and sediment control programs.
The ESA provides protection for federally listed
threatened and endangered species of plants,
animals, and their habitats. Local government
.,.,.,. , ,, T-.CA i A extinct. Threatened species are likely to
responsibilities under the ESA depend upon become endangered fn the foreseeayble
whether the proposed activities occur with federal future.
Endangered species are plants and
animals that, without special protection and
management, are in danger of becoming
government involvement. Federal government
involvement is triggered when a project seeks to cross public lands, receives public funds, or
requires a federal permit (e.g., Section 404 wetland permit).
Any activities by local governments that involve new construction may be regulated under NEPA
(if they involve federal funds) or other state laws that require the preparation of an environmental
impact statement. Construction impacts on receiving waters may be regulated under the NPDES
storm water section of the CWA and may require the local government to obtain a permit and
implement certain controls. Air and noise impacts may be regulated under the CAA and state
and local ordinances.
January 1999 3-13 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Construction Waste Disposal. Most of the
waste generated through construction activities
is nonhazardous solid waste. Typical wastes
generated at construction sites include
concrete, steel, wood, rubber, asphalt, soil, and
organic matter, such as stumps.
The disposal of these wastes may be regulated
under a variety of federal, state, and local laws. Hazardous construction wastes are regulated
under the federal RCRA hazardous waste regulations. Many states and local governments have
regulations regarding the disposal of nonhazardous construction and demolition debris at special
construction waste landfills. Many states allow debris such as uncontaminated concrete and
asphalt to be used as fill material.
3.3.2.2 Maintenance and Renovation
Maintenance and renovation of roads, bridges, or tunnels may include street sweeping,
maintenance of storm sewers, snow removal, and removal and disposal of lead-based paint.
Street sweeping involves using mechanical sweepers to remove dirt, grit, and solids from road
surfaces. Snow removal includes plowing streets and sanding and salting roads. Lead-based
paint may be removed and disposed of during bridge and tunnel maintenance. Maintenance and
renovation activities may impact the environment by removing materials that can enter storm
sewers (sweeping), adding materials that end up in storm sewers and are discharged to water
ways (salting, sanding, sandblasting), or emitting contaminated dust to the air (paint removal).
Aspects of these activities may be regulated under the CWA, RCRA, and local solid waste
disposal requirements.
Street Sweeping. Local governments may be required to sweep streets as a condition of their
NPDES storm water or combined sewer overflow (CSO) permit conditions. Street sweeping
reduces the concentration of pollutants in storm water runoff and improves street appearance.
Considered a BMP and an integral part of a storm water pollution control plan, street sweeping
also ensures the continued structural effectiveness of storm sewers.
Maintenance of Storm Sewers. Local governments may be required to maintain storm sewers as
part of their NPDES storm water or CSO permit. Maintenance of storm sewers may include
catch basin cleaning, litter removal from storm channels, and maintenance of storm water
detention facilities. Catch basin cleaning and litter removal from channels protect against street
January 1999
5-14
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
flooding and remove potential pollutants from storm water. Publicly owned storm water
detention facilities and other pollutant removal structures, such as sand filters and oil and grit
separators, also require frequent maintenance. Disposal of materials generated during cleaning
may be regulated under local solid waste disposal requirements.
Snow Removal. To maintain road safety in the winter, local governments may apply salt and
abrasives (e.g., sand) and remove snow . Heavy applications of salts and abrasives may be
necessary at busy intersections and steep hills. These activities can negatively affect water
quality by increasing sedimentation and salinity in surrounding water bodies. If applied
frequently or improperly, salt may leach into the groundwater and contaminate drinking water
supplies.
To prevent such contamination, snow removal activities may be regulated under a local
government's NPDES storm water permit. The permit may require or recommend that the local
government take steps to minimize the impact of snow removal activities. In addition, the permit
may require designation of sensitive areas (i.e., near public water supply facilities or high levels
of groundwater recharge) where pollution prevention practices must be followed. Some of these
practices include prohibiting dumping of heavily treated snow directly into water bodies or in or
around drinking water supplies or landfills, proper operation of salt storage facilities to reduce
potential salt-contaminated runoff, and use of alternative deicing materials.
Removal and Disposal of Lead-Based Paint. Lead-based paint is typically removed from
bridges by sandblasting or abrasive blasting prior to refurbishing and repainting.
Sandblasting/abrasive blasting removes the existing paint off a bridge or tunnel with high
velocity sand or synthetic particles. This process could contaminate the air with lead dust and
soil and water during disposal or spills of lead-contaminated sand/abrasive and paint chips.
Where possible, blasting takes place in areas with containment to prevent releases of lead-
contaminated materials to the environment. Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) regulations minimize worker exposure to lead dust, and RCRA regulates the disposal of
materials contaminated with lead-based paint. Prevention of lead dust releases may be regulated
by the CAA under the State Implementation Plan (SIP).
3.3.2.3 Traffic Management
Traffic management includes designing roads and bridges, access points, and traffic signals.
Road designs, location of access points, and installation and scheduling of traffic signals affect
the environment by impacting motor vehicle emissions. Increased access points to major roads
January 1999 3-15 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
generally lead to more traffic, while new traffic signals often lead to increased emissions from
engine idling. A local government's traffic management plan must conform to the state's SIP as
required under the CAA. In many areas, therefore, a local government's traffic management
actions do not result in a net increase of air pollutants in the state.
3.3.3 Buildings
Local government activities related to buildings include constructing new schools, public
housing, administrative facilities, and other government buildings; maintaining and repairing
those buildings; renovating old buildings; and demolishing unusable buildings. Because these
activities could affect the environment, they may be subject to environmental laws and
regulations, as indicated in the following list.
New constructionCWA, ESA, Rivers and Harbors Act, CAA, and NEPA
Maintenance and repairCWA, RCRA, CAA, Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA), Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Renovation and demolitionRCRA, CAA, and TSCA
3.3.3.1 New Construction
As with the construction of roads, bridges, and tunnels, the construction of new buildings
involves clearing land, building the structure, and disposing of construction materials. The
impacts and regulations of these activities are similar to those discussed previously in Section
3.3.2.1 for roads, bridges, and tunnels.
Similar to new construction of roads, bridges, and tunnels, storm water runoff (which may
contain sediment and construction waste) from new building construction has the potential to
contaminate surface waters and must be controlled under the requirements of the NPDES storm
water program. As with other construction, most of the waste generated through building
construction activities is nonhazardous solid waste. The disposal of these wastes may be
regulated under a variety of federal, state, and local laws. Hazardous construction wastes are
regulated under the federal RCRA hazardous waste regulations. Many states and local
governments have regulations regarding the disposal of nonhazardous construction and
January 1999 3-16 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
demolition debris at special construction waste landfills. Many states allow debris such as
uncontaminated concrete and asphalt to be used as fill material.
3.3.3.2 Maintenance and Repair
Local governments are responsible for activities related to the maintenance and repair of
buildings, including operating boilers and cooling systems and applying pesticides. In addition,
indoor air quality is a concern, although local governments are not required to comply with any
regulations at present.
Indoor Air Quality-Radon. Over the past 40 to 50 years, exposure to indoor air pollutants has
increased in part because of construction of more tightly sealed buildings, reduced ventilation
rates to save energy, the use of synthetic building materials and furnishings, and the use of
chemically formulated personal care products, pesticides, and housekeeping supplies. In recent
years, comparative risk studies performed by EPA and its Science Advisory Board have
consistently ranked indoor air pollution among the top five environmental risks to public health.
Radon is one particular indoor air pollutant of concern associated with this issue. Common
effects of indoor air quality problems on occupants include headache; fatigue; shortness of
breath; sinus congestion; coughing and sneezing; eye, nose, throat, and skin irritation; dizziness;
and nausea.
Radon levels can vary from structure to structure. The average indoor radon level is estimated to
be about 1.3 picocuries per liter (pCi/L), and about 0.4 pCi/L of radon is normally detected in the
outside air. The U.S. Congress has set a long-term goal for indoor radon levels to be no more
than outdoor levels. While this goal is not yet technologically achievable in all cases, levels in
most structures today can be reduced to no more than 2 pCi/L. EPA recommends followup radon
testing or mitigation in buildings with levels of 4 or more pCi/L.
At this time, local governments are not required to enforce any standards for acceptable radon
levels in commercial or residential buildings, including schools. State and local governments
may pass legislation recommending radon mitigation to owners of buildings in which the radon
level is greater than 4pCi/L; however, this is not a required activity under the CAA or any other
major environmental law at present.
The federal government, as well as most state and local governments, do not have regulations or
established enforcement capabilities regarding indoor air quality in buildings, including schools.
January 1999 3-17 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
For some schools, assistance may be available from local or state departments of health or
environment. The federal or state OSHA office may also provide some help.
Boiler Operations. Local governments are often required to operate boilers to produce steam or
electricity to heat government buildings. Boiler operations include storing fuels and boiler
chemicals, operating the boiler, maintaining the boiler, and disposing of residuals from fuel
burning. Storing fuels and chemicals can affect the environment through spills that have the
potential to reach groundwater or surface waters. Operating boilers may impact the environment
through air emissions from fuel burning. Coal ash from fuel burning can contaminate waterways
if it contains heavy metals or other toxics and is not disposed of in a manner that prevents it from
coming in contact with water ways or rain water.
The storage of liquid boiler fuel (e.g., heating oil) may be regulated under the Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) program of the CWA, which requires a facility to develop
spill prevention plans. The storage of chemicals may be regulated under EPCRA or Section
112(r) of the CAA (risk management plans), which requires the development of emergency plans
and reporting based on the quantity of chemicals stored.
Disposal of residuals, such as coal ash, may be regulated under RCRA, depending on the metals
or other toxics contained in the ash. Air emissions from the boiler may be regulated under the
CAA, which requires the local government to obtain a permit and meet emissions standards
depending on the heat output of the boiler and date of boiler construction.
Emergency Release Notification (EPCRA Section 304).
A facility is required to notify the State Emergency
Response Commission (SERC) and Local Emergency
, . ~ ... n ^n^x c i i * hazardous substances.
Planning Committee (LEPC) or a release equal to or
Appendices A and B of 40 CFR Part
355 list the EPCRA EHSs and 40
CFR Part 302 lists CERCLA
exceeding a predetermined amount of certain hazardous
chemicals. The chemicals covered by this requirement include EPCRA extremely hazardous
substances (EHSs), and hazardous substances identified in CERCLA. The emergency release
notification activates emergency plans and provides information to the LEPCs and SERCs, who
coordinate release response activity in order to prevent harmful effects to the public.
Hazardous Chemical Inventory and Reporting (EPCRA Sections 311 and 312). Under
EPCRA, any facility that is required by the OSHA Hazardous Communication Standard (HCS) to
prepare or have available a material safety data sheet (MSDS) for a hazardous chemical is subject
January 1999 3-18 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
to EPCRA Sections 311 and 312 requirements if the chemical is present onsite at any one time in
excess of threshold levels.
MSDS Reporting. Under Section 311 of EPCRA, a facility must submit a one-time
notification identifying the hazardous chemicals (including EPCRA EHSs and OSHA
hazardous chemicals) present at the facility in amounts equal to or in excess of threshold
quantities to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department (40 CFR 370.21). To meet the
notification requirement, a facility must submit either an MSDS (or copies of MSDSs), or a
list of the EPCRA EHSs and OSHA hazardous chemicals. After initial reporting, if a facility
determines that it has a hazardous chemical that is newly covered in amounts equal to or in
excess of the threshold level or there has been significant new information on an already
reported chemical, it must update the information reported under Section 311 within 3
months after discovery.
Tier Reporting. Under Section 312 of EPCRA, a facility must meet an annual reporting
requirement for OSHA hazardous chemicals and EPCRA EHSs in amounts equal to or in
excess of threshold levels. If equaling or exceeding the threshold levels at any time in the
preceding year, a facility must submit to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department an
"Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form." This form must be submitted by
March 1 of each year. EPA publishes two types of inventory forms, Tier I and Tier II, for
reporting this information. While federal regulations require only the submission of a Tier I
form, EPA encourages, and some states require, the use of the Tier II form.
LEPCs make this information available to the public, and fire departments and public health
officials use the information to plan for and respond to emergencies.
Cooling Systems. Local governments operate cooling systems to maintain temperature in
government buildings and to store food in government building cafeterias. Cooling systems
contain refrigerants, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) or ammonia. If released, CFCs have
the potential to harm the environment because they are ozone-depleting substances. The CAA
requires maintenance of cooling systems to be conducted by certified personnel who are using
certified equipment and following specified guidelines for reclaiming CFCs. The storage and use
of ammonia may require reporting under EPCRA or CAA Section 112(r).
Pesticide Application. Maintaining buildings includes applying pesticides to eliminate vectors
(e.g., insects, rodents) that spread disease, as well as plants and insects that can harm the
structural integrity of the building. Frequently used pesticides include herbicides, insecticides,
January 1999 3-19 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
fungicides, and plant growth regulators. Pesticides are also used on building exteriors for
aesthetics. Improper indoor application of pesticides can harm human health, causing respiratory
and skin infections, and even death. Improper outdoor application can cause health problems in
humans, while also destroying flora and fauna and contaminating groundwater and surface water
supplies through infiltration and runoff. Section 3.4 of this profile describes pesticide
management activities.
3.3.3.3 Renovation and Demolition
Renovation and demolition of buildings can impact the environment as materials trapped within
the building structure become exposed to the environment. The removal and disposal of asbestos
and the removal and disposal of lead paint can significantly affect both human health and the
environment.
Asbestos. Buildings owned by local governments may very well contain asbestos or asbestos-
containing materials (ACM). Used for insulation and as a fire retardant, asbestos and ACMs can
be found in a variety of building construction materials, including pipe and furnace insulation
materials, asbestos shingles, millboard, textured painted and other coating materials, and floor
tiles. When encapsulated, asbestos fibers do not impact human health or the environment.
During renovation or demolition, however, asbestos fibers may be released. If inhaled or
ingested, these fibers can cause respiratory damage. Renovation and demolition activities are
regulated under the CAA, which requires local governments to contact EPA prior to renovation
or demolition, use only accredited trained personnel and appropriate equipment for asbestos
removal, and follow specified procedures for asbestos disposal.
Asbestos is recognized as the greatest environmental concern to schools. If a local government
owns or operates a school building constructed or insulated with asbestos, particularly if
renovations or demolitions occur that release fibers, then indoor air quality can be impaired and
people might suffer severe respiratory and other health problems. Local governments operating
schools could face enforcement actions pertaining to asbestos-related violations.
In October 1986, Congress passed the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA),
which required EPA to establish a comprehensive regulatory framework within which local
governments would inspect, manage, plan, and conduct operations and maintenance (O&M)
January 1999 3-20 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
activities and appropriate abatement responses to control ACM in schools. To this end, EPA
promulgated the asbestos-containing materials in schools rule in October 1987.1
Many states and local governments have since developed comprehensive asbestos management/
control programs and/or abatement contractor certification programs. In addition, EPA's
National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for asbestos regulates
asbestos emissions during building demolition or renovation and the transport and disposal of
asbestos waste. Also, according to federal regulations, school building owners are supposed to
inspect school buildings for friable and nonfriable asbestos materials. Inspection activities
include reviewing building records, inspecting and sampling materials, and mapping the
locations of confirmed or suspected asbestos locations.
Buildings built in the sixties are more likely to have asbestos-containing sprayed- or troweled-on
friable materials than other buildings. EPA banned the use of asbestos-containing materials in
the 1970s.
Lead-Based Paint. Lead-based paint is typically found on building interiors and exteriors of
buildings constructed prior to 1978. During renovation and demolition, paint removal has the
potential to impact human health and the environment as fibers, dust, and paint chips are
released. Paint chips and dust can cause indoor air contamination during renovation, and soil
contamination from demolition or improper disposal. Assessment of lead-based paint hazards
and removal of lead-based paint is regulated under TSCA. Disposal of any building materials
contaminated by lead-based paint is regulated under RCRA.
3.3.4 Outdoor Recreation Facilities
(including stadiums and golf courses)
Local governments construct and maintain
outdoor recreation facilities, including
swimming pools, playing fields, and stadiums.
Because these activities could affect the
environment, they may be subject to
environmental laws and regulations, as indicated in the following list.
U.S. EPA, EPA Study of Asbestos-Containing Materials in Public Buildings, A Report to Congress,
Washington, DC, February 1988, p. 1.
January 1999
5-21
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
New constructionCWA, RCRA, ESA, Rivers and Harbors Act, CAA, and NEPA
Maintenance and renovationCW A, RCRA, EPCRA, CERCLA, CAA, TSCA, and
FIFRA
3.3.4.1 New Construction
New construction of swimming pools, playing fields, golf courses, and stadiums has many of the
same impacts of constructing buildings, roads, bridges, and tunnels. New construction involves
clearing and grading land, landscaping, and building the structure. Section 3.3.2.1 describes
these impacts and the associated regulations.
3.3.4.2 Facility Maintenance and Renovation
Facility maintenance and renovation are performed on playing fields and golf courses, stadium
buildings (including wastewater treatment plants), and swimming pools.
Playing Field and Golf Course Maintenance. Playing field and golf course maintenance may
involve numerous activities, including mowing, irrigating (watering), fertilizing, resodding,
applying pesticides, spreading lime, and maintaining vehicles. Local governments may conduct
each of these activities to keep their playing fields in the desired condition for their designated
use. Mowing is typically done by gasoline powered mowers that can pollute the air with
particulates, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and noise. While mowing activities are
generally exempt from EPA regulations, the mowers themselves are required to meet
specifications described in the mobile sources section of the CAA.
Activities such as irrigating, fertilizing, and applying pesticides may impact the environment
through irrigation or storm water runoff that may contaminate local waterways or cause soil
erosion. If playing field irrigation leads to a direct discharge (i.e., water is drained to a pipe that
leads to a surface water or a storm water system), the discharge may be regulated under the
NPDES program in the CWA. If the discharge drains to a municipal sewer system, the discharge
may be regulated under the pretreatment program in the CWA. Local governments that fertilize
their playing fields and golf courses with biosolids from a municipal wastewater treatment plant
must comply with the biosolids management section of the CWA. Pesticide application may be
regulated under FIFRA. Section 3.4 provides additional information on regulations concerning
the application of pesticides and fertilizers.
January 1999 3-22 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Maintaining vehicles and equipment used for playing field and golf course maintenance may be
regulated under several environmental laws. Section 3.10 describes in detail these activities and
the applicable laws and regulations. Appendix D identifies numerous activities associated with
playing fields and golf courses that may have environmental aspects.
Maintaining Stadium Buildings. Maintenance of stadium buildings includes many of the
activities related to maintenance of other buildings that are described in this section. In addition
to operating boilers and cooling systems, maintenance of stadium buildings may include
operating a wastewater treatment plant during stadium events; operating a large electrical system
that includes capacitors and transformers; storing and using cleaning chemicals; sanding and
salting, as well as removing snow from stadium parking lots; and managing nonhazardous waste
streams, including food wastes.
Large stadiums may have their own wastewater treatment plants to accommodate a relatively
large number of users during stadium events. Operation of a stadium wastewater treatment plant
has the potential to impact the environment in the same manner as a larger municipal wastewater
treatment plant, which is described in Section 3.7. Wastewater treatment plants may impact
surface waters through treatment plant discharges and contaminate the air through treatment plant
emissions, including odors. In addition, treatment plant chemicals can affect the air or
waterways if they are improperly stored or applied. Discharges from wastewater treatment plants
are regulated under the CWA, which may require an NPDES permit or compliance with local
pretreatment regulations. The storage of treatment plant chemicals may be regulated under
EPCRA, while disposal of spilled chemicals may be regulated under RCRA.
Stadiums that hold evening events often have extensive lighting and public address systems that
require capacitors and transformers to assure the necessary electrical current. Stadiums may also
have diesel fuel-fired generators for auxiliary power. Capacitors and transformers that contain
PCB oils are regulated under TSCA, which requires labeling of PCB-containing equipment. The
storage of oils, as well as spills of PCB oils and oils without PCBs, including diesel fuel, may be
regulated under the SPCC provisions of the CWA, depending on the total volume of oil stored at
the stadium.
Maintaining stadium parking lots may involve applying salt or sand to lots or removing snow.
Each of these activities may be regulated under the CWA if the facility has an NPDES storm
water permit or under local ordinance if the facility does not have a permit. Stadiums use
chemicals for cleaning all aspects of the stadium, including restrooms, food service areas, and
seating areas. The storage and use of these chemicals may be regulated under the CAA, EPCRA
January 1999 3-23 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
and CERCLA. Appendix D identifies numerous activities associated with maintaining stadiums
and other recreational facilities that may have environmental aspects.
Maintaining Swimming Pools. Many local governments operate outdoor recreation facilities
that include swimming pools. Swimming pool maintenance involves treating pool water through
filtration and the addition of chemicals. The use and storage of pool chemicals may be regulated
under EPCRA, and the disposal of unused or spilled pool chemicals may be regulated under
RCRA. Filtered materials are generally nonhazardous and may be disposed of according to state
and local nonhazardous solid waste regulations. Appendix D identifies numerous activities
associated with maintaining a swimming facility that may have environmental aspects.
3.3.5 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance
Local governments are responsible for maintaining all vehicles associated with construction and
property management activities according to the operations described in Section 3.10
3.3.6 Pollution Prevention in Construction and Maintenance
Local governments are responsible for construction and maintenance activities. Included in this
category are constructing and maintaining roads, bridges and tunnels, and building, maintaining,
renovating and demolishing structures. In some cases, these activities are conducted through
contractual arrangements. A simple building/construction cycle includes the following activities:
Pre-construction
Construction
Maintenance and repair.
3.3.6.1 Typical Wastes Generated
Pre-construction activities involve the preparation of a site for future development. During this
phase existing vegetation and structures may be removed, creating demolition waste including
asbestos, mercury, PCB, lead based paints, and dust. Other pre-construction impacts include
increased potential for storm water runoff and possible negative impacts on aquatic resources and
habitat.
Construction activities may involve grading, drilling, and filling. These activities generally do
not generate substantial hazardous waste but may result in habitat loss through erosion,
January 1999 3-24 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
sedimentation, and disruption of the natural environment. Building construction and
maintenance activities generate wastes from paints, thinners, grease, resins and sealers, glues,
cleaners, hydraulic oils, paint remover/stripper, soiled rags, and solder, as well as a host of solid
wastes including paper, plastic, scrap lumber, insulation, metals, gypsum, and roofing materials.
Maintenance and repair activities involve the removal and replacement of worn or damaged
surfaces, structural members and lubricating or cooling fluids. This could result in the generation
of hazardous wastes such as lead based paint or asbestos, cleaning fluids, used lubricating oil,
and cooling system fluids.
Pollution prevention begins long before the first nail is driven. Local governments can conduct a
baseline analysis of institutional issues that affect pollution prevention /green building
construction and maintenance policy implementation. Areas to examine include procurement
policies, zoning, building codes and standards, operations and maintenance policies, and
recycling policies. Throughout the construction and maintenance process, opportunities exist for
implementing pollution prevention.
Construction and Demolition (C&D). A major opportunity in the construction and demolition
(C&D) industry is the expansion of the recovery and reuse of materials. Areas to examine include
the type of demolition process selected, labor costs, contracting constraints, project schedules,
material storage space, and marketability of materials.
Local governments should collaborate with the local stakeholders to understand local conditions
and issues. The key is to make material recovery a part of the planning and contracting process
and make waste management and recovery plans part of the contractual scope-of-work. Recovery
levels could be made an explicit factor in awarding contracts. Prevailing labor rates and local
market conditions will need to be considered since labor costs are viewed as the single most
important barrier to increasing C&D materials recovery.
Local planning and permit departments could consider the impacts of connecting permit
authorization with material recovery efforts. Educational outreach programs including
workshops, websites and informational packets are a critical source of encouraging greater
participation in C&D material recovery programs.
January 1999 3-25 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.3.6.2 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
Adopt a resolution or policy to direct future building toward green practices.
Use "first-in, first-out" materials management.
Segregate waste streams.
Reduce risks of spills by controlling access to storage areas and routinely inspecting
containers.
Recycle used cleaning, lubricating or cooling fluid.
Use water-based paints and coatings to minimize the use of petroleum-based solvents and
the hazardous air emissions associated with such solvents.
Avoid unnecessary grading and removal of vegetative cover to minimize road run-off into
surface water.
Use waterborne or thermoplastic traffic paint.
Consider deconstruction and reuse of existing buildings rather than demolition.
Use high efficiency lighting and electronic ballasts to illuminate roadways and tunnels,
and install occupancy sensors to control lighting fixtures.
3.3.7 Success Stories
3.3.7.1 The River dale Deconstruction Case Study
This study fully documents the manual disassembly and salvage of a 2,000-square-foot, 4-unit,
residential building in an urban area of Baltimore County, Maryland. It addresses issues such as
the salvage of common building materials (i.e., brick, framing lumber, hardwood flooring,
windows, doors, and assorted fixtures), labor requirements and activities, total cost comparison,
and environmental benefits, among others. In addition this study also proposes recommendations
for the improvement of the deconstruction industry. For more information on this case study,
January 1999 3-26 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
contact Peter Yost at (301) 249-4000, or read about this case study on the Internet at
http://www.smartgrowth.org/casestudies/casestudy_index.html.
3.3.7.2 Fort ORD Deconstruction Pilot Project Summary
The closure of Fort Ord, U.S. Army Military Reservation in 1994 left more than 28,000 acres and
over 7,000 buildings to be reused in the local community. Working collaboratively with the
University of California Santa Cruz Extension and the Presidio of Monterey Base Realignment
and Closure Office, the Fort Ord Reuse Authority established a specialized program for testing
the feasibility of a more environmentally effective approach to remove the substandard facilities,
abate the remnant hazards, and reuse the materials in new construction. Implementation began in
April of 1998, with four buildings selected for deconstruction, three for relocation, and one
concrete building for disassembly. Non-contaminated materials were offered at a public sale and
contaminated materials were stockpiled for future research. For more details on this project and
to receive a copy of the complete final report, call Standen Cook at (408) 883-3687, or read about
them on the Internet at http://www.fora.org.
3.3.7.3 City of Austin Smart Growth Initiative Summary
Early in 1998, the City of Austin, TX announced its kick-off of the Smart Growth Initiative.
The ultimate goals of the initiative are to manage growth, protect the City's quality of life and
assure the creation of a healthy economy. The Austin City Council created a special
subcommittee to overhaul the City's Land Development Code to provide a foundation for the
Smart Growth initiative by:
Establishing general planning principles, including land use and traffic planning
guidelines
Developing a City of Austin-supported neighborhood-based planning framework
Providing incentives and a viable mechanism for infill development and redevelopment
Analyzing the provision, management and regulation of wastewater service
Outlining a plan for the purchase of water conservation easements in the most
environmentally sensitive areas
January 1999 3-27 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Creating a plain English version of the Land Development Code
Simplifying the development process, providing project-based development guidelines,
clear expectations, and definitive expiration dates.
For more information on this initiative, contact Michele Middlebrook-Gonzalez at (512) 499-
2410, or read about it on the Internet at http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/smartgrowth/
smart_growth.htm.
Resources
"Hazardous Waste Minimization Checklist and Assessment Manual for the Building
Construction Industry," CAEPA, Dept. of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Technology Development, May 1993, Sacramento, CA.
"Hazardous Waste Minimization for the Building Construction Industry," Fact Sheet, op. Cit.
"Building Construction Industry," Waste Audit Study, op. cit.
"Cooling Water Systems, Management Guidelines for Water Quality Protection," Palo Alto
Regional Quality Control Plant, Palo Alto, CA.
"Blueprint for a Clean Bay, Construction-related Industries," Santa Clara Valley Non-point
Source Pollution Control Program, 1992, San Jose, CA.
"Residential Construction Waste: From Disposal to Management," interim document, NAHB
Research Center, Inc., Upper Marlboro, MD.
"Environmental Handbook For Oregon Construction Contractors: Best Pollution Prevention
Practices," River City Resources Group, Inc., May 1994. (located in California EPA, Office
of Pollution Prevention and Technology Development Reference Library, (800) 700-5854).
"Environmental Handbook For Oregon General Construction Contractors: Regulatory
Guidance," Oregon Waste Reduction Assistance Program, Palermini And Associates, April
1994 (located in California EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Technology
Development Reference Library, (800) 700-5854).
January 1999 3-28 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
"Construction And Demolition Waste Recycling Guide: Recycling Construction and Demolition
Waste In The Los Angeles Area," LA Network, August 1992 (located in California EPA,
Office of Pollution Prevention and Technology Development Reference Library,
(800)700-5854).
"Blueprint For A Clean Bay: Best Management Practices To Prevent Stormwater Pollution
From Construction-Related Activities," Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies
Association (BASMAA), 1995 (located in California EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention
and Technology Development Reference Library, (800) 700-5854).
"Pollution Prevention Training Instructors' Guide," Science Applications International
Corporation (SAIC), March 1996 (located in California EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention
and Technology Development Reference Library, (800) 700-5854).
"Start at the Source: Residential Site Planning & Design Guidance Manual For Stormwater
Quality Protection," Tim Richman & Associates, January 1997 (located in California EPA,
Office of Pollution Prevention and Technology Development Reference Library, (800)
700-5854).
Barren, Thomas S., "Pollution Prevention In The Construction Industry: A Workbook Covering
The Chemicals Used And Wastes Generated By Construction Trades," Construction industry
workshop, 1997 (located in California EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Technology
Development Reference Library, (800) 700-5854).
Gruder, Sherrie, "Construction Resources: A Waste Reduction And Recycling Guide for
Wisconsin Builders and Contractors," University of Wisconsin-Extension, Solid and
Hazardous Waste Education Center, 528 Lowell Hall, Madison, WI, Nov. 1997.
For more information, contact Isao Kobashi, Santa Clara County Pollution Prevention Program,
Phone: (408) 441-1195, Fax: (408) 441-0365, E-mail: isao_kobashi@qmgate.pln.co.scl.ca.us.
3.4 PESTICIDE/VECTOR MANAGEMENT
Local governments are responsible for pesticide/vector management, which includes applying,
storing, and disposing of pesticides to improve the health and appearance of their outdoor and
indoor properties. Exhibit 3-3 presents activities associated with pesticide management.
January 1999 3-29 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit 3-3. Pesticide Management
PESTICIDE MANAGEMENT
Because these activities could affect the environment, they may be subject to environmental laws
and regulations, as indicated in the following list.
ApplicationFIFRA, CWA and ESA
StorageFIFRA, EPCRA, CERCLA, and CAA
DisposalFIFRA, CWA, and RCRA
Spill/Release ResponseEPCRA, CERCLA, and CAA
In addition, although purchasing is not regulated, local governments can minimize environmental
impacts through their purchasing decisions.
3.4.1 Purchasing Pesticides
Purchasing includes the acquisition of pesticides and pesticide application equipment. Although
these purchases are not regulated directly by environmental laws, purchasing decisions could
January 1999
5-30
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
impact the environment. The purchase of pesticides sold in recyclable containers that can be
returned to the dealer will, for example, prevent the local government from having to dispose of
the containers, which could be a regulated waste under RCRA. In addition, a local government
can purchase certain types of equipment that apply pesticides more efficiently, thereby
conserving resources, and reducing the environmental impacts of application.
3.4.2 Applying Pesticides
Pesticide application methods and practices depend largely upon the nature of the application.
Pesticides may be applied indoors (e.g., housing units, schools, other publicly owned buildings)
or outdoors (e.g., solid waste management units, parks and other recreational areas, other
publicly owned land). Pesticide application ranges from household products, such as cockroach
sprays and insect repellents (which can be applied without training as long as the label
requirements are followed), to restricted use pesticides (which can only be applied by certified
individuals).
The hundreds of application methods available can be categorized into three major types:
Sub-surface application methods, including injecting the pesticide into the ground to
control subterranean insects, such as termites, grubs, and nematodes, and other sub-
surface methods, such as incorporating the pesticide into the soil
Surface applications, which include applying pesticides, repellants, disinfectants, or
mildewcides directly to the surface of something (e.g., applications to floorboards,
structures, animals or insects, crack/crevices)
Aerial application, including aircraft applications, spray booms to apply pesticides to
trees, or fumigants to control mosquitoes and wood-boring insects, such as termites.
Pesticides can be applied in many forms, including gases, sprays, dusts, granulars, baits, and
dips. Pesticide application can impact the environment in several ways and is regulated under
federal and state environmental laws and regulations. Pesticide-related activities conducted by
local governments are primarily regulated under FIFRA, which specifies application in a manner
consistent with the label. All pesticide management operations must comply with pesticide use
requirements unless an emergency exemption has been granted by EPA (40 CFR 166). (It should
be noted that FIFRA implementation has been delegated by the federal government to the states.)
January 1999 3-31 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Excessive applications may also be regulated under the CWA if the local government develops
best management practices that are included in its storm water or wastewater discharge permit.
3.4.2.1 Applying Pesticides Indoors
Indoor applications occur in non-agricultural areas or any type of structural or industrial areas
requiring pest management. Applicators must follow label requirements for both general and
restricted use pesticides. Applicators applying pesticides indoors must follow guidelines listed
under 40 CFR 171, regulating the use of pesticides in, on, or around the following structures:
Food-handling establishments
Human dwellings
Institutions (e.g., schools and hospitals)
Industrial establishments (e.g., warehouses and grain elevators, and any other structures
and adjacent areas, public or private).
The potential environmental impacts from indoor pesticide application are air pollution and
contamination of personal items. Misuse of a pesticide could cause damage to non-target
species, such as humans, pets, or other animals and plants that come into contact with the
pesticide. Pesticide labels should be followed strictly to prevent indoor pollution and potential
hazards to humans and animals. The label controls when and under what conditions pesticides
can be applied, mixed, stored, loaded, or used. Labeling requirements establish worker
protection standards imposed under FIFRA, which include information on restricted entry
intervals after pesticide usage and personal protective equipment requirements.
3.4.2.2 Applying Pesticides Outdoors
The outdoor use of pesticides refers to the application of any pesticide outside enclosed
manmade structures. Local governments may be responsible for supervising the use of restricted
pesticides to control pests in the following areas:
Public forests, nurseries, and forest seed producing areas
Ornamental trees, shrubs, flowers, and turf producing areas
January 1999 3-32 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Maintenance of public roads, electric power lines, pipelines, railway rights-of-way, or
other similar areas
other similar areas
Recreation or other outdoor areas requiring pest management.
One of the most common methods of applying pesticides to outdoor areas is liquid spraying.
Liquid spraying may be conducted by aerial spraying, tractor spraying, spray rigs, blasters, hand
spraying, or other liquid spray devices. The potential environmental impacts from outdoor
pesticide application are human exposure and air, soil, and water contamination. The application
of certain pesticides may destroy or have adverse effects on endangered or threatened species of
fish, wildlife, or plants and their habitats. Local governments must ensure that the use of
pesticides does not jeopardize the existence of these species or their habitats, as stated under 50
CFR 402.
Outdoor pesticide activities are regulated under the label requirements and application provisions
of FIFRA. FIFRA establishes worker protection standards designed to protect agricultural
workers and pesticide handlers. This includes posting warning signs in areas where pesticides
have been applied. FIFRA also requires the certified applicator to maintain records regarding the
product name, amount, approximate date of application, and location of application of each
pesticide used for a 2-year period.
3.4.2.3 Cleaning Application Equipment
There is no satisfactory way to completely remove all traces of any pesticide from application
equipment. At the end of each application, however, several steps can be followed to clean as
much pesticide as possible off of the equipment:
Rinse the inside and outside of the tank three times with clean water.
Put in a moderate amount of clean water and spray it out. A small amount of liquid
detergent added to the water will help clean the inside of the sprayer system.
Clean the nozzles, nozzle screens, and suction screens with compressed air or a soft
brush.
January 1999 3-33 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.4.2.4 Certifying Applicators
Pesticides can be classified into two categoriesgeneral use and restricted use pesticides.
General use pesticides are those that when applied properly will not cause adverse effects on the
environment and can be applied by anyone. Restricted use pesticides are those that when applied
may cause adverse effects on the environment, including injury to the applicator. Applicators
and supervisors of restricted use pesticides must be certified under Section 11 of FIFRA, which
outlines federal and state certification procedures for applicators. Applicators who use restricted
use pesticides must be certified to use pesticides by demonstrating competency in specified areas:
Label and labeling comprehension
Safety techniques
Environmental awareness
Pest identification
Pesticide application
Equipment use
Application techniques
Laws and regulations.
3.4.2.5 Keeping Records
Local governments who have staff or use certified pesticide applicators must keep and maintain
various restricted use pesticide records for 2 years. The records must include the types, amounts,
uses, dates, and places of application of all restricted use pesticides.
3.4.3 Storing Pesticides
Local governments are responsible for storing any unused or excess pesticides. The
recommended procedures and criteria for proper storage apply to areas where pesticides are
classified as highly toxic or moderately toxic and have written on their labels DANGER,
POISON, WARNING, or the "Mr. Yuk" symbol. FIFRA defines adequate storage as placing
pesticides in proper containers and in safe areas to minimize the possibility of accidental release
that could result in adverse effects on the environment. Storage sites should be in a dry, well
ventilated, separate area where fire protection is provided. Identification signs should be posted
to advise of the contents and hazardous nature of the pesticide. The potential environmental
impacts from pesticide storage are air, soil, and water contamination from accidental releases.
January 1999 3-34 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Because pesticides are typically stored in large quantities for future use, accidental releases may
be large, causing immediate detrimental effects on the surrounding environment.
Pesticides that cause adverse effects on the environment should be stored only in facilities where
special attention has been given to the hazardous nature of the pesticide. Temporary storage of
highly toxic or moderately toxic pesticides may occur at isolated sites and facilities where there is
unlikely contact with external conditions that may cause a release. Each container should be
stored with the label plainly visible, and the container should be inspected for corrosion and
leaks. The storage of pesticides must follow FIFRA guidelines under which all pesticides stored
by the local government must be registered or ruled exempt from the registration requirements
(40 CFR 152.15 through 152.30). FIFRA covers worker protection standards that must be
followed when personnel handle pesticides. In addition, FIFRA lists safety measures that must
be followed by personnel who are around pesticides and containers.
If a local government stores or uses specified amounts of certain pesticides, it may be subject to
planning and reporting requirements of EPCRA and Section 112(r) of the CAA. These
requirements are described below.
3.4.3.1 Risk Management Planning (CAA Section 112(r))
Under Section 112(r) of the amended CAA,
facilities that have more than a threshold
quantity of any of the 140 regulated
substances in a single process are required to
develop risk management programs and to
summarize these programs in risk
npprjprj
management plans by June 21,1999 (40 CFR
At present, EPA has established a list of 140
regulated substances that fall under the Risk
Management Planning Regulations of the CAA.
These substances were published in the Federal
Register on January 31, 1994; EPA amended the
list by rule, published on December 18, 1997.
EPA may further amend the list in the future as
Part 68). Risk management plans, which are
intended to prevent accidental releases of regulated substances and to reduce the severity of those
releases that do occur, will be made available to state and local government agencies and the
public. EPA has been working with industry groups to develop model risk management
programs. To review the model program, refer to EPA's Chemical Accident Prevention and Risk
Management Planning website at http://www.epa.gov/swercepp/acc-pre.htm#Model Plans/.
January 1999 3-35 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.4.3.2 Notification of a Canceled or Suspended Pesticide
Under FIFRA, EPA or a registrar can cancel or suspend the registration of a pesticide or of a
specific use of a pesticide. In such situations, EPA or the state regulatory agency would request
that all entities having supplies of that pesticide notify the state. If a local government has any
amounts of canceled or suspended pesticides, it must notify the state of the amount. The state
will respond with specific directions concerning the pesticide.
3.4.4 Disposing of Pesticides
Pesticide management includes the disposal of excess pesticides that are not capable of being
stored for later use. Pesticide disposal can involve dilution with water, incineration, chemical
degradation, burial in a specially designated landfill, and well and soil injection. The potential
environmental impacts from pesticide disposal are air, soil, and water contamination from
releases. The environmental implications are the same as for the application process, except that
the concentration of the pesticide is typically stronger because of the quantity and mass of the
disposed pesticide. The disposal of pesticides is a critical process and if not properly conducted
can have immediate detrimental effects on the environment.
General and restricted use pesticide labels outline proper disposal guidelines. FIFRA, RCRA,
and the CWA regulate these practices. Disposal activities may require notifying EPA, the state,
or a local solid waste disposal facility (landfill or incinerator) that is complying with permit
provisions. Before disposing of excess pesticide, the local government should try two options:
Store and reuse any leftover portion at the prescribed dosage rates
Return any excess to the manufacturer or distributor for relabeling or reprocessing into
other materials.
3.4.5 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance
Local governments are responsible for maintaining vehicles and equipment associated with
pesticide management activities according to the operations described in Section 3.10.
January 1999 3-36 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.4.6 Pollution Prevention in Pesticide Management
Reduction in the use of pesticides in local government operations can be achieved by using
Integrated Pest Management (IPM). IPM utilizes regular monitoring to determine if and when
treatments are needed. It employs physical, mechanical, cultural, biological, and educational
tactics to keep pest numbers low. Least-toxic pest control methods are used as a last resort.
Using these alternatives will result in decreased use of pesticides. Many of the tips listed in
Section 3.4.6.2 may not initially appear to be related to pesticide pollution prevention. The tips
will result in lowered reliance on pesticide use by making the plants healthier. Healthy plants are
able to withstand pest invasions much like healthy humans. Although IPM reduces reliance on
pesticides, some pesticide use may still be necessary. In these cases, use pesticides properly and
safely.
3.4.6.1 Typical Wastes Generated
The following lists presents typical waste generated during pesticide management and ways to
handle them:
Empty containers including bags, drums, bottles, and cans. Containers should be triple
rinsed or "jet rinsed" prior to disposal. Tripled rinsed containers should be crushed or
punctured to prevent reuse. Containers can be reduced in quantity by buying in bulk;
however, never buy more than the amount needed. When possible, purchase in recyclable
containers that can be returned to dealers.
Excess mixture (i.e., the diluted pesticide left over in the spray tank). The best disposal
method is to use it on a site.
Excess product (i.e., the unused pesticide no longer needed due to a change in procedures
or because the pest problems are solved). The best disposal method is to find someone
who can use it.
Rinse water from containers and application equipment. This rinse water can be added to
a tank and used.
Expired pesticides resulting from poor inventory management or from improper storage.
Contact the vendor to inquire if the manufacturer will take back the product.
January 1999 3-37 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.4.6.2 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
The following recommendations can help local governments achieve reductions in pesticide and
herbicide applications and maintain regulatory compliance associated with chemical use, storage,
and disposal.
Design for water conservation. Group plants with similar water needs together so they
can be irrigated together and water will not be wasted on plants that do not need it.
Proper watering will reduce stress on plants and allow their natural resistance to
withstand pest attacks without the need for pesticides.
Employ Environmental Landscape Management (ELM). ELM is a common-sense
approach that starts with healthy growing space. Select pest resistant plants, use sound
planting techniques, and correctly manage the established landscape. Place the right
plants in the right place; choose plants according to soil characteristics (pH level,
moisture retention), rainfall, and sunlight conditions. Use more native plant species and
reduce the use of exotics.
Avoid monocultures. Monocultures (single-species planting, such as large areas of grass)
are very susceptible to infestation since most pests are host-specific. Growing different
species together prevents pests from readily spreading.
Reduce water runoff by building retaining walls, which direct water to a dry well or other
areas to collect and percolate through soil. If pesticides are used, this will reduce the
likelihood of nearby water body contamination.
Use proper mowing practices. Mow grass with sharp blades. A dull blade rips grass
making larger wounds and increasing susceptibility to disease pathogens. Sharp blades
also increase equipment efficiency and reduce wear on equipment. Never cut more than
one-third the height of the grass at any time.
Scout the landscape regularly to learn which plants have problems. Most plants (except
grass) seldom have more than one major pest problem. By scouting, you will find
problems early and be able to solve them with IPM without resorting to pesticides.
Use pesticides only when needed, not on a prescribed schedule. Use spot treatment
instead of treating the entire area.
January 1999 3-38 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Correctly identify insects prior to treatment. Less than 1 percent of all insects are harmful
to plants. Take care not to harm beneficial insects.
Use least toxic pest control methods:
- Horticultural oils
Insecticidal soaps
Natural enemies such as:
> Pathogens, such as Bacillus thuringiensis, which infects and controls
caterpillars
> Predators, such as purple martins, praying mantis, lady beetles, beneficial
nematodes, and spiders
* Parasites, such as parasitic wasps
- Diatomaceous earth
- Boric acid
- Pyrethrins
- Insect growth regulators, which halt or interfere with the development of an insect
before it matures
Pheromones, which disrupt normal mating behavior by stimulating breeding pests
and luring them into traps
Insect traps
Mechanical treatments, such as cultivating to control weeds; hand picking of pests
off plants, and sticky traps.
January 1999 3-39 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Buy pesticides only in small quantities and store carefully in labeled, airtight containers.
Plan your purchases so pesticides do not expire.
Understand that pest eradication is generally an unrealistic management objective. An
attempt to totally eliminate a pest is likely to result in excessive pesticide application.
Outsource pest control services and write IPM requirements into the specifications.
Keep clutter, excess water sources (e.g., drips or standing water in plants), and food waste
minimized to discourage pests from entering buildings.
3.4.7 Success Stories
3.4.7.1 The City and County of San Francisco, California
In October 1996, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed Chapter 39 of the
Administrative Code, mandating that City departments adopt IPM. Chapter 39 states, "The City,
in carrying out its operations, shall assume pesticides are potentially hazardous to human and
environmental health." IPM coordinators were assigned in each department to act as the primary
contacts for staff and the public on IPM. The IPM coordinators also file the department's IPM
Implementation Plan, keep records on pesticide application, and review and keep on file the
Inspection and Quality Assurance forms submitted by the IPM service providers. The IPM
Implementation Plan outlines pest management strategies that the City department uses to control
pests. The strategies emphasize preventive tactics and least-toxic approaches. For additional
information, contact Alan Horn, IPM Project Coordinator, at (415) 554-6399.
3.4.7.2 Westchester County, New York
Westchester County passed a local law (Chapter 690) to create a Pest Management Committee to
develop and implement pest management policies using the principles of integrated pest
management. They also created a requirement to use chemical pesticides only where feasible
alternatives are not available. For additional information, contact Katherine S. Carsky, Chair,
Board of Legislators Committee on the Environment, (914) 285-2846.
January 1999 3-40 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.4.7.3 Cape May County, New Jersey
In September 1992, the Cape May County Board of Chosen Freeholders unanimously passed
resolution 8199-92, formally adopting an IPM plan. The plan defined IPM and established
procedures to identify pest problems and control strategies. Routine applications of pesticides
were permanently discontinued. When chemicals are deemed necessary, an entomologist
determines the least toxic option. Cumulative savings to date amount to $44,551, and the use of
pesticides and herbicides has been reduced drastically. For additional information, contact Harry
E. Kehr, Director, Department of Facilities and Services, (609) 465-1296.
3.4.7.4 The City of Santa Monica, California
Because most pest control was performed by contractors, the City of Santa Monica changed its
pest control activities by changing their purchasing practices. The City drafted a request for
qualifications, request for proposals (RFP), and specifications for IPM contractors which
required contractors to provide detailed information on their IPM experience. The RFP required
vendors to rank pest management options in categories of "low," "medium" and "high" risk to
human health and the environment. Santa Monica's specifications for IPM contractors included
utilization of non-pesticide methods whenever possible and mandated approval from the City
prior to applying or storing pesticides. For additional information, contact Debbie Raphael,
Environmental Programs Analyst, at (310) 458-2255.
Resources
Common Sense Pest Control, by William Olkowski, Sheila Daar, and Helga Olkowski, The
Tauton Press, 1991, Newtown, CT, pp. 715.
"Biological Control of Insect and Mite Pests of Woody Landscape Plants: concepts, agents and
methods" by Michael J. Raupp, Roy G. Van Driesche, and John a. Davidson. Maryland
Cooperative Extension Service, 1993, pp. 39.
"Suppliers of Beneficial Organisms in North America" by Charles D. Hunter, California
Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Pesticide Regulation, Environmental
Monitoring and Pest Management Branch.
Cornell University World Wide Web site (http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/ent/biocontrol/).
January 1999 3-41 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Handbook of Integrated Pest Management for Turf and Ornamentals, edited by Anne R. Leslie,
Lewis Publishers, 1989, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 660.
National Farm*A*Syst, B142 Steenbock Library, 550 Babcock Drive, Madison, WI 52706-1293,
Phone: (608) 262-0024, Email: farmasyst@macc.wisc.edu.
Integrated Pest Management/Cooperative State Research Service. Contact Dr. Robert C. Riley,
Dr. James R. Gate, or Dr. John M. Barnes. USDA Cooperative State Research Service, Plant
and Animal Sciences, Aerospace Building, Washington, D.C. 20250-2220. Telephone: (202)
401-4781, Fax: (202) 401-4888.
Integrated Pest Management/Cooperative Extension Service. Contact Michael S. Fitzner, USDA
Extension Service, Ag Box 0909, Washington, D.C. 20250-0909. Telephone: (202)
720-2471, Fax: (202) 720-4395. E-mail: mfitzner@esuda.gov. 401- 4939.
Integrated Pest Management Information, National IPM Network - Colorado State University,
http://www. colostate. edu/Depts/IPM/csuipm. html.
National IPM Network, http://ipmwww.ncsu.edu/main.html
For more information, contact Kay Gervasi, Pollution Prevention Manager, Broward County
Department of Natural Resource Protection, Phone: (954) 519-1257, Fax: (954) 765-4894,
Email: kgervasi@co.broward.fi.us.
3.5 PUBLIC SAFETY
As shown in Exhibit 3-4, local governments help ensure public safety by providing emergency
planning and response to releases of hazardous substances, fire protection, and police protection.
Emergency planning and response activities include analyzing community hazards and
developing a local emergency response plan to prepare for and respond to chemical emergencies.
While also involved in emergency planning, fire department activities include fire suppression
and hazardous materials response.
3.5.1 Emergency Planning
Local governments have the basic responsibility for
understanding risks posed by chemicals at the local level,
January 1999 3-42 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
managing and reducing those risks, and dealing with emergencies. Local governments must meet
requirements both as regulated entities and as regulators under EPCRA. EPCRA regulates both
emergency planning and the dissemination of information on certain chemicals to the public.
Exhibit 3-4. Public Safety
1
r
Planning
^
r
Information
Dissemination to
the Public
1
r
Hazardous
Materials
Response
^
r
Fire Response
and Suppression
1
r
Photoprocessing
l
r
Firing Ranges
3.5.1.1 Planning
Under the emergency planning section of EPCRA, local governments must prepare for and
respond to emergencies involving hazardous substances. Local governments and fire
departments are expected to participate in the local emergency planning efforts under EPCRA.
LEPCs, appointed by SERCs for every local emergency planning district, are broadly
representative of their communities and generally include representatives of elected local
officials; law enforcement officials, civil defense workers, and firefighters; first aid, health,
environment, and transportation workers; owners/operators of facilities; and community group
representatives.
LEPCs must analyze community hazards and develop local emergency response plans to prepare
for and respond to chemical emergencies. The focus for emergency planning for LEPCs is the
list of 366 "extremely hazardous substances" identified by EPA as having immediate health
effects and hazardous properties, but plans also address all hazardous materials in the community
January 1999
> A O
5-43
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
that present risks to public health and safety. These substances are found in some widely used
insecticides, herbicides, fertilizers, photographic chemicals, and solvents, as well as in
wastewater treatment and drinking water treatment processes.
Local emergency response plans delineate potential local hazards, response capabilities, and
procedures to follow in an emergency. An emergency plan must include the identity and location
of hazardous materials, procedures for immediate response to a chemical accident, ways to notify
the public about actions it must take, names of coordinators at industrial plants, and schedules
and plans for testing the plan. Initial plans were required by October 1988. The LEPC
publicizes the plan through public meetings or newspaper announcements. In addition, the LEPC
updates the plan at least annually based on chemical information reported by local industries and
the public.
In addition to requirements imposed by federal law, local governments must comply with all
applicable state and local right-to-know laws. State and local emergency response committees
are permitted to impose requirements in addition to those imposed by EPCRA.
3.5.1.2 Providing Chemical Information Dissemination to the Public
Under EPCRA, LEPCs receive hazardous chemical inventory and emergency release information
submitted by facilities and have access to toxic chemical release information supplied by
facilities to EPA. LEPCs can provide this information to local officials, community leaders, and
the public to aid in preparing for emergencies and managing chemical risks. The following
describes the EPCRA reporting requirements for chemicals:
Hazardous Chemical Reporting. Under EPCRA, LEPCs receive hazardous chemical
inventory information submitted by facilities and make it available to the public upon
request. Facilities with chemicals that are present in excess of certain amounts are
required to submit either actual copies of MSDSs or lists of MSDS chemicals to the
LEPC, the SERC, and the local fire department. This reporting requirement has been in
effect since October 1987. In addition, these facilities must submit annual inventories on
the same hazardous chemicals to the LEPC, the SERC, and the local fire department.
These inventory forms are due on March 1 of each year. LEPCs make this information
available to the public, and fire departments and public health officials use the
information to plan for and respond to emergencies. Local governments also are subject
to the reporting requirements if they have or use any of the specific chemicals in excess of
the threshold amounts.
January 1999 3-44 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Emergency Release Notification. Under EPCRA, LEPCs receive emergency release
information submitted by facilities and make it
available to the public upon request. A facility
is required to immediately notify the
community and the state (i.e., the LEPC and
the SERC) of the release of more than a
predetermined amount of certain hazardous
chemicals. Chemicals covered by this
requirement include not only the 366
"extremely hazardous substances," but also more than 700 hazardous substances subject
to the emergency notification requirements of the Superfund hazardous waste cleanup
law. The emergency release notification activates emergency plans, and the information
on emergency releases is considered in the LEPC planning process. Local governments
are also subject to this notification requirement.
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting. LEPCs, as well as the public, have access to an
EPA database called the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI), which contains information on
annual toxic chemical releases submitted by certain facilities. Under EPCRA, specific
facilities must estimate and report each year the total amount of toxic chemicals that they
release into the environment, either accidentally or as a result of routine plant operations,
or transport as waste to another location. EPA compiles this information into the
database. The annual release data are used, along with the other information the LEPC
receives, to put together a more complete picture of the hazardous substances in each
district.
3.5.2 Fire Protection and Emergency Response
Local governments may be responsible for providing fire protection services to their
communities. Fire protection services and responsibilities include fire response and suppression
(i.e., firefighting), salvage (e.g., pumping water out of basements), investigation of fires, repair
and maintenance of equipment, and fire prevention.
To provide appropriate fire protection, a city is usually divided into a number of fire districts
with at least one fire station in each district, depending upon various factors (e.g., population
density, topography, and the nature of buildings and building materials). Each station has teams
or companies for one or more fire trucks (ladder, hose, engine company). Smaller communities
are likely to have only one firefighting company. Many states allow counties and towns or
January 1999
5-45
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
townships to carry out fire protection functions. Fire departments receive financial assistance
through local governments, fund raising, and state loans, although these funds may not be enough
to fully staff and equip a district. Thus, many areas use volunteer firefighters. In small towns
and villages, which often depend entirely on volunteers, local governments usually contribute
part of the money for trucks and other equipment (except in the smallest communities). A
volunteer fire department may fall under the jurisdiction of a local government (which is
sometimes required by state law), or it may be incorporated as an independent fire company,
which is self-governing and owns its own station and equipment.
3.5.2.1 Fire Protection
As discussed above, fire departments are typically responsible for emergency planning and
emergency mitigation, including fire response and suppression (i.e., firefighting) and hazardous
materials response. In this role, fire departments attempt to safeguard lives and property against
the injurious effects of accidents or uncontrolled hazards, fire, explosion, or hazardous materials.
Because fire protection activities can affect the environment, they may be subject to
environmental laws and regulations, as indicated in the following list.
Emergency planningEPCRA
Fire response and suppressionCAA and EPCRA
Hazardous materials responseRCRA and CWA
3.5.2.2 Emergency Planning
As discussed, firefighters may be appointed to LEPCs under the emergency planning provisions
of EPCRA. Section 3.5.1 presents more information on this topic.
3.5.2.3 Fire Response and Suppression
Agents used for fire suppression vary based on the location and type of fire. Halons, which are
low toxicity, chemically stable compounds, have been used for fire and explosion protection
throughout this century. Halons are now known to contribute to the depletion of the ozone layer
and have been phased out of production. Effective January 1, 1994, the production and
importation of new halons (1211, 1301, or 2402) were banned in the United States. Recycled
halon is now the only source of supply. The environmental impacts of halon use in firefighting
are primarily damaging to the ozone layer.
January 1999 3-46 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Firefighters use a number of traditional fire extinguishing agents, including water, carbon
dioxide, dry chemicals, and foam, that are good alternatives to halons for many fire protection
applications. Recent research has led to the commercialization of new agents and technologies:
halocarbon compounds, inert gas mixtures, water-mist or fogging systems, and powdered
aerosols. The potential environmental impacts from firefighting activities using water are soil
and water contamination from runoff. Many conventional synthetic foams contain solvents
regulated under EPCRA.
3.5.2.4 Hazardous Materials Response
Hazardous materials can be located anywhere at any time. In the event of a spill, the public
safety agency (e.g., fire department, local hazardous materials response team) having jurisdiction
where the discharge occurred is responsible for taking the actions necessary to protect public
health and safety and the environment. Based on the nature of the hazard presented by this
discharge, public safety personnel may be obliged to stand by until the hazard is controlled.
The public safety agency may bill the responsible party (i.e., the property owner or whoever
caused the spill) for the expenses incurred to protect the public and the environment. In addition,
safety personnel may use materials to control a spill, protect the environment, and mitigate the
hazard. These materials and personnel costs may be charged to the responsible party.
Depending on the type of hazardous material released,
various response techniques may be used to control the
spill and minimize the impacts on human health and the
environment. The key to effectively combating spills is
- Physical methods.
careful selection and proper use of the equipment and
Response techniques:
- Mechanical containment and
recovery
- Chemical and biological methods
materials most suited to the type of spill and the
conditions at the spill site. The types of response techniques include:
Mechanical containment or recovery, such as booms, barriers, and skimmers, as well as
sorbent materials, that are used to capture and store the spilled material until it can be
disposed of properly.
Chemical and biological methods (e.g., dispersants and gelling agents for oil spills).
January 1999 3-47 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Physical methods, such as natural processes (e.g., evaporation, oxidation, and
biodegradation). Depending on the type of material spilled, this may not be the best
response technique available.
Sorbents contaminated with hazardous materials must be disposed of according to the hazardous
waste provisions of RCRA.
3.5.3 Police Protection
Police protection involves law enforcement, traffic safety, and other activities related to law
enforcement and preservation of order. Local governments, rather than states or the national
government, have primary policing responsibilities:
Patrol. A patrol officer is responsible for investigating complaints, reporting accidents,
making arrests, and maintaining peace and order.
Investigative/detective force. The investigative/detective force concentrates on
specialized work involved in the detection and apprehension of criminals (e.g., vice,
intelligence, narcotics, homicides, bomb threats).
Traffic regulation. Traffic regulation involves traffic control, engineering, and
enforcement.
Crime prevention. A crime prevention unit often works with an investigative unit and
focuses on youth investigation, safety education, and other evidence collection and
identification activities.
To support these units, police departments may participate in various activities including the
development of photographs (i.e., photoprocessing) from arrests and shooting range practice at
either police department or publicly owned facilities. Because these activities could affect the
environment, they may be subject to various environmental laws and regulations, as indicated in
the following list.
PhotoprocessingRCRA, CAA, and CWA
Firing rangesRCRA, CERCLA, and EPCRA
Laboratory operationsRCRA, EPCRA, CERCLA, and CWA
January 1999 3-48 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
3.5.3.1 Photoprocessing
Police departments may have their own photoprocessing laboratories or contract out this activity
to commercial photoprocessing laboratories. Processing photographic film requires the use of
various chemicals to develop and produce finished goods. The photosensitive medium used for
black and white processing is an emulsion of fine silver halide crystals in a matrix of gelatin,
which is applied in a thin layer on either paper or clear plastic film. The film used for color
photography consists of three separate layers of photosensitive emulsion with intermediate layers
which are coated on a clear film base. Each emulsion is sensitive to either red, green, or blue
light due to the presence of selective dyes in the emulsion.
The wastes generated from photoprocessing vary widely according to the type and volume of
processing. Exhibit 3-5 presents examples of typical photoprocessing wastes. Wastes generated
during photoprocessing are primarily aqueous effluents. The disposal of wastewater from
photoprocessing may be regulated under the pretreatment or NPDES program of the CWA.
Exhibit 3-5. Examples of Typical Photoprocessing Wastes
Wastewater
Hazardous Waste
Air Emissions
Solid Wastes
Used, treated fixers
Used developers
Used activators/
stabilizers
Rinse water
Chrome-based system
cleaners
Non-empty aerosol
cans
Discarded, unused, or
outdated chemicals
Used, untreated fixers
Used shop towels
contaminated with
hazardous waste
Volatile organic
compounds or toxics
emitted from:
- Film cleaners
- Solvents
Empty containers
Developed or out-
dated film
Out-dated materials
Used, empty aerosol
cans
Used shop towels
Photoprocessing solutions may be too acidic or alkaline to meet local wastewater discharge
limits. Fluids disposed of or spilled in floor drains or otherwise released from the facility
property are regulated under the NPDES, pretreatment, or storm water provisions of the CWA.
These provisions require notifying EPA, the state, or a local treatment plant; complying with
permit provisions; and preventing untreated fluids from reaching surface waters. The storage
January 1999
5-49
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
and disposal of hazardous wastes (e.g., non-empty aerosol cans; discarded, unused, or outdated
chemicals; solvent-contaminated rags) are regulated under the hazardous waste provisions of
RCRA. Air emissions from the various chemicals used in photoprocessing (e.g., volatile organic
compounds or toxics emitted from film cleaners, solvents) may be regulated under the CAA.
3.5.3.2 Firing Ranges
Most police departments require their police officers to practice
firing accuracy at local indoor or outdoor firing ranges. If
conducted at outdoor firing ranges, this activity may contaminate
the soil (and possibly the groundwater) with lead from the
birdshot, bullets, and bullet fragments, as well as produce airborne
lead dust.
Despite the likely contamination, EPA's current position is that the deposition of lead from lead
shot, bullets, and bullet fragments at firing ranges is considered to be within the normal and
expected use pattern of the manufactured product, and the resultant contamination is not subject
to the RCRA regulations. The bullets and bullet fragments are not characterized as "hazardous
wastes" because they have not been discarded. Where an imminent and substantial
endangerment to health or the environment may have been created by expended shot or debris,
however, remedial requirements may apply under RCRA. In addition, the remediation of lead-
contaminated soil at a firing range, either for maintenance or site closure, is regulated under the
hazardous waste provisions of RCRA and/or CERCLA. Under the provisions of EPCRA, fire
ranges must report releases of lead dust transported by the wind. A release is reportable when
more than 1 pound of lead particles smaller than 0.004 inches in diameter is released beyond the
boundaries of the site or facility.
Notwithstanding the above, EPA encourages the use of alternative approaches that ranges can
take to reduce the possibility of lead contamination. These include installing devices that can
intercept and collect the shot and bullets for recycling and substituting less hazardous materials
(e.g., plastic and steel shot) for the lead shot. To reduce and/or eliminate lead pollution, many
indoor and outdoor firing ranges use bullet "traps." Bullet traps have a rubber media that capture
bullets and contain them, as well as a filter system that eliminates airborne lead dust. These traps
prevent the lead pollution of air and soil, which would normally occur from bullet impact with
metal, sand, or the ground. Most local firing ranges hire salvage companies to recover, clean,
and recycle the bullet traps and filter systems. The disposal of bullets and bullet fragments
recovered from a bullet trap may be regulated under the hazardous waste provisions of RCRA.
January 1999 3-50 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.5.3.3 Laboratory Operations
Chemicals used in the laboratory include acids (e.g., sulfuric, hydrochloric, nitric), bases (e.g.,
sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide, sodium azide solution), and others (e.g., chlorine, ferric
salts, carbon disulfide, and benzene). The quantity of wastes generated depends on the number
and types of tests performed. Disposal of lab wastes down the sink or drain may be regulated
under the pretreatment or NPDES program of the CWA. The storage and disposal of some
wastes generated from laboratory activities may be regulated under the hazardous waste
provisions of RCRA.
3.5.4 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance
Local governments are responsible for maintaining all vehicles associated with public safety
activities according to the operations described in Section 3.10.
3.5.5 Pollution Prevention and Public Safety
Public safety operations, especially emergency planning and response activities, can involve a
variety of different local government agencies, local industry and other community
representatives. Within the public safety arena, local governments have responsibilities as a
regulated entity, an enforcement agent, a generator of various waste streams, and a provider of
quality services to the constituents they serve. Pollution prevention strategies can help local
governments efficiently and effectively meet the regulatory requirements associated with public
safety operations, provide value added services, and implement a proactive approach to
protecting their community from chemical emergencies. The three primary functions associated
with public safety are emergency planning, fire protection and emergency response, and police
protection. The opportunities for pollution prevention within these three primary functions can
best be realized by examining both a list of the wastes generated and the specific services
provided through each of these functions.
3.5.5.1 Emergency Planning
Services
Understand and manage risks associated with specific chemicals and facilities in their
community.
January 1999 3-51 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Prepare for and respond to emergencies involving hazardous substances.
Provide chemical information to the public.
Waste Streams. There are no significant wastes associated with emergency planning other than
any wastes created by the clean up of a specific release. Usually these types of clean ups involve
state and often federal oversight.
Pollution Prevention Opportunities. LEPCs, and Local Emergency Coordinators and Planners,
are in an excellent position to promote pollution prevention through their relationships with both
the facilities that store and release chemicals in their community and the general public they
serve and protect. With guidance and assistance from state and regional pollution prevention
programs, local agencies involved in emergency planning and response can use pollution
prevention as a tool to better manage the risks in their communities by working with facilities to
reduce and eliminate the chemicals posing the risk. Through EPCRA, communities are provided
valuable information regarding the presence, quantities, and release of chemicals in their
environment. This information can be used to identify local prevention priorities and establish a
basis for local officials, citizen groups, and state pollution prevention officials to target and
approach specific facilities.
Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
Encourage facilities which are required to develop risk management plans to consider
pollution prevention strategies to meet or avoid this regulation.
Establish a pollution prevention task force or subcommittee through the LEPC to
investigate ways to access state and regional pollution prevention resources to address
chemical concerns and priorities.
Incorporate pollution prevention requirements into Right-to-Know and other local
enforcement actions.
Sponsor and/or co-sponsor pollution prevention workshops and other educational events
for industrial facilities.
January 1999 3-52 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.5.5.2 Fire Protection and Emergency Response
Services
Fire response and suppression
Hazardous materials response
Fire code inspections
Employee training
Vehicle and equipment maintenance
Waste streams. A majority of the waste associated with fire response and suppression and
hazardous materials response operations is a product of the specific nature of the release or the
fire that takes place. Fire protection services usually involve vehicle and equipment maintenance
activities similar to those associated with public works and other local government operations.
For specific guidance regarding pollution prevention opportunities for vehicle maintenance
operations, please refer to Section 3.10.
Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
Safeguarding lives and property, the primary objective of this service can not be
jeopardized. There are pollution prevention strategies which can be incorporated through
training and response protocols that will minimize the waste generated and long-term
environmental impacts associated with the response incident without compromising
human health and property.
Incorporate strategies within emergency and fire response protocols and responder
training courses to maximize the containment of spilled materials and contaminated fire
suppression run-off and to prevent migration to waterways, sewers, and permeable
surfaces.
Incorporate the use of reusable absorbent booms and pads for materials containment to
replace clay and other absorbent materials that can only be used once. Reusable booms
and pads can provide the opportunity to recover a percentage of the material released and
significantly reduce the amount of waste generated.
January 1999 3-53 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Consider the use of halon free suppression materials where appropriate and develop a
specific protocol for using halon suppressants only for situations where a suitable
alternative is not available.
Review training exercises and other drill activities for opportunities to substitute less
hazardous and non-hazardous materials, and incorporate water reuse and conservation
measures where and when the effectiveness of the training is not compromised.
Promote site specific pollution prevention strategies through fire code inspections and
enforcement activities.
3.5.5.3 Police Protection
Services
Patrol/surveillance to maintain peace and order
Investigation of crimes, and detection and apprehension of criminals
Traffic regulation enforcement and traffic control
Crime prevention, safety outreach, and education
Waste Streams
Photoprocessing wastes (fixers, developers, film cleaners, etc.)
Vehicle maintenance wastes
Gun cleaning wastes (solvents, rags)
Shooting range wastes (spent casings, lead slugs, lead dust emissions)
Batteries
Office paper and other solid wastes
Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
Consider the use of digital cameras to eliminate and/or reduce the need for
photoprocessing.
Consider the use of contracted photoprocessing services through a vendor that recycles
photo wastes to eliminate the generation of photo wastes in house.
January 1999 3-54 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Most liquid photoprocessing wastes can be recycled through a large commercial
photoprocessing company or metals reclaimer.
Consider the use of ceramic or other non-lead bullets for training where the effectiveness
of the training is not compromised. Where alternatives to lead bullets are not suitable, the
use of traps and other devices should be employed at both indoor and outdoor shooting
ranges to capture bullets and bullet fragments for recycling.
Consult Section 3.10 for pollution prevention opportunities associated with vehicle and
fleet maintenance.
Implement a recycling program for office paper, cardboard and other significant solid
waste streams.
Resources
"Preventing Industrial Toxic Hazards: A Guide for Communities," M. Wise and L. Kenworthy,
INFORM.
"Risk Management Planning: Will It Lead to Inherently Safer Operations?" by Carol J. Forrest;
Pollution Prevention Review/ Summer 1997.
"Accidents Do Happen: Toxic Chemical Accidents in the United States," December 1996,
National Environmental Law Center. "Too Close to Home," National Environmental Law
Center.
For more information, contact Tom Hersey, Coordinator - Pollution Prevention Programs, Erie
County Department of Environment and Planning, Phone: (716) 858-7674, Fax: (716) 858-7713,
Email: hersey@cdbg.co.erie.ny.us.
3.6 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Local governments may be responsible for managing solid waste created by households and
businesses within the community. Proper management of solid waste is critical to public health,
as well as to the aesthetics of a community. Exhibit 3-6 presents activities associated with solid
waste management. Because these activities could affect the environment, they may be subject
to environmental regulations as indicated in the following list.
January 1999 3-55 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Collection and storageCWA
CompostingEPCRA, CERCLA, and CAA
DisposalRCRA, CWA, and CAA
Household hazardous waste collection and storage
programs are not regulated by federal statutes.
3.6.1 Collecting and Storing Municipal Solid
Waste
Solid waste management begins with the collection
and storage of solid waste. Collection involves
either picking up the waste at curbside or backdoors or
Storage is basically maintaining the waste at an interim
RCRA defines solid waste as any garbage
or refuse; sludge from a wastewater
treatment plant, water supply treatment
plant, or air pollution control facility; and
other discarded material, including solid,
liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous
material resulting from industrial,
commercial, mining, and agricultural
operations, and from community activities.
The main constituent of the latter group is
municipal solid waste (MSW), which
includes paper and paperboard, yard
waste, wood, metal, glass, food waste,
plastics, rubber, leather, textiles, household
hazardous waste, and miscellaneous
inorganic waste.
gathering it from drop-off locations.
site prior to recycling or final disposal.
3.6.1.1 Collection
Depending on the demographics, geographic environment, and/or state law, every local
government has some type of service in which solid waste is collected from residents. A local
government can use its own employees and equipment, a private firm(s) through an established
contract(s) with the local government, or a private service that has contracted directly with
residents.
Local governments use an array of methods for collecting solid waste, including the following:
Curbside or alley collection
"Backyard set out-set back" or "backyard carry," in which containers are carried from
backyards by collection crews to the curbs for collection
Drop-off stations, where residents deliver solid waste to a specified site, such as a transfer
station, local dumpster, or the disposal site itself.
January 1999
5-56
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit 3-6. Solid Waste Management
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Household
Hazardous Waste
Collection/
Storage
1
r
Vehicle
Maintenance
I
Transfer Stations
^
r
Landfill Operation
1
r
Municipal Waste
Combustor
Most activities undertaken during collection are not regulated by any particular environmental
statute. Federal guidelines for the collection and storage of residential, commercial, and
institutional solid waste are given at 40 CFR Part 243, but are not binding on state and local
governments. There may be local ordinances or state health laws that pertain to the frequency of
collection, depending on the community.
3.6.1.2 Storage/Operation of Transfer Stations
Once a local government has collected the solid waste, it may have to store the waste at an
interim location prior to recycling or final disposal. If necessary, such storage usually occurs at a
transfer station. A transfer station is a facility where wastes are transferred from smaller
collection vehicles to larger transport vehicles, such as tractor trailers, railroad gondola cars, or
barges. These vehicles then transport the waste to its final destination.
Not all local governments have transfer stations. In small communities in which the nearest
landfill is within 10 to 15 miles, compactor trucks take solid waste directly to the landfill. If
stations are used, collection crews take waste to the transfer stations where it is weighed and
either temporarily stored or moved directly into a larger vehicle.
January 1999
5-57
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
These activities may impact the environment if waste is not contained and kept from leaving the
transfer station by wind or storm water runoff. In addition to basic local building and health
codes, the operation of transfer stations may be regulated under the local government's NPDES
storm water or CSO permit conditions. Storage should be on a short-term basis only and should
prevent the waste from being released to the environment. In some conditions, improper storage
could be deemed disposal and could trigger more stringent regulation of the waste.
3.6.2 Recycling and Composting
3.6.2.1 Recycling
Many local governments have established recycling programs as part of their integrated waste
management strategy. Recycling reduces the amount of waste ultimately being disposed of,
conserves natural resources, and, in some situations, generates revenue for the local government.
A local government recycling program usually includes the following activities:
Collecting recyclables
Separating recyclable from nonrecyclable materials
Processing the recyclable materials
Marketing the "final" product.
Collection of recyclables is extremely similar to collection of municipal solid waste. Specially
designed vehicles collect recyclables either at curbside or from designated drop-off locations.
Separating recyclables from nonrecyclable materials depends on the collection method.
Basically, three categories of collection drive separation activities:
Source separation by type of recyclable (e.g., glass, paper, aluminum) either by the
generator (i.e., the resident) or by the collector at curbside
Commingled collection (i.e., generator separates recyclables from nonrecyclables)
Mixed collection, in which there is no separation.
In source separation, segregated recyclables are usually stored by the local government until the
amount is sufficient to send to a processor or market. Private recyclers or dealers usually further
process (e.g., can flattening, glass pulverizing) the recyclables in small communities. During
January 1999 3-58 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
commingled collection, the local government transports the recyclables to a materials recycling
facility where the recyclables are segregated. Most segregation occurs by hand, but some
automated systems are being used. In mixed collection, all waste is collected together and taken
to a central processing facility. The mixed waste is shredded and magnets and air separators
segregate out the recyclable materials in a process known as front-end processing.
Processing recyclables generally includes activities that prepare the material for final shipment to
the recycler or dealer. Once segregated, recyclables may need further processing to make them
more dense or package them in a way that is appropriate for final shipment. For example, bottles
may be crushed, metals flattened, and paper baled. Such activities reduce storage area, facilitate
handling, and reduce transportation costs.
By definition, recycling does not occur until someone uses the recycled product to make new
products. If there is no market for the recycled materials, there is no recycling. The local
government is responsible for locating markets for its recycled materials. This process is similar
to marketing any product or commodity and involves four distinct steps: 1) determining the
possible uses of the end product, 2) identifmg potential markets, 3) marketing the product, and 4)
developing a distribution system. Failure to effectively market the product may ultimately result
in more waste being landfilled.
The major environmental impact associated with recycling is the volume of waste diverted from
landfills or incineration. This diversion extends the life of landfills and limits the volume of
wastes being combusted, thus reducing environmental impact.
Federal environmental statutes do not directly regulate the recycling of typical solid wastes (e.g.,
paper, plastic, glass, aluminum). However, the recycling of used oil is regulated under 40 CFR
Part 279, which establishes standards for used oil generators, collection centers, transporters and
transfer facilities, processors and re-refiners, burners of off-specification used oil, used oil fuel
marketers, the use of used oil as a dust suppressant, and used oil disposal. Used oil generated by
households is exempt from these requirements. Like federal environmental law, most state laws
that address solid waste recycling typically do not focus on the recycling process itself, but may
specify source separation requirements or recycling/recovery goals.
3.6.2.2 Composting
Composting is a process of aerobic biological decomposition of organic materials to produce a
stable and usable organic topsoil that does not require disposal. Resources used to create the
January 1999 3-59 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
final compost product originate from the roughly 70 percent of the municipal solid waste stream
that is organic material (i.e., food waste/scraps, yard and lawn clippings).
Three primary activities are associated with composting:
Collecting/receiving wastes for composting
Processing the wastes (e.g., decomposition)
Marketing.
A local government can collect or receive wastes for composting from a variety of sources. The
local government may have active yard waste collection programs, complete with trucks that
vacuum up leaves. Many communities have separate yard waste pickup as a part of recycling
programs or drop-off stations for yard wastes. Significant composting wastes also result from
recyclable material separation and processing. Once recyclable materials are removed from the
solid waste stream, the remaining wastes may be suitable for composting.
During the processing or decomposition stage of composting, the local government may need to
adjust the physical and chemical properties of the waste to make it more amenable to
composting. For example, it may shred or grind the waste into a smaller particle size, alter the
carbon-to-nitrogen ratio, or add water to the waste. All of these activities are designed to
facilitate decomposition. Depending on the types and amounts used, chemicals added to alter the
properties of the composted waste may be regulated under EPCRA or Section 112(r) of the CAA
(risk management plans). Composting that occurs outside may create nuisance odors. Local
ordinances may address odor problems.
A key aspect of composting programs is the concept of biosolids recycling. Sewage sludge
biosolids are solid, semi-solid, or liquid residue generated during the treatment of domestic
sewage in a wastewater treatment plant. Composting of household organic materials is not
regulated by any major federal statutes, although many states do establish composting standards.
However, the requirements for land application of biosolids at 40 CFR Part 503 pertain to
materials derived from biosolids (e.g., biosolids that have undergone a change in quality through
treatment, such as composting, or by mixing with other materials, such as wood chips, municipal
solid waste, or yard waste). These regulations specify pollutant limits, management practices,
operating standards, monitoring requirements, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements. As
with recycling, the local government is responsible for locating a market for its compost.
January 1999 3-60 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.6.3 Source Reduction
Local governments often encourage programs that are directed at conserving resources and
reducing the amount of solid waste generated in the first place, thereby helping to mitigate the
burden of collection, processing, and disposal practices. In many states, source reduction is the
topic of legislation directed at government procurement and purchasing requirements (e.g., local
governments can model their own policies after state directives to use recycled paper, double-
sided copies), labeling guidelines, and product reuse (e.g., "bottle bills"). Many states have
waste reduction goals that require 25 to 50 percent reduction in the solid waste stream before a
particular year.
Local governments can perform waste audits to assess the flow of materials through their
systems. In doing so, disposal costs are quantified, unnecessarily disposed materials are identified
and quantified, cost savings are estimated, and new programs are initiated and monitored. These
audits can help managers to determine the most appropriate and effective source reduction
programs for their community.
3.6.4 Disposal
Local governments must dispose of solid waste that is not recyclable, compostable, or considered
household hazardous waste. The two primary types of disposal practices are landfilling and
municipal waste combustion, or incineration, which may employ conventional techniques or a
"waste-to-energy" approach.
3.6.4.1 Landfill Operation
Local governments often own and operate solid waste landfills for final disposal of the majority
of solid waste generated within their jurisdictions. Solid waste landfills provide an engineered
facility for the long-term containment of solid waste and involve the following activities:
Receiving and depositing solid waste into the landfill
Controlling disease vector populations
Managing/monitoring landfill gas production, leachate, and storm water
Recordkeeping.
Most landfills include a large disposal area that contains numerous smaller cells. Solid waste is
deposited in these cells daily, compacted using specially designed bulldozers, and then generally
January 1999 3-61 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
covered with either a thin layer of soil or some alternative cover. The local governments control
the flow of solid waste into the facility to exclude materials such as hazardous waste or other
materials that should be managed elsewhere or could be recycled to make the landfill safer and
preserve capacity. Once a cell is full, it is covered with a final cover designed to limit infiltration
and vector populations, as well as to provide a base for cover vegetation.
Local governments must monitor groundwater in close proximity to the landfill and employ a
system of pipes that collect methane gas generated as a byproduct of decomposition. Methane
gas has been identified as a significant greenhouse gas. Facilities that generate sufficient
quantities of methane can recover the landfill gas for use as an energy source. Storm water
runoff associated with landfills may be regulated under the CWA storm water provisions.
Landfill operations are subject to the minimum criteria for municipal solid waste landfills given
at 40 CFR Part 258. These criteria address location restrictions, operating criteria, design
criteria, groundwater monitoring and corrective action requirements, closure and post-closure
care requirements, and financial assurance criteria. If a municipal solid waste landfill subject to
this rule does not meet these requirements, it is considered an open dump, which is prohibited
under Section 4005 of RCRA.
A local government could be subject to state permit provisions if it has developed its own solid
waste permit program under delegated authority from EPA. Under the CAA, landfills are subject
to air emission guidelines (40 CFR Section 60.30c), and EPA is developing NESHAPs for
emissions from landfills as a long-term action. In addition, landfills may be regulated under
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD), nonattainment area (NAA) provisions, and new
source performance standards (NSPS) programs.
3.6.4.2 Municipal Waste Combustion
An alternative method of managing solid waste is through combustion. Solid waste combustion
involves the incineration of all or a portion of the solid waste stream in specially designed solid
waste combustion facilities and the disposal of the residual ash in landfills.
When choosing to employ municipal combustion, local governments can either retrofit existing
facilities, build new facilities, or enter into regional partnerships. If they are building new
facilities, they must site, design (incorporating elaborate air pollution controls), permit, and
construct the combustion facility. Once a combustion facility is in place, the local government
must ensure its proper operation, provide a relatively constant flow of waste as a feed stream, and
January 1999 3-62 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
manage and dispose of the residual ash. Most new incinerators have the capacity to recover and
reuse the energy released during combustion (the" waste-to-energy" process).
Municipal waste combustion is regulated primarily under the CAA (40 CFR Part 60), which
establishes guidelines and standards of performance for municipal waste combustors, as well as
standards of performance for incinerators. Regulations under RCRA would only apply if the
facility receives and burns hazardous waste. Other CAA regulatory programs to which
combustion may be subject are PSD, NAA provisions, NESHAPs, and NSPS.
The disposal of residual ash from the combustion of municipal waste, including fly ash and
bottom ash, is regulated under RCRA and state law. Generally, these two types of ash are
combined and then disposed of either at a municipal landfill or a special ash landfill. Under
RCRA, each facility must determine whether the combined ash constitutes a hazardous waste
and, if so, the ash must be managed as a hazardous waste. If the ash is not a hazardous waste, it
can be managed under state law, which may allow disposal in a solid waste landfill or provide for
disposal in an ash monofill (or impose other special requirements).
3.6.5 Household Hazardous Waste Collection and Storage
Local governments may sponsor basic household hazardous waste collection programs. These
programs may be single-day or continuous events that provide for the safe collection,
identification, sorting, storage, and disposal or reuse of
household hazardous waste. Such programs may be
operated by the local government or administered
under a contract with a waste management firm. The
materials collected during a household hazardous
waste collection program may be recycled (e.g., used
oil), used as a waste fuel (e.g., solvents), or disposed of
properly at hazardous waste facilities.
Under the regulations that implement RCRA, c|egners wQod strjppers
hazardous waste generated by households is exempt
from federal hazardous waste regulations. household and automotive batteries
Common Household Hazardous
Wastes
Oil-based paint and varnish, paint and
varnish remover, pesticides,
insecticides, herbicides, motor oil,
brake fluid, fuels, antifreeze, oven
cleaners, drain cleaners, bleach,
solvents, pool chemicals, mothballs,
dye, nail polish, photo chemicals, toilet
cleaners, fertilizer, metal polish, floor
acid, creosote, sealants, and both
Nevertheless, these wastes can and do pose an
environmental and health risk when they are managed improperly. These products may contain
toxic substances that can be released when they are poured down the sink, sewer, onto the
January 1999 3-63 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
ground, or when they are landfilled or incinerated. Thus, many state and local governments have
established household hazardous waste collection, storage, and disposal programs.
Under federal regulation, the collection, transportation, storage, treatment, and disposal of
household hazardous waste are exempt from the regulations applicable to commercial hazardous
waste. In addition, resource recovery facilities that manage municipal solid waste are not subject
to hazardous waste regulations (with the exception of ash that exhibits a hazardous characteristic,
such as toxicity) if they meet specified conditions.
3.6.6 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance
Local governments are responsible for maintaining all vehicles associated with solid waste
activities according to the operations described in Section 3.10.
3.6.7 Other Operations That May Be Regulated
Another operation associated with solid waste management is pesticide application. Pesticides
may be used in solid waste management activities to control weed growth and control vectors.
Activities related to pesticide use and storage may be regulated under the provisions of FIFRA,
EPCRA, or CAA Section 112(r). Section 3.4 provides more information on pesticide
management.
3.6.8 Pollution Prevention in Solid Waste Management Operations
Numerous opportunities exist for pollution prevention in solid waste management operations. As
the lead municipal department with responsibility of "putting waste in its place," solid waste
operators have a responsibility to demonstrate their commitment to waste reduction by ensuring
that their operations prevent pollution and are in compliance with existing environmental
regulations. With a diverse range of activities, solid waste managers provide a range of services
with polluting possibilities. These can generally be categorized as follows:
Source reduction
Collection and storage
Processingrecycling and composting
Disposal
Household hazardous waste (FfflW).
January 1999 3-64 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
With the exception of source reduction, each of these categories generates wastes as described
below.
3.6.8.1 Typical Wastes Generated
Curbside collection is provided for solid waste and recyclables, with drop off facilities for other
materials and special wastes. Key wastes generated by collection operations include used motor
oil and filters, antifreeze, parts washer solvent, used hydraulic oil, tires, used vehicles and vehicle
parts, and air emissions.
The processing of recyclables at material recovery facilities, solid waste at transfer stations, and
yard waste at compost sites often generates waste. Key wastes include dust from compost sites,
hydraulic oil, site runoff, recycling residues, electrical transformers, and spilled fuels.
Waste disposal includes landfill and waste-to-energy facility operations. Key landfill wastes
include leachate and air emissions. Key waste-to-energy facility wastes include bottom ash, fly
ash, bulky materials, air pollution control residues, air emissions, and wastewater.
Household hazardous waste collection programs are frequently operated by a local government as
a service to the citizens, where the local government typically assumes generator status for
household materials upon acceptance at the collection point. Problematic wastes generated
internally by solid waste management operations include PCBs and mercury from fluorescent
ballasts, paints, and CRTs (cathode ray tubes) from computer monitors.
3.6.8.2 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
Overall
Perform a waste audit - understand your waste stream in order to identify high priority items for
source reduction and reuse (e.g., textiles, yard waste, construction and demolition material).
Collection
Establish "take back" program with motor oil suppliers to provide re-refined oil.
Use in-line oil filters to reduce frequency of oil filter disposal.
January 1999 3-65 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Capture and recycle on site spent antifreeze.
Convert parts washer to aqueous-based systems.
Convert fleet to natural gas as feasible.
Maximize collection efficiency (minimize trips) by using route management software and
multi-purpose vehicles.
Recycle tires and utilize retread tires where appropriate.
Specify tires for maximum durability.
Processing
Establish a preventative maintenance program for all major pieces of equipment to
minimize potential fluid discharges.
Capture and recycle spilled hydraulic oil using oil absorbent material.
Minimize recycling residues through on-going education of customers, limits on
compaction equipment, and employee training.
Maximize acceptability of compost products by minimizing heavy metal content of
source materials, including pretreatment requirements for industrial contributors and
increased frequency of street sweepings.
Disposal
Minimize landfill site runoff by capturing and recirculating leachate and development of
effective storm water management plans.
Capture and reuse methane gas generated at landfill sites.
Minimize hazardous nature of incinerator ash by implementing battery recycling and
household hazardous waste collection programs.
January 1999 3-66 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Household Hazardous Waste
Educate HHW participants to "use it up," provide a waste exchange for unopened materials, and
bulk containerize latex paint for reuse or resale.
Other
Establish preventative maintenance program for electrical equipment and require
equipment vendors to take back all devices with mercury switches or PCB transformers.
Replace underground storage tanks with above ground tanks with proper containment
systems.
Minimize pesticide usage through litter prevention and site management programs.
3.6.8.3 Success Story
The City of Milwaukee Department of Public Works provides solid waste and recycling
collection and processing services for more than 600,000 people. In 1990, the department began
a review of its operations to determine what types of pollution prevention efforts could be
implemented.
As a result of waste audits at numerous facilities, the city has implemented the following:
Encouraged residents to leave grass clippings on their lawns by launching the "Just Say
Mow" campaign.
Designed, tested, and added 45 split body packers for multi-purpose collection.
Developed and implemented a GIS-based routing program to minimize trip times.
Replaced fuel stations with state-of-the art fueling facilities, including pump emission
controls and containment.
Implemented storm water management plans for each of its facilities.
January 1999 3-67 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Improved fleet maintenance by use of re-refined motor oil and paint booth improvements.
Discouraged drop off of latex paints and educated public to reduce and reuse materials.
Resources
EPA Office of Solid Waste Management - www.epa.gov/osw.
Azimi and Saphire, Rethinking Resources: New Ideas for Community Waste Reduction -
http://www. informinc. org/rethinking.html.
Comprehensive Municipal Pollution Prevention Project: Inventory Phase, Regional Municipality
of Hamilton-Wentworth, April, 1995.
For more information, contact Steve Brachman, Waste Reduction and Management Specialist,
UW-Extension, Phone: (414) 227-3165, Fax: (414) 227-3165, E-mail: brachman@uwm.edu.
3.7 WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT
Local governments are responsible for designing, planning, constructing, financing, operating,
and maintaining wastewater treatment plants. They are also responsible for the conveyance
systems that transport wastewater to the treatment plant and discharge storm water runoff to
nearby water bodies. A publicly owned treatment works (POTW) consists of the wastewater
treatment plant and a collection system that
transports sanitary sewage to it. A
collection system can be either of two types
(or some combination of the two):
Separate sanitary sewer systems are
designed to convey only municipal
sanitary sewage and industrial
wastewater.
Combined sewer systems are designed
to convey storm water runoff in
addition to municipal sanitary sewage
and industrial wastewater.
Defining "Municipal" Sewer Systems
EPA uses a broad definition of "municipal" in
defining municipal sewer systems. Municipal
systems are defined as conveyances that are
owned or operated by a state, city, town, borough,
county, parish, district, association, or other public
body having jurisdiction of disposal of sewage,
industrial wastes, storm water, or other wastes,
including special districts understate law such as a
sewer district, flood control district or drainage
district, or other similar entity, or an Indian tribe or
an authorized Indian tribal organization, or a
designated and approved management agency
under Section 208 of the CWA.
January 1999
5-68
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
A third type of conveyance systema municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4)conveys
storm water runoff directly to nearby waters rather than to a POTW.
Overall, POTWs are responsible for collecting, treating, analyzing, and discharging wastewater
received from separate sanitary or combined sewer systems, as well as for disposing of sewage
sludge, or "biosolids," generated during the treatment process. A POTW must comply with its
NPDES permit, including requirements for industrial pretreatment, compliance monitoring, and
proper use or disposal of biosolids. A POTW is also responsible for laboratory operations,
chemical storage and hazardous materials management, and vehicle and equipment maintenance.
Exhibit 3.7 presents common operations for wastewater management.
Exhibit 3-7. Wastewater Management
System Operation
and Maintenance
January 1999
5-69
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
What part of the sanitary sewer
system is most likely to leak?
Sanitary sewer capacity is reduced by
ground water seepage through leaky
pipes and storm water flow through
leaky and missing manhole covers and
domestic and industrial roof drains.
While much of the leakage occurs in
main trunk sewers, more than 50
percent of groundwater seepage in
certain areas may come from holes in
pipes on private property.
3.7.1 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SEWER
SYSTEMS
The system through which water is conveyed can be
one or more of three types, any or all of which a local
government may be responsible for operating and
maintaining. The three types are separate sanitary
sewer systems, combined sewer systems, and
municipal separate storm water systems. These
systems may be regulated under the NPDES,
pretreatment, or storm water provisions of the CWA.
3.7.1.1 Sanitary Sewer Systems
Local governments design, construct, operate, and maintain sanitary sewer systems to convey
wastewater from homes and businesses to wastewater treatment plants. Local governments
install new sewer lines, clean blocked lines, repair leaky lines, maintain root control, repair
manholes, operate and maintain pump stations, and conduct all maintenance activities necessary
to prevent overflows and ensure that wastewater is conveyed to the treatment plant.
Maintaining sanitary sewer systems is a significant responsibility for local governments. Leaks
or the infiltration of wastewater into the sewer system can occur through cracks and improperly
sealed pipe joints.
Overall, this "infiltration and inflow" (I/I) raises the volume of wastewater in sewers and lowers
their capacity. During excess rainfall events, the sewer system cannot carry the excess
wastewater, and flooding can occur. Diluted and untreated sewage can back up through
manholes and into basements, spill into storm drains and creeks, and wash up onto public
beaches. To ensure maximum system capacity and to prevent these "sanitary sewer overflows"
(SSOs), local governments must undertake active monitoring and preventive maintenance
programs to identify and repair leaky sewer lines, as well as conduct any major upgrades or
restorations.
Local governments that operate POTWs are required to report all overflows and flooding from
either sanitary or combined sewage systems so that repairs and preventive action can be taken to
minimize the extent of environmental and human health impacts.
January 1999
5-70
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
SSOs, whether caused by excessive I/I, inadequate capacity, blockages, or equipment failure,
impact the environment through the discharge of raw sanitary sewage. These discharges often
result in direct human exposure to raw sewage, as well as discharge of sewage to surface and
ground waters. SSOs are unpermitted, illegal discharges under the CWA and may subject the
local government to enforcement action by the regulatory authority.
3.7.1.2 Combined Sewer Systems
Approximately 950 communities, mostly in the Northeast and Great Lakes regions, have
combined sewer systems (CSSs) that are designed to carry both sanitary sewage and storm water
runoff to the POTW for treatment. In periods of heavy rainfall or snowmelt, the wastewater
volume in a CSS can exceed the capacity of the system. CSSs, therefore, are designed to
overflow occasionally and discharge excess wastewater directly to nearby water bodies. These
discharges are called combined sewer overflows (CSOs).
Communities with CSSs have operation and maintenance responsibilities similar to those for
separate sanitary sewer systems, such a installing new sewer lines, cleaning blocked lines, and
inspecting for and fixing leaks and infiltration. Their most important activity, however, is
controlling CSOs, which contain not only storm water but also untreated human and industrial
waste, toxic materials, and debris.
EPA's CSO Control Policy describes numerous options available to communities with CSOs,
recognizing that completely eliminating these discharges is neither necessary nor affordable in
many cases. All CSO communities are expected to implement nine minimum controls, such as
maximizing the use of the collection system for storage, controlling the discharge of solid and
floatable materials, and eliminating CSOs during dry weather periods. CSO communities are
also expected to develop long-term CSO control plans that identify which additional controls,
including capital projects, will be developed to help meet water quality standards.
CSO control requirements are included as conditions in NPDES permits and enforcement orders.
Due to the site-specific nature of CSO problems and the flexibility in the CSO Control Policy,
local communities should coordinate actively with their permitting and water quality standards
authorities to develop long-term control plans and permit requirements that will provide
meaningful environmental benefits within the community's financial capability.
January 1999 3-71 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.7.1.3 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
Local governments also are responsible for operating and maintaining separate storm sewers.
MS4s are designed to convey storm water from impermeable areas to bodies of water. In
conveying storm water directly to streams, rivers, and lakes, MS4s also transport oil, grease,
pesticides, herbicides, dirt and grit, all of which have the potential to reduce water quality. Local
government operations related to operating and maintaining storm sewer systems include
clearing blocked sewer lines, preventing contaminants from entering the storm sewer system,
constructing storm water controls, and sampling and analyzing storm water discharges. In
addition, local governments reduce the volume of silt and solids being transported to the sewer
systems and reduce water contamination by cleaning streets, removing wastes, and cleaning
screens.
EPA's NPDES storm water regulations require local governments to apply for an NPDES storm
water permit, characterize storm water discharges, implement management procedures to prevent
contaminated storm water from discharging to waterways, and monitor storm water discharges.
3.7.1.4 Water Line Repair/Replacement
Separate, combined, and storm sewer systems require repair to eliminate conditions that interfere
with their ability to convey sewage and storm water flows. Sewers and other collection system
components, such as manholes, pump stations, and siphons, must be repaired or replaced to
address structural failure, infiltration (leakage of groundwater into pipes), exfiltration (leakage of
sewage out of pipes), and blockages. In combined sewers, regulators must be repaired when they
fail to divert combined wastewater flows at the intended flow rates. Portions of a sewer system
may need to be replaced to address inadequate capacity, which can result in separate sewer
system overflows during periods of high flow. Repairs may involve replacing individual pipe
sections, replacing entire sewer segments, or repairing existing sewers. Grouting leaking joints,
lining existing sewers, and rebuilding or lining manholes and other structures all may be
necessary.
Separate and combined sewer system repairs can impact the environment through the discharge
of raw sewage that may occur as a result of the need to bypass sewage around the line or system
component being repaired. Repairs of separate, combined, and storm sewers also can affect the
environment through erosion and sedimentation, which take place as a result of excavation,
stockpiling, and backfilling, or through the discharge of sediment-laden water from the repair
January 1999 3-72 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
excavation. Guidance on sewer maintenance activities is often included in a local government
POTW's NPDES permit.
3.7.2 Wastewater Treatment
Local governments may be responsible
for the final system through which water
is conveyed and treated. WWTPs are
responsible for the treatment, analysis,
and discharge of wastewater received
from sanitary or combined sewer
systems, and the disposal of sludge
generated from the treatment process.
Activities at a WWTP may include:
Operating and maintaining the plant to ensure that discharges meet the facility's NPDES
permit requirements and limitations
Overseeing a pretreatment program to prevent industrial discharges from causing
interference or pass through, sludge contamination, or the plant to violate its permit
Sampling and analyzing wastewater and sludge prior to discharge or disposal to meet
NPDES monitoring requirements
Managing biosolids from the treatment processes by landfilling, land application, surface
disposal, incineration, or composting
Maintaining records and submitting discharge monitoring reports (DMRs).
Because these activities could affect the environment, they may be subject to environmental
regulations as indicated in the following list.
Wastewater treatment processCAA
NPDES permit complianceCWA
Laboratory operationsCWA and RCRA
Pretreatment programCWA
January 1999
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Biosolids management and disposalCWA, RCRA, and CAA
Chemical storage/hazardous materials managementEPCRA, CERCLA, and CAA
3.7.2.1 Wastewater Treatment Process
Municipal wastewater (sewage) treatment is defined by the extent of pollutant
removal and the mechanisms (physical, biological, or chemical) used for
removal. Wastewater treatment is classified as primary, secondary, and tertiary
treatment. Primary treatment consists primarily of physical processes (settling or
skimming) that remove a significant percentage of the organic and inorganic
solids from wastewater. Secondary treatment depends on biological action to
remove fine suspended solids, dispersed solids, and dissolved organics by
volatilization, biodegradation, and incorporation into sludge. In addition, secondary treatment
satisfies much of the oxygen demand of the pollutant(s). Advanced wastewater treatment uses a
variety of biological, physical, and chemical treatment approaches to reduce nutrients, organics,
and pathogens.
Local governments can use "biogas," a product of anaerobic digestion, either offsite or within the
plant to improve energy efficiency of wastewater treatment processes. Biogas, a gas composed
of methane, carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, and other minor gaseous compounds, has about 60
percent of the heat value of natural gas. If the gas is not reused, it can be flared, which may be
regulated under the CAA.
3.7.2.2 NPDES Permit Compliance
Local governments are responsible for complying with federal regulations, for both wastewater
plant operation and the collection system (sanitary or combined) that conveys wastewater to the
WWTP. Proper operation and maintenance are critical for sewage collection and treatment
because the environmental impacts from these processes can severely degrade water resources
and, ultimately, human health. For these reasons, POTWs receive NPDES permits to ensure
compliance with federal regulations.
NPDES permits, issued by either EPA or a delegated state (EPA has authorized 42 states to
administer the NPDES program), establish effluent limits on the kinds and quantities of
pollutants that POTWs can discharge and the pollutant monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements. Each POTW that intends to discharge into the nation's waters must obtain an
NPDES permit prior to initiating its discharge.
January 1999
5-74
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
To comply with the NPDES permit, local governments are responsible for implementing an
NPDES monitoring program at their POTWs. To comply with the program, POTWs must
collect samples of effluent discharges at the required frequencies and locations as specified in
their permits and submit monitoring reports to the state or EPA. Sampling and analysis are
conducted to verify that the amounts and types of pollutants discharged from wastewater
treatment systems meet the NPDES permit limits. The NPDES permit specifies the parameters
that must be monitored. These parameters vary by plant. The primary parameters in NPDES
permits for POTWs include biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), pH, fecal coliform, residual
chlorine, and suspended solids. An NPDES permit may include other parameters, such as
bioassay toxicity tests and metals.
If a POTW meets the NPDES permit limits, the systems usually are operating properly. Failure
to comply with these requirements can result in permit suspension, increased monitoring
requirements, and/or issuance of fines or other penalties by EPA or the relevant state regulatory
agency.
3.7.2.3 Laboratory Operations
Some POTWs analyze wastewater samples and sludge at onsite laboratories. Laboratory
procedures must comply with approved methods and meet NPDES monitoring requirements.
Chemicals used in the laboratory include acids (e.g., sulfuric, hydrochloric, nitric), bases (e.g.,
sodium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide, sodium azide solution), and others (e.g., chlorine, ferric
salts, carbon disulfide, and benzene). The quantity of wastes generated depends on the number
and types of tests performed. The storage and disposal of some wastes generated from laboratory
activities may be regulated under the hazardous waste provisions of RCRA.
POTWs are responsible for operating the wastewater laboratory safely. To prevent laboratory
accidents, chemicals should be stored in a properly ventilated and well lit room. All bottles and
reagents should be clearly labeled and dated. Volatile liquids that can escape as a gas, such as
ether, must be kept away from heat sources, sunlight, and electrical switches. Cylinders of gas
being stored should also be capped and secured to prevent rolling or tipping.
3.7.2.4 Pretreatment Program
Under the pretreatment regulations (40 CFR 403), POTWs are required to develop and
implement local pretreatment programs. Through this program, the POTW is directly
January 1999 3-75 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
responsible for the regulation of certain industrial users discharging to the wastewater treatment
system. See Section 3.11 for more information.
3.7.2.5 Biosolids Management and Disposal
treatment of domestic
sewage in a treatment works.
Local governments are responsible for managing and disposing
,, , , ,. u. r , x 0. r , . What are biosolids?
of sewage sludge (i.e., biosolids). Biosolids are a primary Biosolids (or sewage sludge)
organic solid product produced by wastewater treatment are defined as solid, semi-
processes that can be beneficially recycled. (The fact that
biosolids can be recycled does not preclude their disposal.)
Local governments must follow the federal sludge management
program (40 CFR Part 503), which establishes requirements for
the final use or disposal of biosolids when biosolids are:
Applied to land to condition the soil or fertilize crops or other vegetation grown in the
soil
Placed on a surface disposal site for final disposal
Fired in a biosolids incinerator.
A fourth disposal option is landfilling. If biosolids are placed in a municipal solid waste landfill,
the local government is responsible for ensuring that the biosolids meet the provisions of 40 CFR
Part 25 8.
For the most part, the requirements of 40 CFR Part 503 are self-implementing and must be
followed even without issuance of a permit. In most cases, Part 503 requirements will be
incorporated over time into NPDES permits issued to POTWs. The sludge program includes
other facilities (e.g., sewage sludge incinerators, composting facilities, sewage sludge surface
disposal sites) that have not been part of the NPDES program because they were not point
sources of discharge to U.S. waters.
The following provides more information on final use and disposal options for biosolids:
Land Application Land application, defined as the spreading of biosolids on or just
below the surface of the land, is the most widely employed use of biosolids. Part 503
specifies the biosolids quality, pollution limits (metals), pathogen reduction and vector
January 1999 3-76 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
attraction requirements, application rates, and environmental conditions under which land
application is permitted. Representative samples of biosolids must be collected and
analyzed for inorganic pollutants and pathogens according to methods specified in the
Part 503 rule. In addition, the regulations specify recordkeeping requirements for land
application facilities.
Surface Disposal. Surface disposal is defined in the Part 503 regulations as an area of
land that contains one or more active biosolids units. A unit is an area of land on which
only biosolids are placed for final disposal. Under the provisions of Part 503, facilities
using surface disposal must comply with pollutant limits, management practices, and
operational standard(s), as well as other requirements related to the frequency of
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. The regulation established limits for three
inorganic pollutants (i.e., arsenic, chromium, and nickel) for active biosolids units that do
not contain a liner and leachate collection system. In addition, site-specific limits can
apply in certain situations.
When placing biosolids on a surface disposal site, local governments must follow
management practices, some of which are given below:
- Threatened or Endangered Species. Biosolids cannot be placed in a
surface disposal site if it is likely to adversely affect a threatened or
endangered species (under Section 4 of the ESA) or its designated critical
habitat.
- Wetlands. An active biosolids unit cannot be located in a wetland unless a
permit is issued under Section 402 (NPDES permit) or Section 404
(dredge and fill permit) of the CWA. If the owner/operator of a surface
disposal site suspects that all or some portion of an active biosolids unit is
in a wetland, he or she should contact the local Corps of Engineers district
office to request a wetland delineation.
- Methane Gas Concentrations. Methane, an odorless and highly
combustible gas, is generated at surface disposal sites. When biosolids are
covered by soil or other material either daily or at closure, established
limits on methane gas concentrations in air must be met because of the
gas's explosive potential. The gas can migrate and be released into the
environment. To protect site personnel and the public from risks of
January 1999 3-77 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
explosions, air must be monitored for methane gas continuously within
any structure on the site and at the property line of the surface disposal
site.
- Incineration. Incineration of municipal biosolids is regulated under the
CAA. National ambient air quality standards apply to six pollutants,
including total suspended particulates. Biosolids incinerators contribute
primarily to ambient particulate loadings. Pathogens and toxic organic
chemicals are destroyed during biosolids incineration. However, metals,
such as cadmium and lead, are not destroyed during incineration and are
associated with the ash and fine particulates in the stack emissions. The
emission of mercury and beryllium from sludge incinerators and drying
equipment is regulated under 40 CFR 61. This regulation rarely causes
concern, however, since most biosolids have low concentrations of these
elements.
Incinerators constructed or significantly modified since June 11, 1973, are
subject to additional regulation under the NSPS, which limit particulate
discharges. These standards apply to any incinerator that burns more than
10 percent wastewater sludge at a rate of more than 1,000 kg per day (40
CFR 60). Usually, incinerators will have to use high-pressure scrubbers to
meet these requirements, but some incinerators have been able to meet the
standard solely through strict operating practices. SIPs may require a
facility to demonstrate that air quality impacts will be within acceptable
limits.
- Landfilling. Landfilling is a biosolids disposal method in which sludge is
deposited in a dedicated area alone or with solid waste and buried beneath
a soil cover. Landfilling is primarily a disposal method, with no attempt to
recover nutrients and only occasional attempts to recover energy from the
biosolids. If biosolids are placed in a municipal solid waste landfill, the
local government is responsible for ensuring that the biosolids meet the
provisions of 40 CFR Part 258.
- Impact of Biosolids Composition on Disposal/Use Options. The
composition of biosolids can limit a local government's choice of
biosolids use/disposal options or make certain options more appealing.
January 1999 3-78 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
The most important constituents are the organic content, nutrients,
pathogens, toxic organic chemicals, and metals. Biosolids may contain
varying amounts of heavy metals and inorganic ions (e.g., cadmium,
copper, lead, mercury, silver) that at high concentrations may be toxic to
humans, animals, and plants. The metals concentrations in biosolids are
among the foremost considerations in land application because of their
potential to damage crops and, in the case of cadmium, to enter the human
food chain. Metals may also be a concern in landfilling, if conditions are
acidic and promote leaching of metals, and in incineration, if improper
design or operating procedures result in the release of metals into the
atmosphere.
Under the hazardous waste provisions of RCRA, biosolids from municipal
wastewater treatment plants are neither excluded nor specifically listed as
hazardous waste. Biosolids from POTWs with highly industrialized areas,
however, may need to be evaluated for characteristics that would result in
designation as hazardous waste. The test most appropriate for these
biosolids is the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP). If the
biosolids fail the TCLP test, they must be handled as a hazardous waste
according to the RCRA requirements.
3.7.2.6 Chemical Storage/Hazardous Materials Management
If storing or using specified amounts of certain hazardous chemicals, a local government may be
subject to planning and reporting requirements of EPCRA and Section 112(r) of the CAA.
Hazardous chemicals may be used in various wastewater collection and treatment operations,
such as disinfection as part of the treatment process or cleaning and other maintenance activities.
Specifically, chlorine and sulfur dioxide are commonly used in the disinfection
(chlorination/dechlorination) process. Additional chemicals may be used in laboratory
procedures to analyze wastewater samples. Facilities must submit hazardous chemical inventory
and emergency release information as follows:
Emergency Release Notification (EPCRA
Section 304). A facility is required to notify the
SERCs and LEPCs of a release equal to or
exceeding a predetermined amount of certain
hazardous chemicals. The chemicals covered by
Appendices A and B of 40 CFR
Part 355 list EPCRA EHSs and 40
CFR Part 302 lists CERCLA
hazardous substances.
January 1999
5-79
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
this requirement include EPCRA extremely hazardous substances (EHSs), as well as
hazardous substances identified in the CERCLA. The emergency release notification
activates emergency plans and provides information to the SERCs and LEPCs, who will
coordinate release response activity in order to prevent harmful effects to the public.
Hazardous Chemical Inventory and Reporting (EPCRA Sections 311 and 312)
Under EPCRA, any facility that is required by OSHA's Hazardous Communication
Standard to prepare or have available an MSDS for a hazardous chemical is subject to
EPCRA Sections 311 and 312 requirements if the chemical is present onsite at any one
time in excess of threshold levels.
MSDS Reporting. Under Section 311 of EPCRA, a facility must submit a one-time
notification identifying the hazardous chemicals (including EPCRA EHSs and OSHA
hazardous chemicals) present at the facility in amounts equal to or in excess of threshold
quantities to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department (40 CFR 370.21). To meet the
notification requirement, a facility must submit either an MSDS (or copies of MSDSs) or
a list of the EPCRA EHSs and OSHA hazardous chemicals. After initial reporting, if a
facility finds that it has a hazardous chemical that is newly covered in amounts equal to or
in excess of the threshold level or there has been significant new information on an
already reported chemical, it must update the information reported under Section 311
within 3 months after discovery.
Tier Reporting. Under Section 312 of EPCRA, a facility must meet an annual reporting
requirement for OSHA hazardous chemicals and EPCRA EHSs in amounts equal to or in
excess of threshold levels. If equaling or exceeding the threshold levels at any time in the
preceding year, a facility must submit to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department an
Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form. This form must be submitted by
March 1 of each year. EPA publishes two types of inventory forms, Tier I and Tier II,
for reporting this information. While federal regulations require only the submission of a
Tier I form, EPA encourages, and some states require, the use of the Tier n form.
LEPCs make this information available to the public, and fire departments and public
health officials use the information to plan for and respond to emergencies.
January 1999 3-80 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Risk Management Planning (CAA
Section 112(r)). Under Section
facilities that have more than a
At present, EPA has established a list of 140
substances that are regulated under the CAA.
119M of thp ampnHpH r A A These substances were published in the Federal
112(r) ot the amended CAA, Register on January 31,1994; EPA amended the
list by rule, published on December 18, 1997.
EPA may further amend the list in the future as
threshold quantity of any of the 140 . .
n J J needed.
regulated substances in a single
process are required to develop risk
management programs and to summarize these programs in risk management plans by
June 21, 1999 (40 CFR Part 68). Risk management plans, which are intended to prevent
accidental releases of regulated substances and to reduce the severity of any releases that
do occur, will be made available to state and local government agencies and the public.
EPA has been working with industry groups to develop model risk management
programs. To review the model program, refer to EPA's Chemical Accident Prevention
and Risk Management Planning website at http://www.epa.gov/swercepp/acc-
pre.htm#Model Plans/.
3.7.3 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance
Local governments are responsible for maintaining plant vehicles according to the operations
described in Section 3.10, as well as for maintaining equipment (e.g., pumps, standby generators)
at the POTWs. Equipment maintenance is necessary for optimal equipment operation, which
helps ensure high performance at a plant. Most POTWs maintain an onsite spare parts inventory.
Many large plants have fully equipped machine shops staffed by competent mechanics. Smaller
plants often have to rely on machine shop facilities in the community. In addition, most pump
manufacturers maintain pump repair departments where pumps can be fully reconditioned.
3.7.4 Other Operations That May Be Regulated
In addition, POTWs may be regulated for pesticide management. POTWs may use pesticides,
particularly herbicides, onsite to control weed growth and maintain the plant site. Activities
related to pesticide use and storage may be regulated under the provisions of FIFRA, EPCRA, or
Section 112(r) of the CAA. See Section 3.4 for more information on pesticide management.
3.7.5 Pollution Prevention in Wastewater Management
A substantial amount of the pollution generated by the practices and processes used to collect and
treat wastewater can be prevented. In preventing pollution, wastewater treatment plants can
January 1999 3-81 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
serve as role models for their residential, commercial, and industrial customers and to help or
require dischargers to reduce their own toxic discharges to sewers through education, on site
assistance, and regulatory programs.
3.7.5.1 Typical Wastes Generated
Sewer line and wastewater treatment operations and maintenance is key to ensuring proper
treatment of wastewater and protection of the environment. Losses include leaks from pipes,
unintended discharges to water ways, and others.
The wastewater treatment process involves treating both the liquid and solid factions of waste
water. In doing so, various chemicals may be added to either the solids or the liquids to produce
an appropriate product meeting discharge requirements. Sample of losses include lab waste,
methane flare, bar screen waste, and grit chamber material.
Other elements of a wastewater collection and treatment system may include such things as
wetlands, storage tanks, pesticide and herbicide use, use of well water, and purchasing practices.
Spills and leaks from containers or purchasing a hazardous chemical over an alternative
non-toxic chemical, etc. contribute to losses that increase pollution in the environment.
The proper maintenance of vehicles and equipment is key to wastewater treatment. Potential
wastes found in this area are emissions from vehicle use and spill/leaks/drips from equipment.
3.7.5.2 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
Keep harmful chemicals out of the sewer lines and protect line workers, the plant, and the
public's investment. Work closely with assistance programs at the local and state level,
such as pollution prevention programs, economic development commissions and
pretreatment programs.
Institutionalize a preventative maintenance program to predict problems before they occur
instead of reacting to them after their occurrence.
Design, implement, and evaluate sewage acceptance procedures including provisions for
spill prevention, discharge limitations, hauler performance guarantee, and enforcement or
permit revocation.
January 1999 3-82 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Explore, evaluate and implement alternatives to existing wastewater treatment processes,
such as ultraviolet radiation or osmosis, to avoid toxic chemicals, such as chlorine and
hypochlorite.
Reuse or recycle solids (e.g., primary scum) and secondary screenings in areas such as
landscaping. Check local and state regulations for any special requirements.
Post and track statistical control tools to inform all employees of the plants target
operating level and the actual operating level.
Establish a screening mechanism for procuring chemicals that evaluates non-toxic
alternatives, and reduces chemical dependence thereby lowering hazardous waste and the
hazardous waste generator status.
Be innovative in use and reuse of energy, such as fuel cells operating from methane,
participating in DOE's Green Lights Program, using variable speed pumps, and using
heating/air conditioning controls and room sensors in buildings.
Create a gain share program whereby employees benefit from reduced pollution and for
sharing ideas. (Labor unions embrace pollution prevention as a health and safety issue
for their members.)
Use alternative transportation, such as bicycles, at the facility. Offer transit subsidies,
telework, and flex-schedules for employees.
3.7.6 Success Story
The City of Portland, Oregon's, Environmental Services operates and maintains the collection
and treatment systems of two wastewater treatment facilities for 550,000 people in the greater
Portland area. Columbia Boulevard Wastewater Treatment Plant's average annual day flow is 80
MGD, whereas Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant's average flow ranges from 5 to 17
MOD. Each facility provides primary and secondary treatment. Using self-directed work teams
and participating in a Pollution Prevention Program field project, each facility has accomplished
great results in prevention. These include:
Implementing a chemical pre-screening program
January 1999 3-83 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Participating in the Green Lights Program, thereby saving $28,465 per year in energy
costs
Testing a new fuel cell that converts methane and produces power for use by the
treatment plant
Reducing hazardous waste generator status from large quantity generator to conditionally
exempt small quantity generator
Reusing treated effluent to water facility grounds.
Resources
"Promoting Pollution Prevention Among Dischargers to POTWs," Lois N. Epstein and Steven A.
Skavroneck, WEF conference, Miami, FL, October 25, 1995. Available from the
Environmental Defense Fund, 1875 Connecticut Avenue NW, #1016, Washington, D.C.
20009.
For more information, contact Margaret Nover, Pollution Prevention Program, City of Portland,
Oregon, Phone: 503-823-7623 Fax: 503-823-5565, E-mail: margaret@bes.ci.portland.or.us
3.8 WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
Water resources include surface waters (i.e., coastal bays, lakes, rivers, and streams) and
groundwater. These water resources may be used to supply drinking water, industrial process
water, or water for recreational opportunities. For each of these uses, local governments are
primarily responsible for ensuring that the water is safe and available in sufficient quantities to be
used for its intended purpose. Activities related to water resources management include
protecting and managing surface waters (including reservoirs), and protecting groundwater
drinking supplies. Water resources management programs protect these waters from storm water
runoff, direct wastewater discharges, and direct discharge of materials that can cause
contamination. In contrast to the previously described local government operations, the
implementation of water resources management activities has a minimal negative impact on the
environment. Rather, the activities themselves are designed to reduce the environmental impact
on water resources. For this reason, considering water resources management through land use
planning is an important component of protecting the water supplies. Section 3.11 of this profile
provides more information on land use planning.
January 1999 3-84 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Local governments may be responsible for managing the water resources within their borders as
part of their efforts to meet requirements in their NPDES storm water or CSO control program
permit conditions. While many water resource management activities will overlap these permit
requirements, local governments may elect to develop water resources management programs
whether or not they are required by regulations.
3.8.1 Surface Water Protection
Local governments may be responsible for protecting surface waters for designated uses
including drinking water, habitat preservation, or recreation. Surface waters are generally
protected through implementation of storm water management plans that include BMPs, effluent
or watershed monitoring, and in some cases, reservoir management. These activities can reduce
contamination of water sources and increase opportunities to use those sources for their intended
purposes.
3.8.1.1 Best Management Practices
BMPs may be structural (e.g., storm water detention/retention ponds) or nonstructural (e.g., street
sweeping) and may include managing existing sources or conduits of contamination such as
roads, bridges, and storm water systems. These activities help a local government protect its
water supply and comply with its storm water permit.
Structural BMPs are designed to prevent, inhibit, or slow the rate at which storm water runoff or
spilled contaminants reach a body of water. BMP structures, including extended retention ponds,
wet ponds, and constructed wetlands, prevent contaminants from reaching surface waters by
capturing runoff and allowing it to filter through the soil or evaporate, rather than directly
flowing to a water body. Additional filtering structures include sand filters, oil and grit
separators, and infiltration basins. Containment structures may require periodic maintenance to
remove accumulated sediment, while filtering structures may require maintenance to remove
debris and ensure the filters are working efficiently. Each of these structures helps remove
contaminants (sediment, oils and greases, pesticides, fertilizers, debris) from rain water to protect
the surface water for its intended use.
3.8.1.2 Nonstructural BMPs
Nonstructural BMPs include various operational activities such as sweeping streets, and
maintaining or preserving grassed swales, vegetative buffer areas, and wetlands.
January 1999 3-85 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
While many local governments may sweep the streets to improve community aesthetics or as part
of their NPDES combined sewer or storm water permits, street sweeping is also an effective tool
in protecting water resources. Contaminants typically found on streets include the following:
Particulates from local soil erosion
Nitrogen and phosphorus from local plants and soils
Phenolic compounds from wear of asphalt street surfaces
Grease, petroleum, n-paraffin, and lead from vehicle leaks and spills
Lead, zinc, and asbestos from tire wear
Asbestos, lead, chromium, copper, and nickel from clutch and brake lining wear
Chlorides from deicing compounds.
Street sweeping protects surface waters by removing such solids as sand, debris, and litter that
would otherwise be transported to the surface water during a rain event. Street sweeping also
prevents contaminants that may be absorbed by sand and debris from reaching surface water.
Vegetative buffer areas are physical active controls designed and maintained to filter and
infiltrate pollutants thereby preventing them from reaching surface waters, and are essential in
maintaining surface water quality. These areas complement passive control, such as land use or
zoning laws, that prevent activities (e.g., paving, pesticide use) that could increase surface water
contamination.
Wetlands are used to help break down contaminants before they reach open bodies of water.
Local governments may actively manage marsh areas by adding new plants and removing
accumulated sediment.
Watershed Monitoring. Watershed monitoring programs complement implementation of BMPs
by providing the local government with a comprehensive tool to measure the effectiveness of the
BMPs. Watershed monitoring programs include collection and observation of water, insects,
aquatic plants, and fish from locations throughout the watershed. Chemical analysis is performed
to determine whether specific contaminants have infiltrated a water body, and biological analysis
is conducted to evaluate the impact of contaminants on various plant, animal, and insect species.
Samples taken for chemical analysis (e.g., phosphorus, metals) are generally analyzed in a
laboratory, while physical attributes (e.g., turbidity, temperature, color) are analyzed in the field.
Biological monitoring evaluates the health of a water body by determining the number and type
of plant, fish, and insect species found in the water body. Samples for biological analysis may be
analyzed in the field or in a laboratory. By allowing local governments to measure the
January 1999 3-86 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
effectiveness of various BMPs, and the relative health of a water body over time, watershed
monitoring programs can promote the use of effective activities to protect surface waters. For
communities that are unable to undertake comprehensive watershed monitoring programs,
periodic monitoring of storm water discharges can provide useful information for developing
controls for storm water and nonpoint pollution.
The following highlights some other types of monitoring that may be included in a watershed
monitoring program:
Identification of Major Outfalls. Surveying and mapping all major storm water outfalls is vital
for developing monitoring regimes for characterizing runoff and ambient water body conditions.
Treatment or diversion of these outfalls may be necessary.
Detection of Illicit Discharges. Outfall identification is also imperative for determining if
wastes or wastewater from non-storm water sources are being improperly discharged from a
separate storm sewer system. Many of these discharges occur during dry weather and are often
the result of improper connections into the storm system or via spills or infiltration at drains. A
plan to detect and address these illicit discharges is vital to a storm water management program.
Public Outreach and Education. A concerted effort to inform the public of the hazards of
improper waste disposal and illegal connections is also vital to a storm water management
program. This effort could include storm drain stenciling, encouragement of citizen reporting of
illicit discharges and improper waste disposal, and outreach programs covering potential
contaminants like motor oil, antifreeze, fertilizers and pesticides/herbicides.
Reservoir Management. Protecting reservoirs is a key component to a local government's
surface water protection program. Keeping reservoirs clean and free from contamination helps
ensure a safe supply of drinking water. In addition, preventing debris, sedimentation, litter,
chemicals or other pollutants from entering a reservoir reduces the amount of treatment necessary
for the water to meet drinking water standards. While managing reservoirs includes many of the
BMPs described previously, it also includes establishing security around the reservoir and
creating buffer zones.
Reservoir security involves controls to prevent direct litter, dumping, or inappropriate use.
Security measures may include fencing at the water line or fencing of a larger surrounding area.
Dumping, litter, or inappropriate use of reservoirs can also be limited through indirect means,
such as providing limited access roads or trails in the reservoir vicinity. While not preventing
January 1999 3-87 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
contamination, limiting access roads and trails can prevent large-scale dumping, limiting
pollution to litter or human waste, while allowing hiking or cycling opportunities for community
residents.
Managing reservoirs also includes creation of buffer zones to prevent off site contamination from
reaching the reservoir. While these buffer zones are similar to those used for protecting other
surface waters, local governments may pay special attention to the zones of vegetation that filter
or prevent off site spills and runoff from reaching the reservoir. These zones may be created by
direct purchase and planting of vegetation on adjacent land, or through zoning laws that prohibit
or limit development (thus using the land's natural existing vegetative filters). Buffer zones may
also include structural controls such as storm water retention basins, which are discussed above.
Pollution Prevention. In addition to the activities described previously, local governments may
be responsible for implementing or overseeing pollution prevention activities designed to prevent
surface water contamination. These activities include limits or prohibitions of certain activities
in protected areas, requirements for new construction, and public education. These activities are
useful for both surface water and groundwater protection, and are described in more detail below.
3.8.2 Groundwater (Wellhead) Protection
Local governments that provide or maintain underground drinking water supplies within their
boundaries may be responsible for developing wellhead protection programs to prevent
contamination of the supplies. Similar to surface water protection programs, wellhead protection
programs generally involve implementation of management practices on government and private
land. In contrast to surface water protection programs, wellhead protection programs often focus
more on management practices and oversight by the local government, rather than building new
structures. A local government may conduct some of the necessary activities for wellhead
protection. Private landowners, however, participate in many of the protection activities, as well,
under the direction of and in accordance with ordinances established by the local government.
The following list highlights selected wellhead protection activities:
Zoning and subdivision ordinances
Site plan reviews
Design standards for new construction and operating standards for ongoing land use activities
Source prohibitions within protected areas
Property or easement purchases
Public education
January 1999 3-88 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Groundwater monitoring
Household hazardous waste collection.
Zoning and subdivision ordinances. Zoning and subdivision ordinances are designed to direct
or limit development in a wellhead protection area. Zoning ordinances may also restrict or
regulate land uses within the protected area. Subdivision ordinances are designed to limit the
division of land for sale or development. By limiting the creation of new subdivisions, local
governments can limit the number of potential sources of contamination.
Site plan reviews. Site plan reviews require developers to submit for approval plans for
development occurring within a given area. Site plan reviews help minimize the impact on a
protected area by requiring compliance with protection ordinances and giving the local
government an opportunity to review and approve development activities prior to
implementation.
Design and Operating Standards. Local governments can establish design standards for new
construction and operating standards for ongoing land use activities. Design standards can
ensure that new buildings or structures placed within a wellhead protection area do not pose a
threat to the water supply. Operating standards minimize threats from ongoing activities, such as
application of fertilizers and pesticides or storage and use of hazardous materials. These
standards may also include prohibition of potential pollutant sources within protected areas.
Property or Easement Purchases. Local governments can purchase property or property
easements on land within the protected areas. These purchases can prevent future development
and give the local government land on which to maintain vegetative buffers to help prevent
contaminants from reaching the protected area.
Public Education. Public education for wellhead protection programs is similar to educational
programs that a local government may implement as part of a storm water pollution prevention
plan or the combined sewer system nine minimum controls. Public education includes
distributing press releases, newsletters, or brochures about wellhead protection activities; posting
signs around protected areas; and establishing wellhead protection committees.
Household Hazardous Waste Collection. As part of their wellhead protection programs, local
governments may establish household hazardous waste (HHW) collection programs. HHW
collection programs provide an opportunity for safe disposal of oils, fertilizers, gasoline, or other
household chemicals that residents might otherwise dispose of on the ground or in a landfill
designed to accept only nonhazardous solid waste. By collecting and safely disposing of these
January 1999 3-89 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
materials, local governments prevent them from potentially reaching underground drinking water
supplies. Section 3.6 presents more information on operating HHW collection centers.
Groundwater Monitoring. As part of wellhead protection programs, local governments may
monitor the groundwater within and leading to a drinking water aquifer. In addition, owners of
businesses that have the potential to contaminate groundwater may be required to monitor
groundwater as it leaves their property. EPA regulations may require monitoring in particular
circumstances (e.g., underground storage tank monitoring), and local governments may request
property owners who participate in particular activities (e.g., agricultural fertilizer application) to
periodically monitor groundwater to determine whether it is becoming contaminated.
Activities associated with groundwater monitoring that could affect the environment include
collecting samples, preserving samples, and analyzing samples. Collecting samples generally has
a minimal impact on the environment; however, spilled sample preservation chemicals can
contaminate an aquifer. In addition, if wells are improperly drilled and a contaminated aquifer is
located above an uncontaminated aquifer, groundwater from the contaminated aquifer can seep
into the uncontaminated aquifer.
3.8.3 Pollution Prevention and Water Resources Management
The best way to protect water quality is to avoid polluting the water in the first place. When
pollution reaches surface or underground waterways, it can have many adverse effects, including
impacts on drinking water sources. Water resource management approaches vary from
community to community depending on various factors such as the source of water, size and
population of the community, needs of the population, and the water supply system integrity. For
example, water conservation may be a very high priority in some locales, while other areas may
enjoy an abundance of source water. But in all cases, there is a need to protect and manage water
resources wisely. Some water resource management entities have an opportunity to act as
pollution prevention role models for others.
As with other local government activities, by incorporating pollution prevention criteria into the
decision making processes, public policy makers and water resource managers can:
Help prevent and reduce waste and pollution
Prevent and reduce potentially harmful chemical exposures to employees and citizens
Reduce risks of accidents and releases
Prevent or reduce potential liabilities and regulatory compliance burdens while providing
service delivery and cost savings to their organizations, customers and communities.
January 1999 3-90 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Programs that focus on municipal and industrial pollution prevention help prevent or reduce
water pollution. Development of local source water management programs can help achieve
CWA and SDWA goals.
3.8.3.1 Typical Wastes Generated or Losses Contributing to Pollution
Overall (affecting surface and ground water)
Releases into storm water sewer systems of hazardous substances such as used oil or
household or yard chemicals.
Industrial site releases.
Runoff of excessive pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides.
Lack of education, awareness, and participation (public and private sector) in local
collection, recycling and disposal of household hazardous waste materials.
Lack of education, awareness, and participation (public and private sector) in local water
protection and conservation activities.
Additional Surface Water
Lack of residential and commercial development storm water management controls.
Flood control projects that impair water quality.
Soil runoff from construction and other sites.
3.8.4 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
3.8.4.1 Pollution Prevention Outreach and Promotion
Overall (surface and ground water)
Develop local storm water management NPDES and pollution prevention programs.
Develop local groundwater (wellhead) protection programs.
January 1999 3-91 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Develop household hazardous waste collection initiatives.
Require pollution prevention BMPs as a permit condition under the CWA. Agencies
could design BMPs on a case-by-case basis or develop generic BMPs that would be
applied to all facilities in a given industrial category.
Set protective limits for reduction of discharges to wastewater treatment plants.
Set protective limits for discharges of hazardous substances and petroleum storage.
Adopt landscaping codes (e.g., institute irrigation restrictions, implement increasing
block pricing or time of day pricing.)
Investigate reduced water use projects (i.e., ultra-low flush "toilet voucher programs,"
low flow shower heads, sprinkler systems that are sensitive to rainfall, etc.)
Establish low-income resident programs to conduct in-home water audits, leak repairs,
and subsidized retrofits with water conserving fixtures.
Additional Surface Water
Develop local surface water protection programs.
Develop erosion and sediment control programs.
Set protective discharge limits for storm water controls.
Additional Ground Water
Develop groundwater monitoring programs.
Limit or exclude industrial discharges to septic systems through design review.
3.8.4.2 Internal Local Government Operations
Overall (surface and ground water)
C onduct 1 eak detect! on program s.
Perform plumbing fixture retrofits.
January 1999 3-92 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Upgrade water meters to ensure accurate readings (use water inventory meter and retrofit
programs).
Develop BMPs for local government internal operations, in order to lead by example.
Integrate water conservation into new facility design
Set protective limits for reduction of internal discharges to wastewater treatment plants.
Set protective limits for internal discharges of hazardous substances and petroleum
storage.
Limit or exclude internal discharges to septic systems.
Investigate a new source water potential: water recycling for golf courses, parks, roadway
landscaping, schools, firefighting, fountains, street sweeping, vehicle washing, and
irrigation projects.
Investigate U. S. EPA's Water Alliances for Voluntary Efficiency (WAVE) program
which will soon be expanded to schools, hospitals, and other public facilities. EPA also
encourages municipalities, local, and regional water resource boards; water districts; and
water utilities to join the WAVE program as supporters.
Additional Surface Water
Reconstruct or upgrade wastewater treatment plants.
Investigate wetland mitigation banking opportunities.
Set protective internal discharge limits for storm water controls.
Additional Ground Water
Plug free-flowing Artesian wells.
January 1999 3-93 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.8.5 Success Stories
3.8.5.1 The City of New York/Multi-County Partnership, New York*
New York City, which operates as a city/county consolidated government, and the counties of
Delaware, Greene, Schoharie, Sullivan, Ulster, Putnam, and Westchester in New York State,
have signed a watershed protection agreement that will protect the source of these communities'
drinking water supply. The partnership also includes the agricultural community, watershed
municipalities, and the state and federal governments. Benefits to the City include a filtration
waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, saving billions of dollars in capital
costs. Upstate communities benefit from higher property values resulting from environmentally
sound agricultural practices and planned sustainable development.
Components of the Watershed Protection Agreement That Are Currently Under Way:
Upgrading the nine City-owned upstate sewage treatment plants
Rehabilitating and upgrading City-owned dams and water supply facilities in the
watershed
Implementing the Watershed Agricultural Program
Constructing or upgrading public and privately owned wastewater infrastructure,
including failing septic systems
Acquiring hydrologically sensitive lands in high priority areas near reservoirs, streams
and wetlands
Establishing the Catskill Fund for the Future, an economic development bank to support
responsible, environmentally sensitive projects in the watershed
Extensively reviewing proposed developments and other projects to ensure compliance
with watershed regulations and standards and the protection of water quality
Monitoring water quality in streams, reservoirs, and the distribution system
Forming the Watershed Protection and Partnership Council
January 1999 3-94 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Establishing the Sportsmen's Advisory Councils to review and recommend possible
public recreational uses of City-owned lands in the watershed.
* This case study contains excerpts from "Innovative City/County Partnership - A Report from
the Joint Center for Sustainable Communities." For further information, contact Joel A. Miele,
Sr., P.E., Commissioner, New York City Department of Environmental Protection, Phone:
718/595-6565.
3.8.5.2 Cincinnati Water Works Wellhead Protection
In April 1998, Judy Suzurikawa, a member of the Cincinnati Water Works Wellhead Protection
Team, presented a paper at the "Source Water Assessment and Protection '98" conference in
Dallas, Texas. Ms. Suzurikawa's paper, "Data base and Geographic Information System (GIS)
for Management of a Multi-Jurisdictional Wellhead Protection Area," discussed various
management tools, a geographic information system, and computer data bases used by the
Hamilton to New Baltimore Groundwater Consortium to track water quality issues in the Great
Miami Buried Valley aquifer. The Hamilton to New Baltimore Groundwater Consortium
consists of Cincinnati Water Works and five other public and industrial water suppliers. The
purpose of the Consortium is to monitor the quantity and quality of groundwater and to
implement a comprehensive groundwater protection program. The Consortium's
multi-jurisdictional Wellhead Protection Plan was fully endorsed by the Ohio EPA in January
1998. The Consortium has cost-effectively avoided duplication of effort by its members while
promoting a unified, consistent groundwater management program for the region. The
Consortium's web site, listed in the references below, describes the Consortium's purpose and
programs. The web site also describes and illustrates examples of groundwater contamination
and many preventive measures. The City of Cincinnati was designated a Groundwater Guardian
Community at the end of 1997 by the Groundwater Foundation of Lincoln, Nebraska. Cincinnati
Water Works has been actively involved since 1990 in the joint development of a Groundwater
Protection Program for the Charles M. Bolton wellfield and adjacent wellfields in the Greater
Hamilton/Fairfield area in Ohio.
Resources
"Smart Investments for City and County Managers: Energy, Environment and Community
Development," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning and
Evaluation, EPA 231-R-98-004, April 1998.
January 1999 3-95 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
"Preventing Pollution in Our Cities and Counties: A Compendium of Case Studies," NPPR,
NACo, NACCHO and U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1995.
"Database and Geographic Information System (GIS) for Management of a Multi-Jurisdictional
Wellhead Protection Area," Cincinnati Water Works, 1998, Proceedings, NWRI Source
Water Assessment and Protection 98 Conference, Dallas, TX.
"When it Rains, It Drains-What Everyone Should Know About Storm Water," Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality, Surface Water Quality Division.
"Innovative City/County Partnerships - A Report from the Joint Center for Sustainable
Communities," The United States Conference of Mayors and National Association of
Counties, 1998.
U.S. EPA Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C.
20460 (http:www.epa.gov/opptintr/p2home).
International City/County Management Association, Smart Growth Network (SGN):
http://www.smartgrowth.org; 202/962-3591; email Noah A. Simon nsimon@icma.org.
"Drinking Water - The Safe Drinking Water Act vs. the Small Systems 'How Safe is Safe,'"
EMGT 850, 1996.
"Building State and Local Pollution Prevention Programs," U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of the Administrator, EPA-130-R-93-001, December 1992.
Local Government Environmental Assistance Network (LGEAN), contact: David George at
International City and County Management Association (ICMA) at 202/962-3531; email
dgeorge@icma. org.
Water Efficiency Program; San Jose/Santa Clara Valley Water District and Water Pollution
Control Plant, 3025 Tuers Road, San Jose, CA 95121.
South Bay Water Recycling, 2540 North First Street, Suite 316, San Jose, CA 95131; 408/232-
0832.
January 1999 3-96 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
The U.S. EPA's WAVE Program: EPA Office of Water, Contact: John Flowers, WAVE
Program Director, Phone: 202/260-7288; EPA's WAVE Technical Support Hotline:
800/993-WAVE.
The Hamilton to New Baltimore Groundwater Consortium's web site: www.gwconsortium.org.
"Beyond Delineation and Assessment: Community Action to Protect Source Water Using
Farm*A*SystXHome*A*Syst": http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/Abstracts/Castelnuovo.html.
" Cryptosporidium and Water" by the CDC Working Group on Waterborne Crypto, provides
guidance on setting-up a local task force to deal with the threat to drinking water:
http://www. cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/crypto/crypto. htm.
The Lincoln-Lancaster Health Department (NE) developed a guide and checklist for septic and
wells that was implemented through citizen volunteers. For information, contact the Lincoln
Lancaster Health Department at 402/441-8000.
" Tools for Drinking Water Protection" Video Workshop - The League of Women Voters
developed this excellent video on local government and citizen action on water quality issues.
Their resources are listed on the web at http://www.lwv.org/pubweb/resources.html
For more information, contact: J. Bruce Suits, City of Cincinnati, Office of Environmental
Management. Phone: 513/352-6270; Fax: 513/352-4970; E-mail: bruce.suits@cinems.rcc.org
3.9 WATER SUPPLY
Local governments may be responsible for operating
public water systems. Public water systems are defined
as the central systems or networks of facilities that supply |
drinking water to the public. Public water systems are
designed to provide and maintain a reliable, high-quality
water source (e.g., groundwater or surface water). The
operations necessary to provide and maintain reliable
drinking water include water treatment, residuals
management, and water distribution. (See Exhibit 3-8)
January 1999
5-97
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit 3-8. Water Supply
WATER SUPPLY
>
i
Chemical Storage/
Hazardous
Materials
Management
>
r
Residuals
Management
\
r
Laboratory
Operations
>
r
SDWA
Compliance
>
r
System
Operation and
Maintenance
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), EPA regulates chemical, physical, radiological,
and bacteriological substances in drinking water that pose a health risk to the public. EPA
develops drinking water regulations to protect public health and welfare, and individual states
enforce the regulations for public water systems. Public water systems, therefore, must provide
water treatment, as required; ensure drinking water quality through monitoring; and provide
public notice of violations or possible contamination.
3.9.1 Water Treatment
Because water treatment operations include several activities that could affect the environment,
they are regulated under U.S. environmental laws and regulations. These activities include the
treatment process itself, laboratory operations, management of residuals, and storage of
chemicals and hazardous materials management. Typical steps in the treatment process include:
Screening and Presedimentation. Screening captures large debris, such as leaves, logs,
plastic bottles, sticks, and fish, at the intake where water is drawn into the treatment plant.
Presedimentation allows removal of settleable solids in the water by gravity prior to
additional treatment.
January 1999
5-98
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Coagulation/Flocculation/Sedimentation. These three processes commonly are used
together to remove suspended solids, dissolved chemical substances, and impurities from
raw water supplies. The removal of suspended solids and other substances improves the
appearance and taste of drinking water and helps remove some of the chemical and
microbiological contaminants that might be harmful to humans.
Filtration. Filtration is another commonly used step in removing solids and fine
particles. In slow-sand filtration, source water passes through granular materials, such as
sand, where particles are trapped and removed. In rapid-sand filtration, solids remaining
after the coagulation/flocculation/sedimentation processes are removed.
Disinfection. Disinfection is the process by which pathogens in the water are inactivated
or rendered harmless by the use of chemicals, such as chlorine and ozone.
Softening. Water softening is a process used to remove minerals (primarily calcium and
magnesium) that cause hardness of water.
The SDWA regulates the treatment of drinking water. Specifically, SDWA regulations (40 CFR
141) require filtration and disinfection for water systems that use surface water as their source of
water. In addition, other treatment activities, may be regulated under environmental laws and
regulations, as indicated in the following list.
Chemical storage/hazardous materials managementEPCRA, CERCLA, CAA, and
CWA
Laboratory operationsRCRA and CWA
Residuals managementRCRA and CWA
More detail on the specific activities related to water treatment are provided below.
3.9.1.1 Chemical Storage/Hazardous Materials Management
If a local government stores or uses specified amounts of certain hazardous chemicals, it may be
subject to planning and reporting requirements of EPCRA and Section 112(r) of the CAA.
Hazardous chemicals may be used in various water treatment operations, such as disinfection, or
other maintenance activities. Specifically, chlorine is commonly used in the disinfection process.
January 1999 3-99 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Additional chemicals are used for laboratory procedures used to analyze water samples.
Facilities must submit hazardous chemical inventory and emergency release information as
follows:
The list of EPCRA EHSs can be
found at 40 CFR Part 355,
Appendices A and B; the list of
CERCLA hazardous substances
can be found at 40 CFR Part 302.
Emergency Release Notification (EPCRA Section 304).
A facility is required to notify the SERCs and LEPCs of a
release equal to or exceeding a predetermined amount of
certain hazardous chemicals. The chemicals covered by
this requirement include EPCRA EHSs, as well as
hazardous substances identified in CERCLA. The emergency release notification activates
emergency plans and provides information to the LEPCs and SERCs, who will coordinate release
response activity in order to prevent harmful effects to the public.
Hazardous Chemical Inventory And Reporting (EPCRA Sections 311 and 312). Under
EPCRA, any facility that is required by the OSHA Hazardous Communication Standard (HCS) to
prepare or have available an MSDS for a hazardous chemical is subject to EPCRA Sections 311
and 312 requirements if the chemical is present onsite at any one time in excess of threshold
levels.
MSDS Reporting. Under Section 311 of EPCRA, a facility must submit a one-time
notification identifying the hazardous chemicals (including EPCRA EHSs and OSHA
hazardous chemicals) present at the facility in amounts equal to or in excess of threshold
quantities to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department (40 CFR 370.21). To meet the
notification requirement, a facility must submit either an MSDS (or copies of MSDSs) or
a list of the EPCRA EHSs and OSHA hazardous chemicals. After initial reporting, if a
facility determines that it has a hazardous chemical that is newly covered in amounts
equal to or in excess of the threshold level or there has been significant new information
on an already reported chemical, it must update the information reported under Section
311 within 3 months after discovery.
Tier Reporting. Under Section 312 of EPCRA, a facility must meet an annual reporting
requirement for OSHA hazardous chemicals and EPCRA EHSs in amounts equal to or in
excess of threshold levels. If equaling or exceeding the threshold levels at any time in the
preceding year, a facility must submit to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department an
"Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form." This form must be submitted by
March 1 of each year. EPA publishes two types of inventory forms, Tier I and Tier II,
January 1999 3-100 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
for reporting this information. While federal regulations require only the submission on a
Tier I form, EPA encourages, and some states require, the use of the Tier n form.
LEPCs make this information available to the public, and fire departments and public
health officials use the information to plan for and respond to emergencies.
At present, EPA has established a list of 140
substances that are regulated by the Risk
Management Planning regulations of the CAA.
These substances were published in the Federal
Register on January 31, 1994; EPA amended the
list by rule, published on December 18, 1997.
EPA may further amend the list in the future as
needed.
Risk Management Planning (CAA Section
112(r)). Under Section 112(r) of the
amended CAA, facilities that have more than
a threshold quantity of any of the 140
regulated substances in a single process are
required to develop risk management
programs and to summarize these programs
in risk management plans by June 21, 1999
(40 CFR Part 68). Risk management plans, which are intended to prevent accidental releases of
regulated substances and to reduce the severity of any releases that do occur, will be made
available to state and local government agencies and the public. EPA has been working with
industry groups to develop model risk management programs. To review the model program,
refer to EPA's Chemical Accident Prevention and Risk Management Planning website at
http://www.epa.gov/swercepp/acc-pre.htm#Model Plans.
Exhibit 3-9 presents selected process chemicals used in water supply operations.
Exhibit 3-9. Chemicals Used in Water Supply Activities
Activity
Coagulation, flocculation, and
sedimentation
Filtration
Disinfection
Softening
Residuals management
Water main repair/replacement
Pump maintenance
Process Chemicals Utilized
Alum (aluminum sulfate), ferrous sulfate, ferric chloride, cationic
polymers, calcium hydroxide, and sodium aluminate
Cationic polymers, anionic polymers, calcium carbonate, and calcium
hydroxide
Chlorine (gas or liquid), sodium hypochlorite, calcium hypochlorite,
chloramines, chlorine dioxide, and ozone
Lime and calcium carbonate
Lime and calcium carbonate
Sodium hypochlorite, calcium hypochlorite, and liquid chlorine
Petroleum-based lubricants and grease
January 1999
3-101
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Water supply facilities are responsible for operating the laboratory safely. To prevent laboratory
accidents, chemicals should be stored in a properly ventilated and well lit room. All bottles and
reagents should be clearly labeled and dated. Volatile liquids that could escape as a gas, such as
ether, must be kept away from heat sources, sunlight, and electrical switches. Cylinders of gas
being stored should also be capped and secured to prevent rolling or tipping.
3.9.1.3 Residuals Management
Residuals management includes managing the wide variety of waste products generated from the
treatment of drinking water using screening, presedimentation, coagulation/flocculation/
sedimentation, filtration, disinfection, and softening processes. The residuals may be organic and
inorganic compounds in liquid, solid, and gaseous forms, depending on the source of raw water
and the type of treatment processes. Key residuals include the following:
Sludges from coagulation/flocculation/sedimentation operations
Sludges from softening operations
Sludges from iron and manganese removal operations
Solids in rapid-sand filter backwash water
Solids from screening and presedimentation, slow-sand filtering, and other processes.
The primary aspect of residuals that may impact the environment is solid materials that, if
discharged to waterways, could lead to increased suspended sediment levels in the water column
and deposition at the bottom. Additional aspects include metals and chemical residuals that
attach to the solids. The environmental impacts of these depend on the management method,
which include dewatering and landfilling, as well as discharge to a POTW.
Sludge that is dewatered and placed in a landfill or properly applied to land has minimal
environmental impact. Excessive land application, however, can lead to sludge runoff during
rain events, thereby increasing sedimentation in water bodies. Liquid sludge discharged to a
wastewater treatment plant may affect the integrity of the sewer system through excessive
buildup of solids in the system. Liquid sludge discharged to a water body can increase
sedimentation in that water body. Land application or land disposal of sludge may be regulated
under RCRA solid waste regulations or state guidelines; liquid disposal to a treatment plant or
directly to a waterbody is regulated under the CWA pretreatment and NPDES programs
respectively.
January 1999 3-102 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.9.2 Water Distribution System Operation and Maintenance
The operation and maintenance of the water distribution system includes upkeep of the pipes,
storage tanks, and pumps that convey water from the water treatment plant to the customers.
Because activities could affect the environment, they are regulated under environmental laws and
regulations, indicated in the following list.
Water pipe flushingCWA and EPCRA
Water main repair/replacementCWA, EPCRA and CAA
Storage tank maintenanceRCRA and CAA
Pump maintenanceRCRA
In addition, cross contamination and backflow can contaminate waste distribution systems and,
therefore, are subject to various building codes and regulations.
3.9.2.1 Cross Connection Control and Backflow Prevention
Cross connection control and backflow prevention are operational programs that a public water
system and its customers must implement to prevent contaminants and non-potable water (e.g.,
wastewater, storm water, process water) from being drawn into the public drinking water system.
Cross connections are physical, piped connections between potable water and an unsafe or
polluted water source. Cross connections can threaten water quality and public health through
the backflow of such hazardous substances as antifreeze, boiler water, and sewage. Backflow is
a reverse flow of water from the customer or service connection into the water distribution
system. Backflow typically occurs when distribution system pressure drops due to a water main
break or due to firefighting demands. Cross connection control programs consist of building
codes and other regulations that prohibit cross connections and require backflow prevention
devices on particularly high risk service connections (e.g., a wastewater treatment plant).
Education, inspection, and enforcement are also necessary to ensure compliance with the
building codes and regulations.
3.9.2.2 Water Pipe Flushing
Water pipe flushing is performed on distribution systems to remove any accumulated sediments
or other impurities that have been deposited in the pipe. Water pipe flushing also improves the
flow of water through the distribution system, allowing it to work at capacity. Flushing is
performed by isolating sections of the distribution system and opening flushing valves or more
January 1999 3-103 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
commonly fire hydrants to cause a large volume of flow to pass through the isolated pipeline and
suspend the settled sediment. Water mains may also be mechanically cleaned through the use of
swabs or pigs, which are pulled through a section of line to scrape the accumulated debris off the
inside of the pipe. The major environmental aspect of water pipe flushing is the discharge of
flushed water, which may be high in suspended solids and other contaminants that can harm
water bodies. The negative impacts of the discharge may be minimized by discharging the flush
water into a sanitary sewer with adequate capacity or by discharging the flush water into a
separate storm sewer system with storm water management measures, such as a detention pond,
where solids can settle before the water is discharged. The discharge of water from flushing may
be regulated under an NPDES permit.
3.9.2.3 Water Main Repair/Replacement
Water main repair/replacement must be performed to water systems to replace or repair broken,
corroded, or leaking sections of pipe. The broken pipe section is either replaced or, as is often
the case, a repair sleeve is placed around the outside of the broken pipe section and clamped into
place. Following the repair of the pipe, the line is typically flushed and then disinfected with a
chlorine solution. The chlorine solution is usually mixed onsite with powdered calcium
hypochlorite or sodium hypochlorite. Pipe repair and replacement could affect the environment
through:
Erosion and sedimentation, which take place as a result of excavation, stockpiling, and
backfilling
Discharge of sediment laden water in the excavated area from groundwater and rainfall
Discharge of sediment laden flush water and highly chlorinated disinfecting solution.
These impacts can be minimized through control measures. Sediment and erosion control
measures that can be implemented for the excavation of the trench include stockpiling the
excavated soil on the uphill side of the trench or installing silt fences on the downhill side of the
excavation. The impacts associated with discharges from trench dewatering, pipe flushing, and
pipe disinfecting can be reduced by discharging into storm water management facilities, such as
detention ponds, where solids can settle and chlorine compounds can dissolve. The discharge of
water from these activities may be regulated by the facility's NPDES permit, and storage and use
of chlorine may be regulated under EPCRA or the CAA.
January 1999 3-104 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.9.2.4 Storage Tank Maintenance
This activity includes frequent inspection and may require occasional repairs. The most frequent
types of repairs are repainting the tanks and replacing screens over vents and other points of
access to insects, birds, and rodents. Most tanks are made of steel and, therefore, subject to
corrosion. To prevent corrosion, the tanks are painted on a regular basis. Tank painting can
generate sandblasting residue, which results from preparing the tank's surface for receiving paint.
This impact can be minimized by containing the area to be sandblasted and collecting and
recycling the sandblasting residue. Sandblasting activities may be regulated under the State
Implementation Plans developed under the CAA. Disposal of paint chips and dust, if they are
determined to be hazardous, may be regulated under RCRA.
3.9.2.5 Pump Maintenance
Pump maintenance must be performed to ensure that booster and other distribution system
pumps stay in working order. Maintenance of the pumps involves checking the pumps regularly
for excessive vibration or noise, providing grease and lubrication regularly, and checking the
pump bearings and packing glands. Using and storing the necessary petroleum-based grease and
lubricants could affect the environment through spills to water or land. Disposal of these
products may be regulated under the RCRA used oil regulations. Spills of oil that reach
waterways may be required to be reported under the SPCC regulations of the CWA.
3.9.2.6 Safe Drinking Water Act Compliance
Local governments are responsible for complying with SDWA regulations, both for water
treatment and the distribution system. As part of those regulations, water supply facilities are
required to sample and analyze the water for specific chemicals to ensure they do not exceed the
maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for those chemicals. If and when MCLs are exceeded,
local governments must notify the state within 48 hours. In addition, local governments are
required to provide public notice of the exceedance. All local government water supply facilities
also must maintain records, including bacteriological and chemical analyses, actions taken to
correct violations, sanitary surveys of the system, and variances or exemptions granted to the
system.
January 1999 3-105 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.9.3 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance
Local governments are responsible for maintaining all vehicles associated with water supply
activities according to the operations described in Section 3.10.
3.9.4 Pollution Prevention in Water Supply
The collection, treatment and distribution of water is one of the largest and most expensive tasks
of local governments. Water supply systems vary from community to community depending on
various factors such as the source of water, age and infrastructure integrity, size and population
of the community, and the needs of the population. For example, water conservation may be a
very high priority in some locales, while other areas may enjoy an abundance of source water;
both have a need to protect their water sources. Moreover, while the various water supply,
treatment, and distribution methods and their related operations have their clear health and
economic benefits, these processes also bring the potential to pollute. Some municipal water
supply facilities have an opportunity to act as pollution prevention role models for other private
water facilities and for their residential, commercial, and industrial customers. As with other
local government activities, incorporating pollution prevention criteria into their decision making
process, public policy makers and water supply operations managers can help prevent and reduce
waste and pollution. Preventing and reducing potentially harmful chemical exposures to
employees and neighbors will reduce risks of accidents and releases, as well as prevent or reduce
potential liabilities and regulatory compliance burdens.
3.9.4.1 Typical Wastes Associated with Water Supply
Solvent cleaners and paints, mercury switches and lamps, lubricants and other wastes
from operations, and facility maintenance activities.
Disinfection by-products (e.g., trihalomethanes).
Corrosion by-products
Leaking or broken lead from service lines, goose neck or service connections.
Radon in wells.
January 1999 3-106 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Pesticides in rinse waters and containers.
Industrial, commercial, and household chemical discharges.
3.9.4.2 Top Pollution Prevention Opportunities
Investigate alternatives or reductions (e.g., GAC, ozone treatment, ultraviolet) to chlorine
water disinfection.
Investigate reduced risk storage and handling of chlorine and other chemicals.
Install plant dehumidification systems to reduce rusting/corrosion of plant equipment.
Use lead-free solder, retrofitting the service lines with PVC instead of metal.
Know your waste stream in order to identify high priority (or "low hanging fruit") for
source reduction, reuse or recycling opportunities.
Strategically plan for SDWA compliance through source protection and source selection
strategies, operational strategies, collaborative arrangements, purchased-water
transactions, or institutional restructuring.
Perform self-evaluations regularly.
Install water conservation devices (e.g., low-flow showerheads, low-flush toilets, motion
sensing faucets.)
Implement water conservation strategies (e.g., use grey water for irrigation), consider
xeriscape (i.e., native, low water requirement) landscaping, consider pervious material for
walkways and driveways.
Look for energy efficiency improvements in designing or re-designing water pumping and
treatment systems.
Use national and local events to promote the pollution prevention ethic to employees and
the public.
January 1999 3-107 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Connect with local, state, national or international organizations to share information,
techniques and approaches to continuous improvement through pollution prevention.
Perform consistent and proper monitoring.
3.9.4.3 Success Story
The Cincinnati (Ohio) Water Works, a municipally owned and operated utility, was purchased by
the City of Cincinnati from a private owner in 1839. The service area of the Cincinnati Water
Works has grown and now includes the entire City of Cincinnati, approximately 90 percent of the
rest of Hamilton County and three additional service areas in the adjacent counties of Butler and
Warren. The City of Cincinnati and the great majority of Hamilton County are served on a retail
or metered basis. The City of Cincinnati is responsible for the complete administration,
operation, maintenance, and capital planning for the entire service area. The Cincinnati Water
Works now supplies approximately 46 billion gallons of water a year through 2,742 miles of
water main to more than 221,028 residential and commercial accounts representing more than
900,000 consumers in the Greater Cincinnati area.
The City of Cincinnati and the Cincinnati Water Works have taken steps to prevent and reduce
pollution. The City has recently implemented a Pollution Prevention Program which seeks to
identify pollution before it occurs and substitute a non-polluting process or material for that
which would pollute. In other words, prevent or eliminate the source or cause of pollution so the
environment does not have to be cleaned up later. Cincinnati has the only granular activated
carbon (GAC) filtration plant of its kind in the nation and one of largest such plants in the world.
Ninety percent of the water supplied by the Cincinnati Water Works is filtered through carbon
filters. The other 10 percent is provided from the Water Works' well-water treatment plant in
Butler County. The GAC removes organic substances from Ohio River water, which is
Cincinnati's primary water source. The state-of-the-art GAC treatment process, installed in 1992,
ensures that customers will receive high quality water and is considered a pollution prevention
technology because the facility uses only one third the amount of chlorine as would otherwise be
used in the treatment of water. The process enables Cincinnati Water Works to be in compliance
not only with present Ohio and federal safe drinking water regulations, but allows Cincinnati to
be prepared for future regulations.
The Natural Resource Defense Council called the Cincinnati Water Works GAC facility the
"crown jewel" of the utility's treatment process. The Milwaukee Journal describes the Cincinnati
January 1999 3-108 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Water Works as a "model" water utility because of its treatment processes and aggressive
research to find additional ways to improve its water quality.
In another area of pollution prevention, as a "covered" facility that will need to meet the CAA
112(r) (Risk Management Planning) requirements by June 21, 1999, the construction of the
California chlorination facility may be considered pollution prevention. This is because risk of
release and exposure has been reduced significantly by the creation of a containment building
and the modification from four 55-ton chlorine storage tanks to 48 1-ton tanks.
Additionally, Cincinnati Water Works recently identified three pilot projects that may help
prevent pollution. They include use of electric power mowers to maintain grounds, use of
biodegradable antifreeze for facility vehicles and use of environmentally friendly ice and snow
removal techniques, such as sand and nontoxic chemicals.
Resources
"For Your Information - Message from the Cincinnati Water Works," Issue 1, 1996.
"Preventing Pollution in Our Cities and Counties: A Compendium of Case Studies," NPPR,
NACo, NACCHO and U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1995.
U.S. EPA Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C.
20460 (http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/p2home).
Smart Growth Network: 202/260-2750; http://www.smartgrowth.org.
U.S. EPA Design for the Environment (DfE): 202/260-1678; http://es.inel.gov/dfe.
"Safe Water from Every Tap - Improving Water Service to Small Communities" National
Academy Press, 1998.
DRAFT "Pollution Prevention in Enforcement - Village of South Charleston, Ohio" Office of
Pollution Prevention, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1998
"Conservation Improvement Projects through Soil and Water Conservation Districts,"
Cooperative Extension Service The Ohio State University.
January 1999 3-109 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government Environmental Assistance Network (LGEAN) through the International
County and City Managers Association; Contact: David George at 202/962-3531; email:
dgeorge@icma.org.
"Setting Standards: Risk Assessment Issues," edited by, Frederick W. Pontius, Denver CO.,
AWWA Journal, July 1995, pplO-16, 114.
"Safe Drinking Water From Small System: Treatment Options," edited by, James A. Goodrich,
Cincinnati, OH. , AWWA Journal, May 1992, pp.49-55.
" Tools for Drinking Water Protection" Video Workshop - The League of Women Voters
developed this excellent video on local government and citizen action on water quality issues.
Their resources are listed on the web at http://www.lwv.org/pubweb/resources.html
"Chemicals Versus Microbial in Drinking Water: A Decision Sciences Perspective," edited by,
Susan W. Putman, Boston MA, AWWA Journal, March 1993 pp 57-61.
"Drinking water, Pollution Prevention and Public Health" (8pp) - EPA/742/F-97/004
"Incentives and Disincentives for Adoption of P2 Measures Under EPA's Water Program"
(94pp) - EPA/742/R-94/006
American Water Works Association Small System Hotline
U.S. EPA Drinking Water Hotline/National Drinking Water Clearinghouse
National Rural Water Association
Rural Community Assistance Corporation
State Drinking Water Primacy Agency
For more information, contact J. Bruce Suits, City of Cincinnati, Office of Environmental
Management Phone: 513/352-6270; Fax: 513/352-4970; E-mail: bruce.suits@cinems.rcc.org
January 1999 3-110 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
3.10 VEHICLE/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
Local governments are responsible for operating, maintaining, and purchasing motor vehicles
and equipment to perform government services. Vehicles range from school buses, fire engines,
snow plows, and heavy construction equipment to automobiles used by building inspectors,
police departments, and government officials. Equipment may include pumps, tools, and boilers.
As shown in Exhibit 3-10, local government fleet operations include vehicle repair shops, fueling
stations, and purchasing operations. (Note: While this section specifically discusses vehicle
maintenance, many of the regulated activities apply to equipment maintenance.)
Exhibit 3-10. Vehicle Maintenance Activities
3.10.1 Vehicle Repair Shops
Because vehicle repair shops conduct several activities that could affect the environment, these
activities are regulated under environmental laws and regulations, as indicated in the following
list.
January 1999
3-111
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Fluid changesRCRA and CWA
Parts washing RCRA, CAA, and CWA
Battery maintenanceRCRA and CWA
Air conditioner repairCAA
Vehicle and shop floor washingCWA
Exhaust system repair and replacementCAA
PaintingRCRA and CAA
Outdoor material storageCWA
Exhibit 3-11 illustrates some repair shop activities.
Exhibit 3-11. Vehicle Repair Shop Activities
(photo from CCAR-Greenlink)
January 1999
3-112
Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.10.1.1 Changing Vehicle Fluids
Changing vehicle fluids includes oil, transmission, and break lubrication, as well as antifreeze
changes. Changing fluids also involves storing both new and waste fluids and managing or
disposing of waste fluids. Fluids generally are drained from the vehicle to a pan or bucket
placed below the vehicle. Full pans or buckets are then dumped into a larger container, such as a
55-gallon drum, UST, or aboveground storage tank, prior to off-site disposal. The potential
environmental impacts from fluid changes are soil and water contamination from spills or
improper disposal. Storage of new materials may be regulated under the SPCC provisions of the
CWA, which require development of a spill prevention plan that generally includes providing
secondary containment for all tanks and drums. Storage, recycling, and disposal of waste fluids
are regulated under the used oil provisions of RCRA. The used oil provisions require used oil to
be stored in structurally sound containers labeled with the words "used oil only" and ultimately
recycled or burned for heat. Fluids disposed of or spilled in floor drains or surface drains or
otherwise released from the facility property are regulated under the NPDES, pretreatment, or
storm water provisions of the CWA. These provisions require notifying EPA, the state, or a local
treatment plant, complying with permit provisions, and preventing untreated fluids from reaching
surface waters. Fluids stored in underground tanks are regulated under the UST provisions of
RCRA, which require that the tanks maintain spill prevention and leak detection devices and be
made of specified structurally sound materials.
3.10.1.2 Washing Vehicle Parts
Washing vehicle parts consists of immersing the small parts, such as nuts, bolts, or carburetor
pieces, into a solvent bath of chemical or water-based solvent or spraying them with a chemical
or citrus-based solvent. Washing vehicle parts also may include spraying shop rags with solvent
and rubbing the solvent on the part to clean it. Chemical solvent washers often consist of a metal
sink attached to a 20-gallon drum of solvent. When the solvent is no longer usable, the drum is
replaced. Water-based solvent washers consist of an enclosed bath with high pressure sprayers.
The use of chemical solvent washers is regulated under the cold solvent bath section of the CAA,
which requires sink lids to be kept closed and specifies additional practices to minimize the
release of hazardous air pollutants. The disposal and recycling of used chemical solvent are
regulated under RCRA, which specifies disposal methods. The disposal of wastewater from
water-based solvent washers may be regulated under the pretreatment program or NPDES
programs of the CWA. The disposal of solvent-contaminated rags may be regulated under
RCRA.
January 1999 3-113 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.10.1.3 Maintaining Vehicle Batteries
Maintaining vehicle batteries includes testing, changing, storing, and disposing of new and used
vehicle batteries. The storage of batteries may be regulated under the NPDES storm water
provisions of the CWA, which require that batteries be contained and covered to prevent
potential leaks from coming in contact with storm water. Disposal of batteries may be regulated
under RCRA, which requires that batteries either be returned to a supplier or recycler or meet
stringent disposal requirements.
3.10.1.4 Repairing A ir Conditioners
Repairing vehicle air conditioners includes adding, removing, and recycling CFC refrigerants, as
well as performing general maintenance on vehicle air conditioners. These activities are
regulated under the CAA, which is designed to prevent ozone depletion by requiring the capture
and recovery of used refrigerants, the use of certified recycling equipment, and the training and
certification of all operators.
3.10.1.5 Washing Vehicles and Shop Floors
Washing vehicles and shop floors includes spraying water and detergent on vehicles and floors
and discharging the washwater through a drain to a septic tank, POTW, or waterway. Some
facilities may dump used washwater on the ground outside of the facility. Washing vehicles and
shop floors may be regulated under the pretreatment program or NPDES program of the CWA.
These sections may require the facility to obtain permits, install oil and water separators, or
comply with other provisions designed to prevent contaminated wastewater from reaching the
environment.
3.10.1.6 Repairing or Replacing Exhaust Systems
Repairing or replacing exhaust systems consists of repairing or replacing catalytic converters.
Any work that affects vehicle emissions is regulated under the CAA, which requires that records
be kept of all converter repair and replacement, and specifies procedures for ensuring that
removed converters are properly replaced.
January 1999 3-114 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.10.1.7 Painting Vehicles
Vehicle painting includes overall body painting, touch up, paint and thinner mixing, and
unusable paint and thinner disposal. Vehicle painting often is conducted in an enclosed room or
booth that has positive pressure ventilation to ensure that paint fumes leave the room, rather than
being inhaled by the painter. To minimize air pollution, air filters are placed in the vents and
changed regularly. Vehicle painting also includes changing and disposing of these filters. If
significant quantities of paints containing hazardous materials are used or if the local government
is located in a designated geographic area, air emissions from painting operations may be
regulated under the CAA, which may specify the type of ventilation system and the frequency for
changing the filters. The disposal of air filters used to filter emissions from paints containing
hazardous materials, disposal of many unusable paints, and disposal of spent thinners is regulated
under RCRA. Preparing a vehicle for painting (e.g., stripping, sanding) may also be regulated
under RCRA because such activities may result in a hazardous waste.
3.10.1.8 Storing Materials Outside
Due to space and safety concerns, many vehicle repair shops store drums of used and new fluids,
hazardous materials, batteries, vehicle parts, or other wastes outside of the shop. The storage of
any materials that could reach waterways through spills or storm water runoff are regulated under
the NPDES direct discharge or storm water discharge provisions of the CWA, which require that
the facility prevent these materials from coming in contact with storm water.
3.10.2 Fueling Stations
Local governments operate and maintain vehicle fueling stations to provide fuel to their vehicles.
Because these activities could affect the environment, they are regulated under environmental
laws and regulations, as indicated below.
Fuel storageCWA and RCRA
Fuel dispensingCAA
Disposal of spilled unusable fuelRCRA
3.10.2.1 Fuel Storage
Vehicle fuels, including gasoline, kerosene, and diesel fuel, are stored in underground or
aboveground storage tanks that are connected by piping to the fuel dispensing unit. The
January 1999 3-115 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
operation and maintenance of these tanks may be regulated under the SPCC section of the CWA
which requires development and implementation of spill prevention plans and secondary
containment for aboveground tanks and/or under the UST section of RCRA, which specifies
structural, monitoring, and leak detection requirements for underground tanks.
3.10.2.2 Fuel Dispensing
Fuel dispensing units used at local government facilities are similar or identical to those used at
retail service stations and could emit organic vapors to the atmosphere. In some areas,
dispensing is regulated under the CAA which may require the dispensing units to have vapor
recovery systems at the point of fueling and at the location where the aboveground or
underground fuel storage tanks are filled. In addition, fuel dispensing units are required to
dispense fuel at a prescribed gallons per minute rate to prevent spills.
3.10.2.3 Disposal of Unusable Fuel
In the course of fueling or fuel loading operations, fuel may be spilled. Fuel that cannot be
dispensed into a vehicle for use must be disposed. The disposal of this fuel may be regulated
under RCRA, which sets requirements for handling, storage, and ultimate disposal of hazardous
wastes. A repair shop may be required to report any spill to local authorities.
3.10.3 Purchasing
Purchasing includes the acquisition of vehicles, equipment, and materials. The only purchasing
activity that is regulated directly by environmental laws is the purchasing of clean fuel vehicles
for local governments with large vehicle fleets, which is regulated under the CAA. Local
governments that purchase new vehicles for certain size fleets are required to purchase a
specified certain percentage of clean fuel vehicles each year that vehicles are purchased. Other
purchasing decisions, such as the purchase of hazardous or water-based solvent, can directly
impact whether the fleet operations are subject to additional environmental requirements.
3.10.4 Pollution Prevention in Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance
Pollution prevention opportunities abound in vehicle and equipment maintenance. Usually, three
factors contribute to the level of success of a pollution prevention plan. The first factor involves
auditing current procedures, researching pollution prevention opportunities, and committing to
make appropriate and beneficial changes. This step requires researching alternative products and
January 1999 3-116 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
funding equipment purchases. The second factor is funding. Generally, present funding can be
reappropriated in a phased plan to purchase new equipment, products, and/or contract services.
The third factor deals with the regulatory requirements and contract services available based on
the facility's location. Some facilities base their decisions for a pollution prevention plan on the
regulatory requirements contained in RCRA, OSHA, and/or local regulations. Pollution
prevention technology implemented under this approach will enhance the safety of workers,
improve regulatory compliance, and may lower the operating costs of the facility. There are
many options for pollution prevention depending on the waste stream's characteristics and
regulatory requirements. Some of the best ideas for pollution prevention can come from
mechanics who peform the tasks every day, but changing old habits is the key to pollution
prevention success. The most important item to remember is that pollution prevention can play
an important role in any plan as long as appropriate research and planning are performed. The
remainder of this section highlights pollution prevention options by waste stream.
3.10.4.1 Typical Wastes Generated
Cleaning solvents
Anti-freeze/cool ant
Used/soiled shop rags
Unrecovered Freon from air conditioners
Oil/lubricants
Scrap metal
3.10.4.2 Parts Cleaning Systems
There are many different types of parts cleaning systems. Some utilize a pump to circulate
cleaning solvent/solutions. These machines can be managed by the facility or contracted to a
service that maintains the system and hauls away any generated wastes. The type of system and
the solvent/solution (e.g., organic based, aqueous, citrus based) used in the system will determine
the applicable regulatory management requirements and pollution prevention opportunities.
Some systems have a distiller to clean the solvent and a reservoir tank to hold the waste that is
"cooked" out, while others utilize filters to extract impurities. Protecting the integrity of the
cleaning solvent/solution in order to extend its life and reduce disposal quantities is pollution
prevention. For example, by managing your own system that utilizes filters, you can change the
filters based on the system's use before they reach a regulated threshold and not because of a pre-
set contracted service. Also, there are aqueous, semi-aqueous, and citrus-based systems that
offer unique opportunities for pollution prevention. With any of these types of systems, it is
January 1999 3-117 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
important not to introduce any non-compatible solvents/solutions into them that would cause
them to become regulated hazardous waste.
Some Factors to Consider in a Filtered System
Utilizes non-chlorinated solvents in the system.
Has a high flash point solvent of more than 143 degrees.
Can meet all regulatory requirements regarding disposal of filters.
Has a closing lid for when the system is not being used to reduce evaporation and air
emissions.
Meets OSHA safety requirements.
Some Factors for Aqueous Solution Systems
The system cleans to the standard required for the part to function properly.
There will be minimal regulatory restrictions if disposal of the solution is required.
A balance can be maintained for the bioremediation in the system to work properly.
Key Tips
Maintain the solution/solvent integrity to extend its life and increase frequency of filter
replacement to reduce disposal costs of solvent/solution. Let the part sit in the wash basin and
drip dry to reduce solvent "drag out" loss. Choosing aqueous systems may reduce regulatory
requirements all together.
3.10.4.3 Pressurized/Aerosol Cleaners
Chlorinated solvents/solutions should not be used in any application to clean parts. Avoid using
any aerosol cleaning products that are not RCRA approved. The use of these types of
solvents/solutions can cross contaminate fluids and make them regulated under RCRA and
increase OSHA requirements. Solvent/solutions purchased in bulk and applied with self-
pressurizing applicators will reduce the use of the product and waste containers. Pre-cleaning
with a putty knife and wire brush and utilizing recyclable shop rags will also reduce disposal cost
and excess use of solvents/solutions. Verify compatibility of the solvent/solution with the parts
washer's solvent/solution. Aqueous solutions may be the best option when utilized properly.
There are pre-cleaning solvents/solutions that can affect the parts washing tank if, after use,
January 1999 3-118 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
further cleaning of a part is required in that system. Eliminate overuse and set standards on the
amount of cleaning required for the particular part to function properly.
Some Factors to Consider in a Self-pressurizing System
Use of non-chlorinated solvents.
Solvent/solution is compatible with the parts washer.
Solvent/solution content affect on RCRA/OSHA regulatory requirements.
Does the manufacturer/supplier offer system product support and/or training?
Key Tips. Utilizing a scraping device and/or wire brush, recyclable shop towels, and a non-
regulated RCRA solvent/solution will reduce usage and hazardous waste regulatory
requirements. Solvents/solutions with low VOC and low toxic contents produce less emissions
that are harmful to the employee.
3.10.4.4 Anti-freeze/Coolant
Using manufacturer-specified antifreeze/coolant is required to maintain warranties and extend
the life of the vehicle/equipment. Antifreeze/coolant can be recycled in various ways, to
manufacture specifications and for reuse on site. The facility should verify that the
vehicle/equipment warranty will be honored if this reused antifreeze/coolant is utilized. One
method to recondition used antifreeze/coolant is to utilize a mobile service to perform onsite
recycling at your facility. Verify that the service is licensed and has a neutral third party
laboratory's test results to demonstrate the system works, and the service guarantees the system's
product. Another approach is to purchase your own on-site recycling machine. This allows full
management of the system's use and the quality of the product it produces. Either one of these
will reduce new product purchases and associated RCRA disposal costs, as well as ensure a
readily available product.
Some Factors to Consider in Choosing the Best Method for the Facility
Verify warranty coverage of the vehicle/equipment for the system/service chosen.
Verify disposal approval for filters generated from the recycling system.
See if bulk containers for used/recycled anti-freeze are available and proper storage can
be achieved.
January 1999 3-119 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Key Tip. Whatever method is chosen, make sure testing and warranties of the system's product
is backed, and the manufacturer of the vehicle/equipment allows for the use of the reconditioned
anti -freeze/cool ant.
3.10.4.5 Shop Rags
Do not use disposable shop rags. Contract with a service to provide reusable rags for the facility
as needed. Provide mechanics with a certain amount to perform the job. Require them to bring
back and exchange used rags for new rags. Verify that the service selected has an approved
method and facility for recycling the rags. The only exception to utilizing a service is if the
facility's nonregulated waste is disposed of at a waste-to-energy plant that can incinerate waste
rags. Remember, never use chlorinated solvents regardless of the recycling/disposal method.
Some Factors to Look for in Selecting a Service
A regulatory approved method for the facility where the rags will be recycled.
Will set a pick-up schedule for the used rags as required by your facility.
Offers different rag selection based on the use for the facility.
Key Tip. Use as few rags as possible and always utilize a service to recycle rags at an approved
facility.
3.10.4.6 Air Conditioning
There are several manufacturers that have different machines that will recover Freon from a
system for off-site recycling. Other machines recover and recycle the Freon and then place the
recycled Freon back into the repaired unit. These types of machines reduce new Freon purchases
and disposal costs associated with the management requirements of the waste stream. If the
repair of air conditioners is performed offsite, verify their practice for handling generated waste.
Some Factors to Look for in Selecting a Machine
Is regulatory approved and registered.
Is backed by third party test results verifying efficiency.
Has factory warranty and supplier training.
January 1999 3-120 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.10.4.7 Lubricating Oils
There are several types of lubricating oils in the various types of vehicles/equipment in use today.
Changing these oils should be performed as determined by the use and not specific timed dates.
If the vehicle/equipment is underutilized and/or is only needed for a specific task, changing the
oils by a timed date is a waste of resources. Synthetic oils generally have a longer span of time
for use before a change is required. When choosing the correct lubricant, verify warranty
approval and track the miles/hours of use of the product in the vehicle/equipment. Check various
options of disposal to see if refining of the waste oils is available over fuel blending for
incineration. Keep non-compatible oils separate from one another to reduce possible cross
contamination and increased disposal cost.
3.10.4.8 Metal Recycling
Most parts replaced are made of metal. Some metal parts must be exchanged for the new part
when purchased. Many parts can be recycled, while saving the facility disposal costs. Lead tire
weights, broken engine brackets, nuts and bolts, and body parts are just a few that have value for
recycling. Set up places to store the recyclable metal, preferably out of the weather, and contract
with a scrap dealer to pickup what is recycled at the facility on an as needed basis. Some scrap
dealers will supply the container to the facility for the storage of the metal to be recycled. The
scrap dealer may require separation of the different metal types.
3.10.4.9 Conclusion
Pollution prevention will have a positive effect on procedures/processes and regulated waste
generated at the facility when the pollution prevention concept is initiated. When product use is
decreased and/or eliminated, manufacturing, transporting, and handling are all affected. This
decreases the need for energy and raw materials. Although the facility may not benefit entirely
from this occurrence, the entire scope of pollution prevention for the industry does. Changing
procedures and incorporating new technology to reduce or eliminate waste are true pollution
prevention tactics and must be encouraged from top management to every employee. The key to
incorporating a successful pollution prevention plan is to utilize current funds and available
resources to implement the changes required in the plan. Inventory control, product research,
operational procedures, and regulatory compliance requirements all must be evaluated before
implementation occurs. Evaluate and document current product uses and procedures to verify the
extent of the pollution prevention plan's success at the facility.
January 1999 3-121 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.10.5 Success Story
The purpose of this case study was to evaluate and eliminate violations and the potential to
violate RCRA at Lee County's Fleet Management Facility, to reduce associated liabilities
regarding the facility's employees' health and safety, to implement and utilize BMPs, pollution
prevention technologies and preferable purchasing techniques, where possible, and to perform
research and institute recycling procedural requirements, where profitable.
The Fleet Management Facility maintains over 1,600 pieces of equipment from lawn mowers to
heavy equipment utilized by various departments in Lee County. Several violations of RCRA
were discovered in 1992 and Lee County was required by the Board of County Commissioners to
fix the situation so violations did not occur again. A corrective plan was the first task, and later
another operations plan was written to include pollution prevention, BMPs, and Reduce, Reuse,
and Recycle (R3). The later plan initiated a three-year phased process that covered product
substitution and/or elimination, equipment/chemical purchasing requirements, and employee
training.
Some of the equipment purchased by Lee County to promote pollution prevention, BMPs, and
R3 included:
Parts washer with a multi-staged filter system that used a cleaner degreaser. Using this
system allowed for the total elimination of hazardous waste that was being generated and
then shipped off-site for disposal.
Anti-freeze recycler used to filter impurities from used anti-freeze before chemically
balanced to manufacturer specifications. This closed loop approach is the only way to
ensure compliance is achieved and product integrity. As long as filters are changed
appropriately, they do not accumulate regulated heavy metal amounts. Also, performing
on-site recycling of the anti-freeze saved money required for new product purchases,
testing to determine if it was a hazardous waste, and transportation/disposal.
Air conditioning reclaimer/recycler, which cut the cost of freon purchases by 82 percent,
with zero waste to dispose.
Self-pressurizing solvent sprayer. In conjunction with recyclable rag service, there is no
regulated hazardous waste. Also, changing to manual pressurizing dispensers eliminated
use of chlorinated solvents.
January 1999 3-122 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
The cost of hazardous waste disposal was reduced 100 percent for savings of $16,800 per year
for an average year's cost. This includes solvent disposal contracts, anti-freeze disposal, and
freon disposal. Recycling of fluids such as anti-freeze, used oil, parts cleaning solvent, and freon
also reduced the facility's liability and saved in new product purchases. For more information,
contact Dale Nottingham (see below).
References
Local, State, and National Vehicle Trade Associations
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable
State Pollution Prevention Roundtables
National Association of Counties
EPA Website
For more information, contact Dale L. Nottingham - Lee County Small Quantity Generator
Program, 1500 Monroe Street, Fort Myers, FL 33901, Phone: (941) 479-8126, e-mail:
nottindl@bocc.co.lee.fi.us.
3.11 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REGULATORY PROGRAMS
The preceding sections of this chapter present activities conducted by local governments in
which the local government is the regulatee, (i.e., the one being regulated). There are some
environmental programs at the local level, however, in which the local government is the
regulator, (i.e., the one implementing and enforcing the program). This section discusses three
distinct environmental programs in which the local government is the regulator.
It should be noted that in addition to the three programs discussed in this section any local
government is also responsible for environmental programs and initiatives that may affect their
populations. In their daily operations, for example, local governments must consider and address
several high-profile EPA programs, including environmental justice, Brownfields, and the
reduction of the exposure of children to lead-based paint or asbestos. Some of these programs,
such as lead-based paint and asbestos, do have regulatory recourse on which the local
government can rely. Others, however, do not have an explicit statutory basis and, as such, must
January 1999 3-123 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
be developed and implemented by a local government through policies or standard operating
procedures.
3.11.1 Pretreatment Program
Local governments are responsible for ensuring compliance with pretreatment program
requirements. The national pretreatment program (CWA Section 307(b)) controls the indirect
discharge of pollutants to POTWs by "industrial users." The goals of the pretreatment program
are to protect municipal wastewater collection and treatment systems from adverse impacts
resulting from the discharge of pollutants into the sewage system, prevent the pass through of
pollutants to receiving waters, and protect the quality of the sludge.
EPA established the National Pretreatment Program and shares responsibilities for its
implementation among the federal government, states, and local governments:
EPA and the states are responsible for reviewing, approving, and overseeing local
pretreatment programs and regulating discharges to POTWs that do not have local
programs.
Local governments are responsible for developing, implementing, and enforcing their
local programs.
As part of their responsibilities, local governments conduct a variety of activities within the
confines of the pretreatment program, including the following:
Identifying industrial users that need to be regulated
Reviewing permit applications from industrial users
Drafting/writing permits
Conducting sampling and inspections
Evaluating the status of industrial user compliance (e.g., reviewing reports)
Taking enforcement actions, as warranted.
Any POTW with a design flow of more than 5 million gallons per day is required to develop a
pretreatment program. In addition, any POTW with a design flow of less than 5 million gallons
per day may be required to develop a program if a potential exists for nondomestic wastes to
cause POTW upsets, sludge contamination, violations of NPDES permit conditions, or exposure
January 1999 3-124 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
of workers to hazardous chemicals or if their industrial users are subject to national pretreatment
standards.
3.11.2 Air Pollution Control
Local governments are responsible for ensuring compliance with air program requirements to
reduce the environmental impacts from other entities. Local governments usually are responsible
for the following activities:
Monitoring, including operating and overseeing maintenance of sampling stations
Permitting, including issuing draft Title V permits, construction permits, and source
registrations
Conducting compliance and enforcement activities.
Local government responsibilities pertain primarily to stationary sources; states maintain control
over mobile sources (e.g., vehicle inspections).
Local agencies conduct ambient air quality monitoring, which consists of collecting air samples
to evaluate compliance with and/or progress toward meeting ambient air quality standards. Air
quality monitoring programs are implemented by using state and local air monitoring stations
(SLAMS) and/or special purpose monitoring stations (SPMS) to measure the criteria pollutants.
Criteria pollutants are those that have documented effects on public health and the environment
(e.g., carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.)
Some states also monitor fine particulate matter.
In addition, local governments are responsible for issuing permits, primarily Title V and
construction permits, and for overseeing facility compliance with the permits. A Title V permit
is an operating permit required for individual facilities under Title V of the CAA. The Title V
permit brings together all federal, state, and city air pollution control requirements for a given
facility into one permit. This permit includes information on the types of pollutants being
released, permissible emission levels, and methods for reducing or eliminating pollution,
including plans for monitoring and reporting emissions. Construction permits indicate that
construction-related equipment and facilities meet all applicable air quality standards or
requirements. Permits for new or modified facilities must be obtained before construction starts.
January 1999 3-125 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
3.11.3 Land Use Planning/Zoning
At the local government level, urban planning and community and rural development involve
planning, administering, and researching the development of urban and rural areas. In general,
land use management involves making decisions regarding how a particular site will be used.
Once land is zoned or used for one purpose, it cannot be used for another purpose.
Along these lines, EPA has launched a national effort (campaign) to restore "Brownfields" (i.e.,
abandoned or under-utilized industrial and commercial sites that are environmentally
contaminated from previous use). In many situations, restoration or remediation of these areas
would contribute to the economic revitalization of an area or community.
Effective and comprehensive land use planning requires coordination by federal, state, and local
experts. Federal and state objectives that reflect the needs and conditions of county and
municipal governments are appropriate, because land use management typically occurs at the
local level. State and federal governments often grant local governments the necessary authority
to implement national and state land use requirements, as well as review land use plans, in a
manner appropriate to individual communities.
Land use planning and zoning activities do not themselves cause environmental effects. The
results of these activities the actual land use pose environmental impacts. Land use
determines whether natural resources are conserved or depleted. Land set aside for open space or
parks obviously will conserve the resource and cause less severe environmental impacts than
land zoned for industrial purposes. Land set aside for open space, however, is at risk for later
development. Land used for residential, commercial, or industrial purposes can affect air, land,
and water resources. On the other hand, abandoned sites that are restored can revitalize an area
and reduce environmental risks as the site is remediated.
3.11.4 Pollution Prevention in Air Pollution Programs and Pretreatment Programs
Both of these regulatory programs often exist at the local government level and provide many
important functions. As a result, these programs interact with many different types of businesses
and industries and, therefore, have a tremendous opportunity to encourage pollution prevention
and waste reduction at these sources. It will be at the discretion of each individual program
where it wants to focus its efforts; however, there are common aspects of these regulatory
programs that offer the opportunity for integration of pollution prevention. In addition to
working with prevalent industries in the region, programs can also target sources of emissions or
January 1999 3-126 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
discharges, which lead to problems specific to that region, such as ozone or specific treatment
plant upsets. Although the priorities of these programs are often in the areas of permits,
inspections, compliance and enforcement, it is important to remember that these programs also
have a responsibility to educate the regulated community. By educating pollution sources on the
benefits of, and opportunities for, waste reduction and pollution prevention, a program can more
effectively and efficiently accomplish its mission of environmental protection. The following
section lists some examples of opportunities to incorporate pollution prevention into existing
regulatory programs.
3.11.4.1 Top Pollution Prevention Strategies
The following list highlights selected pollution prevention strategies associated with air pollution
and pretreatment programs:
Incorporate pollution prevention into the permitting process. Examples of opportunities
include:
Providing recommendations for pollution prevention and waste minimization
during permit applications for new facilities
Including pollution prevention work standards, practices, or conditions in permits
Requiring formal pollution prevention/waste minimization plans from facilities as
part of their operating permits
Providing a definition of pollution prevention and information on available
services, assistance, and benefits in permit renewal letters.
Train engineers and inspectors on pollution prevention technologies and opportunities
and have them include information and technical assistance during inspections, as well as
in the permit and plan review and approval stages.
Provide compliance assistance and pollution prevention information through descriptive
brochures, BMPs, and implementation documents associated with regulatory standards.
These can be provided with permits, distributed by inspectors, or handed out at
workshops or training events.
January 1999 3-127 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Provide various incentives such as relaxing inspection periods or reducing permit fees for
sources that implement pollution prevention practices.
Utilize surcharge and impact fees to encourage water re-use, conservation, and pollutant
reduction. These fees can be scaled and should be based on the quantities and the
concentrations of pollutants discharged to avoid dilution.
Utilize national events, such as Clean Air Month, Earth Day, and National Pollution
Prevention Week, to publicize pollution prevention initiatives and target local issues,
such as high ozone levels and acid rain. This is a good opportunity to educate local
sources on EPA initiatives, including Climate Wise and Energy Star.
Incorporate implementation of pollution prevention projects into enforcement and
settlement agreements. If a program is willing to offset a portion of the fines for facilities
that agree to implement pollution prevention projects, they provide a much greater
incentive for facilities to utilize this option.
Get involved with other national and international organizations, such as the State &
Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and Association of Local Air Pollution
Control Officials (STAPPA/ALAPCO), Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies,
and the National Pollution Prevention Roundtable.
3.11.4.2 Case Study
In February 1993, the U.S. EPA promulgated, in Final Rule, the Standards for the Use and
Disposal of Sewage Sludge (40 CFR 503). In response to this, the Metropolitan Water
Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (the District) initiated a comprehensive plan, the 503
Enforcement Initiative (503EI), to achieve two primary objectives: (1) to "substantially reduce
the discharge of metals of concern from the regulated industrial community," and (2) ensure "that
the District's Water Reclamation Plants produce high quality sludge, which maximizes the
District's opportunities for beneficial reuse." The main components of the 503EI included "(a)
optimization of the District's existing Pretreatment Program, (b) increased monitoring of
industrial point source discharges into its sewerage system, and (c) innovative pollution
prevention assistance to the industrial community."
In cooperation with several local and regional agencies, the District began providing pollution
prevention training, outreach, and technical assistance to local businesses and also developed a
January 1999 3-128 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
public recognition program for businesses successful in implementing pollution prevention
measures. In addition, the District cooperated with local industry stakeholders to develop a cost
recovery system for the Pretreatment Program, to help cover the additional costs incurred by the
Program for the 503EI. This system "brought direct financial liability to industrial users who are
regulated for the discharge of these metals" and created a further incentive for these users to
reduce their discharges. The District has found that by linking compliance performance to
financial liability, Pretreatment Program administrative costs are more equitably distributed
amongst the industrial users and "in conjunction with pollution prevention assistance programs,
offer greater leverage to influence SIU (Significant Industrial User) behavior at lesser cost to
Control Authorities and the industrial community." Overall, this program resulted in a more
than 33% reduction in heavy metal discharges to the sewerage system between the years of 1992
and 1996, and it is an illustrative example of the benefits of incorporating pollution prevention
into existing regulatory programs.
(Source: Richard Sustich et al., "Chicago's 503 Enforcement Initiative: A Great Industrial Clean-
Up Experience," Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, presented at the
Water Environment Federation Technical Expo and Conference, Chicago, Illinois, October
1997.)
For more information, contact Mr. Richard Sustich at the Metropolitan Water Reclamation
District of Greater Chicago, (312) 751-3050.
3.11.5 Pollution Prevention in Land Use Planning & Zoning and Brownfield
Redevelopment
Although the connections may not be immediately evident, poor planning and zoning decisions
can lead to environmental impacts, particularly through environmentally irresponsible
development patterns. The country's development patterns of low density single family housing,
separation of uses, dependence on the automobile, loss of habitat and greenfields, and urban
sprawl have greatly contributed to overall environmental degradation. This can be counteracted
by promoting construction to optimize energy efficiency, infill development, Brownfield
redevelopment, mixed land use, and pedestrian and transit-oriented development (TOD). These
smart growth initiatives can benefit a community economically, financially, and socially through
improved environmental quality and improved quality of life. If planning, zoning, and
development are done carefully and with foresight, energy, water and other resources can be
conserved, aquifers and watersheds can be protected, neighborhoods can become more self-
sufficient, vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) can be reduced (as well as the pollution associated with
January 1999 3-129 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
vehicles), money and other resources can be conserved through avoidance of the need for
additional infrastructure, declining areas can be revitalized, and overall environmental quality
can be improved both locally and regionally. Therefore, it is important to consider many factors
at the planning and zoning stage, including current and potential future uses of the land, existing
infrastructure in the area, potential impacts to nearby watersheds and aquifers (please refer to
Section 3.8 of this profile for more information), and the accessibility to, and feasibility of,
residents and employees using alternative means of transportation, such as mass transit, biking,
or walking. There are several areas associated with planning and zoning operations which offer
excellent opportunities to implement innovative ideas and projects to help prevent pollution and
support smart growth.
3.11.5.1 Top Pollution Prevention Strategies
The following list highlights pollution prevention strategies associated with planning and zoning
operations:
Establish steering committees with representatives from various departments involved in
the planning and zoning process to research the feasibility and encourage the
implementation of smart growth initiatives. For example, an Infill Task Force can be
established to research and address the existing barriers to smart growth and to develop
an infill strategy for the community.
Establish policies identifying areas for environmental resource preservation or
conservation and establish rules to protect such areas from incompatible land uses and
management practices. Examples may include:
- Incorporate watershed management plans into Comprehensive Development
Master Plans
- Establish protective zones around aquifers and other drinking water sources to
limit certain land uses and operations
Restrict certain land uses and operations in those areas served only by septic tanks
- Minimize impervious surfaces in a development through compact design and
reduction of road width and parking lot size (to reduce storm water run-off)
January 1999 3-130 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
- Locate watershed development with an eye for preserving the natural land near
lakes, rivers, and streams.
Create an urban design manual for developers to educate them on smart growth concepts
and opportunities for incorporation into their plans and projects.
Establish incentives for developers who incorporate smart growth initiatives into their
plans and projects. These incentives could include expedited approval processes,
decreased permit fees, decreased impact fees, and priority in the provision of services,
facilities, and allocation of financial resources.
Modify economic incentive packages for Brownfield developers based on how closely
they follow recommendations for pollution prevention implementation. For example,
increase the economic package if they are willing to implement more pollution prevention
initiatives.
Establish policies requiring BMPs for particular land uses and activities to achieve
pollution reduction goals.
Incorporate pollution prevention language into local Brownfield codes and ordinances.
Provide education opportunities (workshops, booklets, pamphlets, etc.) to encourage
smart growth initiatives and implementation of pollution prevention and BMPs. This
may include:
Education of financial institutions on the benefits to them of providing loans for
pollution prevention projects and equipment.
Education of target Brownfield communities on the benefits of the developer and
future business utilizing pollution prevention. Since it is added insurance that the
property will not become contaminated again this may help win the community's
approval for location of a new facility in a Brownfield area.
Education of residents and businesses located in areas served by septic tanks on
the operation and proper maintenance of these systems to prevent ground and
groundwater contamination.
January 1999 3-131 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Review and amend zoning subdivision regulations and other regulations to encourage
TOD principles. This may include maximizing the use of existing urbanized areas
accessible to transit through infill and redevelopment, reinforcing transit through land use
planning, or reducing VMTs by creating opportunities to walk, bike, and use mass transit.
3.11.5.2 Case Study
Since the 1970s the City of San Jose, California, has been committed to growth management and
sustainability and has been establishing initiatives and policies to promote smart growth. This
commitment came in response to tremendous growth and urban sprawl in the 1950s and 1960s,
when the city discovered that the revenue generated by urban development on the City's fringe
was insufficient to cover the costs of providing the infrastructure and services to this area. The
City realized that it must take action to prevent this trend from continuing and began approving
numerous initiatives within their General Plan in order to ensure a sustainable and profitable
future for the area. With policies such as the Sustainable City Major Strategy, the
Greenline/Urban Growth Boundary, and the Intensification Corridors Special Strategy, the City
has been implementing smart growth development in a variety of ways. Some of these include
directing urban development to infill sites which are already provided with urban infrastructure
and services, promoting high density housing and supportive mixed uses in close proximity to
public transit corridors, and enacting building and site design policies to improve energy and
water use efficiency.
Overall, the City's goal is to "ensure that urban development in San Jose is designed and built in
a form that enhances the City's ability to provide adequate levels of urban services and ensuring
the efficient use of existing infrastructure and services while protecting the natural environment
to the maximum extent feasible." Through proactive planning and building, the City is helping
to ensure smart growth today while providing adequate resources for future generations.
(Source: International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), U.S. Office, Cities
for Climate Protection Campaign Case Studies, San Jose, California Growth Management Plan)
Portland, Oregon is another city which has implemented a very proactive smart growth plan. For
more information on San Jose, California or Portland, Oregon contact the ICLEI, U.S. Office,
Cities for Climate Protection Campaign, at (510) 540-8843.
January 1999 3-132 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Resources
AMSA: (202) 833-2672; http://www.amsa-cleamvater.org
Clean Air Technology Center (CATC): (919) 541-0800; http://www.epa.gov/ttn/catcCenter
Center for Technology Transfer and Pollution Prevention (CT2P2):
http://ingis.acn.purdue.edu:9999/cttpp/cttpp.html
Energy Star Buildings/Green Lights: (202) 233-9178; http://www.epa.gov/appdstar/buildings/
and http://www.epa.gov/greenlights.html
Florida Sustainable Communities Center: http://sustainable.state.fl.us
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), U.S. Office, Cities for Climate
Protection Campaign: (510) 540-8843; http://www.iclei.org
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable: (202) 466-7272; http://www.p2.org
Smart Growth Network: (202) 260-2750; http://www.smartgrowth.org
STAPPA/ALAPCO: (202) 624-7863; http://www.4cleanair.org
U.S. EPA Design for the Environment (DfE): (202) 260-1678; http://www.epa.gov/dfe
For more information, contact Nichole Hefty, Dade County DERM, Florida; Phone: (305)
372-6825; Fax: (305) 372-6760; E-mail: heftyn@co.miami-dade.fl.us.
January 1999 3-133 Local Government Operations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
4. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE FEDERAL STATUTES
AND REGULATIONS
This chapter discusses the federal regulations that may apply to local governments. The purpose
of this chapter is to highlight and briefly describe the applicable federal requirements and to
provide citations for more detailed information. The descriptions within this chapter are intended
solely for general information. Depending on the nature or scope of the local government
activities, these summaries may or may not necessarily describe all applicable environmental
requirements. Moreover, they do not constitute formal interpretations or clarifications of the
statutes and regulations. This chapter also discusses proposed regulations that may affect local
governments.
As a supplement to this chapter, Appendix D presents a detailed matrix of local government
activities organized by the operations presented in Chapter 3. For each activity, the matrix
identifies the federal environmental statutes that may regulate that specific activity. Local
governments can use the matrix as a quick reference to determine which statutory programs may
regulate specific activities.
4.1 CLEAN AIR ACT
The Clean Air Act (CAA) and its amendments, including the Clean Air Act Amendments
(CAAA) of 1990, are designed to "protect and enhance the nation's air resources so as to promote
the public health and welfare and the productive capacity of the population." The CAA consists
of six sections, known as Titles, which direct EPA to establish national standards for ambient air
quality and for EPA and the states to implement, maintain, and enforce these standards through a
variety of mechanisms. Under the CAAA, many facilities will be required to obtain permits for
the first time. State and local governments oversee, manage, and enforce many of the
requirements of the CAAA. CAA regulations appear at 40 CFR Parts 50-99.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Pursuant to Title I of the CAA, EPA has
established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQSs) to limit levels of "criteria
pollutants," including carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, ozone,
and sulfur dioxide. Geographic areas that meet NAAQSs for a given pollutant are classified
as attainment areas; those that do not meet NAAQSs are classified as non-attainment areas.
Under Section 110 of the CAA, each State must develop a State Implementation Plan to
January 1999 4-1 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
identify sources of air pollution and to determine what reductions are required to meet
federal air quality standards.
New Source Performance Standards. Title I also authorizes EPA to establish New Source
Performance Standards (NSPSs), which are nationally uniform emission standards for new
stationary sources falling within particular industrial categories. NSPSs are based on the
pollution control technology available to that category of industrial source. New municipal
waste combustors or sewage sludge incinerators may be subject to these standards.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Under Title I, EPA
establishes and enforces National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAPs), which are nationally uniform standards oriented toward controlling particular
hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). Title I, Section 112(c) of the CAA further directed EPA to
develop a list of sources that emit any of 189 HAPs and to develop regulations for these
categories of sources. To date, EPA has listed 174 categories and developed a schedule for
the establishment of emission standards. The emission standards will be developed for both
new and existing sources based on "maximum achievable control technology" (MACT).
MACT is defined as the control technology achieving the maximum degree of reduction of
HAP emissions, taking into account cost and other factors. Unless a local government
operates a treatment, storage, and disposal facility or stores significant quantities of organic
chemicals, it is not likely to be subject to the NESHAP requirements.
Mobile Sources. Title n of the CAA pertains to mobile sources, such as cars, trucks, buses,
and planes. EPA uses reformulated gasoline, automobile pollution control devices, and
vapor recovery nozzles on gas pumps, among other mechanisms, to regulate mobile air
emission sources. Local governments may be subject to these standards if they operate
vehicles or large fleets of vehicles or if they conduct fueling operations.
Sulfur Dioxide/Nitrous Oxide Emissions. Title IV of the CAA establishes a sulfur
dioxide/nitrous oxide emissions program designed to reduce the formation of acid rain.
Sulfur dioxide releases will be reduced by granting to certain sources limited emissions
allowances, which are below previous levels of sulfur dioxide releases. Local governments
that operate municipal waste combustors, sewage sludge incinerators, or large
boilers/generators may be subject to these requirements.
Major Source Permit Program. Title V of the CAAA of 1990 created a permit program
for all "major sources" (and certain other sources) regulated under the CAA. One purpose of
January 1999 4-2 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
the operating permit is to include in a single document all air emissions requirements that
apply to a given facility. States are developing the permit programs in accordance with
guidance and regulations from EPA. Once EPA approves a state program, that state will
issue and monitor permits.
Stratospheric Ozone Protection. Title VI of the CAA is intended to protect stratospheric
ozone by phasing out the manufacture of ozone-depleting chemicals and restricting their use
and distribution. The production of Class I substances, including 15 kinds of
chlorofluorocarbons and chloroform, were phased out (except for essential uses) in 1996.
Local governments that conduct vehicle or building air conditioner maintenance and repair
are subject to these requirements.
Risk Management Planning. Section 112(r) of the amended CAA mandates a new federal
focus on the prevention of chemical accidents. The objective of Section 112(r) is to prevent
serious chemical accidents that could affect public health and the environment. Under these
requirements, industry is obligated to prevent accidents, operate safely, and manage
hazardous chemicals in a safe and responsible way. Under the new CAA requirements,
stationary sources (facilities) must identify and assess their chemical hazards and carry out
certain activities designed to reduce the likelihood and severity of accidental chemical
releases. Information summarizing these activities will be available to state and local
governments, the public, and all other stakeholders. Using this information, citizens can
work with industry to reduce risks to the community from chemical accidents.
In the broadest sense, risk management planning relates to local emergency preparedness and
response, to pollution prevention at facilities, and to worker safety. In a more focused sense,
it forms one element of an integrated approach to safety and complements existing industry
codes and standards. The risk management planning requirements build on the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) Process Safety Management Standard.
In general, large, urban local governments and governments near pristine areas, such as national
parks and wilderness areas, will be subject to the most stringent CAA requirements. Appendix D
contains a detailed matrix of activities and the specific statutes under which they are regulated.
The following proposed regulations under the CAA are currently in the development process:
New Source Performance Standard: Sewage Sludge Incinerators. Section 129 of the
CAAA requires the EPA Administrator to establish new source performance standards and
January 1999 4-3 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
emission guidelines for new and existing solid waste incineration units, including units that
incinerate municipal sewage sludge. The standards and guidelines are to specify numerical
emission limitations for the following substances: particulate matter (total and fine), opacity
(as appropriate), sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide,
lead, cadmium, mercury, and dioxins and dibenzofurans. In addition, the standards and
guidelines are to include requirements for emissions and parameter monitoring as well as
provisions for operator training and certification. This final action is expected to be
completed and published in May 2000.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Publicly Owned
Treatment Works. Section 112 of the CAAA requires the EPA Administrator to regulate
the emissions of HAPs from stationary sources by establishing national emission standards.
The standards reflect the maximum degree of reduction in HAP emissions through
application of a MACT. The proposed emission standards for Publicly Owned Treatment
Works (POTWs) would require control for HAP emissions from each new or reconstructed
POTW that is a major source of HAP. The standards would also require each existing and
new POTW that treats specific industrial user waste streams from an individual userfor
the purpose of allowing that industrial user to comply with another NESHAPto meet the
treatment and control requirements of the relevant NESHAP. EPA has specifically
requested comments on pretreatment and wastewater collection systems to help determine
the importance of their effect on HAP emissions from POTWs. The final rule is expected in
May 1999.
4.2 CLEAN WATER ACT
The primary objective of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly referred to as the
Clean Water Act (CWA), is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of the nation's surface waters. The CWA regulates "priority" pollutants, including
various toxic pollutants; "conventional" pollutants, such as biochemical oxygen demand, total
suspended solids, fecal coliform, oil and grease, and pH; and "non-conventional" pollutants,
including any pollutant not identified as either conventional or priority.
NPDES Permits. The CWA regulates both direct and indirect discharges. The National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program (CWA Section 402) controls
direct discharges into navigable waters. Direct discharges or "point source" discharges are
from such sources as pipes and sewers. These include discharges of industrial and municipal
wastewater, as well as storm water conveyed through a municipal separate storm water
January 1999 4-4 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
system. NPDES permits, issued by either EPA or an authorized state (EPA has authorized
43 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands to administer the NPDES program), contain industry-
specific, technology-based and/or water quality-based limits and establish pollutant
monitoring requirements. Each municipal or industry facility that intends to discharge into
the nation's waters must obtain a permit prior to initiating its discharge. A permit applicant
must provide quantitative analytical data identifying the types of pollutants present in the
facility's effluent. The permit then sets the conditions and effluent limitations on the facility
discharges.
An NPDES permit may also include discharge limits based on federal or state water quality
criteria or standards that were designed to protect designated uses of surface waters, such as
supporting aquatic life or recreation. These standards, unlike the technological standards,
generally do not take into account technological feasibility or costs. Water quality criteria
and standards vary from state to state and from site to site, depending on the use
classification of the receiving water body. Most states follow EPA guidelines, which
propose aquatic life and human health criteria for many of the 126 priority pollutants.
Local governments that own and operate wastewater treatment plants are required to apply
for and obtain an NPDES permit. These permits contain a variety of required elements,
including discharge limits; monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements; and
biosolids requirements.
Combined Sewer Systems Permit
Provisions. EPA's 1994 Combined Sewer
Overflow (CSO) Control Policy provides
recommended NPDES permit conditions for
municipalities with combined sewer systems.
These provisions, which are typically
implemented by the permitting authority,
include requirements for meeting the nine
minimum controls to reduce the frequency
and water quality impacts of CSO events and
to establish a long-term control plan to
address capital improvements to the system.
Local governments that operate and maintain
a combined collection system must abide by
these requirements, which are included as part
Defining "Municipal" Sewer Systems
EPA uses a broad definition of "municipal"
in defining municipal sewer systems.
Municipal systems are defined as
conveyances that are owned or operated by
a state, city, town, borough, county, parish,
district, association, or other public body
having jurisdiction of disposal of sewage,
industrial wastes, storm water, or other
wastes. This includes special districts
under state law, such as a sewer district,
flood control district or drainage district, or
other similar entity; an Indian tribe or an
authorized Indian tribal organization; or a
designated and approved management
agency under Section 208 of the CWA.
of the NPDES permit.
January 1999
4-5
Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Storm Water Discharges. In 1987, the CWA was amended to require EPA to establish a
program to address storm water discharges. In response, EPA promulgated the NPDES
storm water regulations. Implemented in two phases, the first phase requires local
governments that operate large (serving a population greater than 250,000) or medium
(serving a population from 100,000 to 250,000) municipal separate storm water systems to
apply for and obtain an NPDES storm water permit. During phase 2 of the storm water
program, local governments operating regulated small municipal separate storm water
systems will be required to submit a Notice of Intent to EPA to be covered under a national
general storm water permit.
In addition to requiring storm water permits for collection systems, the CWA may also
require industrial or local government operations to obtain or be covered by storm water
permits. Such operations may include construction activities (e.g., roads, buildings) or
storage of chemicals or hazardous materials.
Pretreatment Program. The CWA also regulates discharges to POTWs. The national
pretreatment program (CWA Section 307(b)) controls the indirect discharge of pollutants to
POTWs by "industrial users." Facilities regulated under Section 307(b) must meet certain
pretreatment standards. The goal of the pretreatment program is to protect municipal
wastewater treatment plants from damage that may occur when hazardous, toxic, or other
wastes are discharged into a sewer system and to protect the quality of sludge generated by
these plants. Discharges to a POTW are regulated primarily by the POTW itself, rather than
the state or EPA.
EPA has developed technology-based standards for certain industrial users of POTWs.
Different standards apply to existing and new sources within each category. EPA develops
these "categorical" pretreatment standards applicable to an industry on a nationwide basis.
In addition, a POTW develops another kind of pretreatment standard, "local limits," to assist
the POTW in achieving the effluent limitations in its NPDES permit.
Regardless of whether a state is authorized to implement either the NPDES or the
pretreatment program, it may enforce requirements more stringent than federal standards.
Local governments that own and operate POTWs must meet the requirements for a
pretreatment program under the CWA. In such situations, the local government becomes the
regulator and establishes limits that must be met by industries discharging to the POTW.
January 1999 4-6 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Sludge Management Section 503 of the CWA and the associated regulations govern land
application and land disposal of sludge generated from municipal wastewater treatment. The
Section 503 regulations establish provisions for sludge quality, application rates, and
environmental conditions under which land application is permitted. The regulations also
specify management methods, monitoring, and recordkeeping for both disposal and land
application facilities. Local governments that produce sludge from their wastewater
treatment operations are subject to the Section 503 regulations.
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plans. The 1990 Oil Pollution Act
requires facilities that could reasonably be expected to discharge oil in harmful quantities to
prepare and implement more rigorous Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
(SPCC) Plans required under the CWA (40 CFR Sectionl 12.7). The SPCC regulations also
require specific management procedures for loading, unloading, and storing petroleum
products. The regulations delineate criminal and civil penalties for deliberate or negligent
spills of oil. Regulations covering response to oil discharges and contingency plans (40 CFR
Part 300), as well as facility response plans to oil discharges (40 CFR Sectionl 12.20) and for
PCB transformers and PCB-containing items, were revised and finalized in 1995. Local
governments that maintain fueling operations must comply with the SPCC regulations.
Many local governments conduct operations that are directly regulated by the CWA. Appendix
D contains a detailed matrix of activities and the specific statutes under which they are regulated.
The following proposed regulations are currently in the development process:
NPDES Comprehensive Storm Water Phase II Regulations. Expected in 1999. See
Section 4.2 for a description of the Storm Water Program.
NPDES Wastewater Permit Application Forms and Regulatory Revisions for
Municipal Discharges and Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal. The purpose of this action is
to revise and consolidate existing application forms and requirements for POTWs and other
treatment works treating domestic sewage, as well as to streamline the application process
for these facilities. The Agency seeks to establish a unified process that minimizes the need
for additional information from applicants while providing permit writers the necessary
information, including toxics data, to ensure that permits adequately address concerns of
permittees and environmental protection. The Agency seeks to allow the use of existing data
and to avoid unnecessary reporting. The Agency is also considering how to utilize electronic
data submission. Although these forms will increase the burden on permittees not already
January 1999 4-7 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
required to submit these data, EPA is minimizing the need for information from small
entities, including tribal facilities. The burden on states would be minimized because of
improvements to the application forms. This final action is expected in 1999.
Revisions to NPDES Requirements for Compliance Reporting and Collection System
Discharges. EPA is proposing revisions to the NPDES regulations. The proposed revisions
would clarify how standard noncompliance reporting requirements and prohibition/defense
provisions in NPDES permits apply to discharges from sanitary sewer and combined sewer
collection systems owned and operated by municipal entities. These proposed revisions
respond to recommendations made by a FACA Subcommittee (under the Urban Wet
Weather Federal Advisory Committee) that was convened by EPA to provide
recommendations for improving NPDES program implementation efforts that address SSOs
and sanitary sewer operation, management, and maintenance. The proposed revisions would
address combined sewers, as well as separate sanitary sewers, to avoid confusion among the
regulatory community. Failures in sewer collection systems can result in discharges of
wastewater containing raw sewage to surface waters. Pathogens and other pollutants in
these discharges can create significant health and environmental risks. The SSO FACA
Subcommittee identified inconsistent application of several key NPDES provisions to SSOs
as a major implementation problem. There is substantial agreement among the SSO FACA
Subcommittee that EPA should modify the NPDES regulations to clarify how
noncompliance reporting and prohibition/defense provisions apply to dischargers to waters
of the U.S. from a sanitary sewer collection system. The proposed action is expected in
1999.
4.3 COASTAL ZONE ACT REAUTHORIZATION AMENDMENTS OF 1990
The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) encourages states/tribes to preserve, protect,
develop, and where possible, restore or enhance valuable natural coastal resources such as
wetlands, floodplains, estuaries, beaches, dunes, barrier islands, and coral reefs, as well as the
fish and wildlife using those habitats. It includes areas bordering the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic
Oceans, Gulf of Mexico, Long Island Sound, and Great Lakes. A unique feature of this law is
that participation by states/tribes is voluntary. To encourage states/tribes to participate, the act
makes federal financial assistance available to any coastal state, tribe, or Territory, including
those on the Great Lakes, that is willing to develop and implement a comprehensive coastal
management program. Most eligible states/tribes are, or will be, participating in the program.
January 1999 4-8 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
In its reauthorization of the Coastal Zone Management Act in 1990, Congress identified nonpoint
source pollution as a major factor in the continuing degradation of coastal waters. Congress also
recognized that effective solutions to nonpoint source pollution could be implemented at the
state/tribe and local levels. Therefore, in the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of
1990 (CZARA), Congress added Section 6217, which calls upon states/tribes with federally-
approved coastal zone management programs to develop and implement coastal nonpoint
pollution control programs. The Section 6217 program is administered at the federal level jointly
by EPA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA).
Section 6217(g) of CZARA called for EPA, in consultation with other agencies, to develop
guidance on "management measures" for sources of nonpoint source pollution in coastal waters.
Under Section 6217 of CZARA, EPA is responsible for developing technical guidance to assist
states/tribes in designing coastal nonpoint pollution control programs. On January 19, 1993,
EPA issued its Guidance Specifying Management Measures For Sources of Nonpoint Pollution
in Coastal Waters, which addresses five major source categories of nonpoint pollution: (1) urban
runoff, (2) agriculture runoff, (3) forestry runoff, (4) marinas and recreational boating, and (5)
hydromodification.
Depending on their geographical locations, local governments may be responsible for
contributing to the above mentioned programs. Appendix D contains a detailed matrix of
activities and the specific statutes under which they are regulated.
4.4 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), a
1980 law known commonly as Superfund, authorizes EPA to respond to releases or threatened
releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health, welfare, or the environment.
CERCLA also enables EPA to force parties responsible for environmental contamination to clean
it up or to reimburse the Superfund for response costs (including remediation costs) incurred by
EPA. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 revised various
sections of CERCLA, extended the taxing authority for the Superfund, and creating a
free-standing law, SARA Title in, also known as the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).
The CERCLA hazardous substance release reporting regulations (Section 103; 40 CFR Part 302)
direct the person in charge of a facility to report to the National Response Center any
environmental release of a hazardous substance that equals or exceeds a reportable quantity.
January 1999 4-9 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Reportable quantities are listed in 40 CFR Section 302.4. A release report may trigger a response
by EPA or by one or more federal or state emergency response authorities.
EPA implements hazardous substance responses according to procedures outlined in the National
Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR Part 300). The NCP
includes provisions for permanent cleanups, known as remedial actions, and other cleanups,
referred to as removals. EPA generally takes remedial actions only at sites on the National
Priorities List, which currently includes approximately 1,300 sites. Both EPA and states can act
at sites; however, EPA provides responsible parties the opportunity to conduct removal and
remedial actions and encourages community involvement throughout the Superfund response
process.
Local governments are generally not involved with hazardous waste cleanup as part of normal
operations. However, many local government operations have the potential to generate
hazardous waste. In reviewing the requirements of CERCLA, it is important for local
governments to assess the impacts of all their operations to minimize environmental impacts and
to reduce the potential CERCLA liability. In particular, local governments should maintain tight
controls on landfill and incinerator operations, vehicle maintenance operations, underground and
above ground storage tanks, and any other activities or operations that could significantly affect
the environment. Appendix D contains a detailed matrix of activities and the specific statutes
under which they are regulated.
4.5 EMERGENCY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT
As mentioned previously, the SARA of 1986 created the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA, also known as SARA Title HI), a statute designed to improve
community access to information about chemical hazards and to facilitate the development of
chemical emergency response plans by state and local governments. EPCRA required the
establishment of state emergency response commissions (SERCs), which are responsible for
coordinating certain emergency response activities and for appointing local emergency planning
committees (LEPCs).
EPCRA and its regulations (40 CFR Parts 350-372) establish four types of reporting obligations
for facilities that store or manage specified chemicals:
EPCRA Section 302 requires facilities to notify the SERC and LEPC of the presence of any
extremely hazardous substance (the list of such substances is in 40 CFR Part 355,
January 1999 4-10 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Appendices A and B) in excess of the substance's threshold planning quantity and directs the
facility to appoint an emergency response coordinator.
EPCRA Section 304 requires the facility to notify the SERC and the LEPC in the event of a
release equaling or exceeding the reportable quantity of a CERCLA hazardous substance or
an EPCRA extremely hazardous substance.
EPCRA Sections 311 and 312 require a facility at which a hazardous chemical, as defined
by the Occupational Safety and Health Act, is present in an amount exceeding a specified
threshold to submit to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department material safety data sheets
(MSDSs) or lists of MSDSs and hazardous chemical inventory forms (also known as Tier I
and n forms). This information helps the local government respond in the event of a spill or
release of the chemical.
EPCRA Section 313 requires manufacturing facilities included in SIC codes 20 through 39,
as well as SIC codes 10, 12, 4911, 4931, 4939, 4953, 5169, 5171, and 7389, that have 10 or
more employees and that manufacture, process, or use specified chemicals in amounts
greater than threshold quantities to submit an annual toxic chemical release report. This
report, known commonly as Form R, covers releases and transfers of toxic chemicals to
various facilities and environmental media and allows EPA to compile the national Toxic
Release Inventory (TRI) data base.
Since local governments do not have operations that fall within the identified SIC codes,
they are not subject to Section 313 reporting requirements.
Hazardous chemicals may be used as refrigerants, for cleaning, for disinfecting, or for other
maintenance activities. If a local government stores or uses specified amounts of certain
chemicals, it may be subject to planning and reporting requirements of EPCRA. Appendix D
contains a detailed matrix of activities and the specific statutes under which they are regulated.
4.6 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) establishes a program for conserving endangered and
threatened species and their habitats. The ESA affords broad protection for species offish,
wildlife, and plants that are listed as endangered and threatened in the United States and
elsewhere. Provisions are made for listing species, as well as for recovery plans and the
designation of critical habitat for listed species. Anyone can petition the Fish and Wildlife
January 1999 4-11 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Service (FWS) to list a species. The ESA strives to conserve ecosystems both through federal
action and through the establishment of state programs. The law outlines procedures for federal
agencies to follow when taking actions that may jeopardize listed species or their habitats. The
ESA is the enabling legislation for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
of Wild Fauna and Flora.
The ESA requires the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), acting through the FWS, to list species
as endangered or threatened when certain factors, including habitat destruction, overutilization,
disease or predation, inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms, or other natural or manmade factors,
warrant such a listing. In the case of marine plants, fish, or wildlife, the Secretary of Commerce,
acting through the Marine Fisheries Service (MFS), determines whether to list a species or
change the status of a species. When determining that a species is endangered or threatened, the
Secretary must, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, designate critical habitat. In
addition, the Secretary must develop and implement recovery plans for the conservation and
survival of endangered and threatened species.
Under the ESA, the Secretary must cooperate to the maximum extent practicable with states and
may enter into management agreements with states for the administration of particular
conservation areas. The Secretary is also authorized to enter into cooperative agreements with
states that establish and maintain adequate and active programs for conservation of listed species.
State laws or regulations may be more, but not less, restrictive than the ESA or its regulations.
When taking action, federal agencies must consult with the FWS or MFS to ensure that such
action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in
destruction or adverse modification of a critical habitat of a species. If jeopardy or adverse
modification is likely, the FWS or MFS must suggest reasonable and prudent alternatives to the
agency and the applicant.
The ESA prohibits the taking, possession, import, export, sale, and transport of any listed fish or
wildlife species. The term "take" includes harassing, harming, hunting, killing, capturing, and
collecting. It is also unlawful to maliciously damage, destroy, or remove from any area under
federal jurisdiction, damage or remove from any other area in knowing violation of state law,
import, export, or trade any listed plant species. These prohibitions do not apply to species
legally held in captivity or a controlled environment. In addition, the FWS or MFS may permit a
prohibited act for scientific purposes, for the establishment and maintenance of experimental
populations, or for the enhancement of the propagation and survival of an affected species. The
FWS or MFS, by permit, may also allow a taking incidental to an otherwise lawful activity if the
January 1999 4-12 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
applicant submits, and the FWS or MFS approves, a conservation plan addressing the impact of
the taking, mitigation measures, funding, and alternative actions considered.
Requirements of the ESA may be triggered if local governments conduct activities along these
guidelines. Appendix D contains a detailed matrix of activities and the specific statutes under
which they are regulated.
4.7 FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) is a comprehensive regulatory
statute that addresses the sale, distribution, and labeling of pesticides, as well as the certification
and training of pesticide applicators. FIFRA also imposes selected record keeping and reporting
requirements on certified applicators of restricted use pesticides, as well as imposing storage,
disposal, and transportation requirements on registrants and applicants for registration of
pesticides.
The primary purpose of FIFRA is to regulate the labeling and the subsequent use of pesticides.
Pesticide use is regulated through requirements to apply pesticides in a manner consistent with
the label. The labeling requirements include directions for use, warnings, and cautions, along
with the uses for which the pesticide is registered (i.e., pests and appropriate applications). The
labeling requirements reflect regulatory program determinations made with respect to particular
products. For example, the worker protection standard of FIFRA includes specific restrictions on
the entry of workers into areas after pesticide applications, as well as requirements for the use of
personal protective equipment. (40 CFR Part 170). Labeling requirements also include specific
conditions for the application, mixture, storage, and time period for re-entry to fields following
pesticide application, and when crops may be harvested after applications. If a pesticide is used
in a manner contrary to its labeling, that use constitutes a violation of FIFRA.
FIFRA has an array of other requirements, including record keeping, storage, and handling, that
are applicable to pesticide producers (registrants) and certified applicators. The intent of these
requirements is to regulate the use and management of pesticides so these products do not pose
an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment.
For example, FIFRA Section 136f(b), Inspections, contains requirements that apply to producers,
distributors, carriers, dealers, and persons who sell or offer for sale pesticide devices. These
groups or individuals are required to allow regulatory authorities to inspect records related to the
delivery, movement, or holding of pesticides. These records include the quantity, date of
January 1999 4-13 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
shipment, receipt, and name of the consignor and consignee. FIFRA Section 136i-l, Pesticide
Record keeping, requires that certified applicators of restricted use pesticides (Section
136a(d)(l)(C)) maintain records regarding the product name, amount, approximate date of
application, and location of application of each pesticide used for a 2-year period.
FIFRA Section 136q(a), Storage, Disposal, and Transportation, includes requirements for
developing methods by registrants for safe storage, transportation, and disposal of excess
quantities of pesticides, as well as the labeling to reflect this information. Registrants must also
develop information on the procedures for transport, storage, and disposal of the pesticide, any
container of the pesticide, and rinsate containing the pesticide, or any other material used to
contain or collect excess or spilled quantities of the pesticide. Many of these requirements also
extend to suspended/canceled pesticides. FIFRA Sectionl36q(e), Container Design, presents
requirements for containers used to hold pesticides, as well as procedures governing pesticide
removal, including disposal of rinsates and residues.
In summary, FIFRA presents a complex regulatory program for the regulation of pesticide
labeling and use. States are the primary enforcement authority for pesticide use violations;
however, states may not enact more stringent labeling requirements than those specified under
FIFRA. Once the federal authority has approved a particular label, a regulatory authority cannot
alter or amend it. States are empowered to restrict the sale or use of a federally registered
pesticide, but may not allow the sale or use of a federally prohibited product.
Local governments may use pesticides to maintain building appearance and prevent or eradicate
disease-carrying vectors. These operations may be subject to regulation under FIFRA. Appendix
D contains a detailed matrix of activities and the specific statutes under which they are regulated.
4.8 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was one of the first laws written to establish the
broad national framework for protecting our environment while bolstering the health and welfare
of humankind. Congress, recognizing the profound impact of humankind's activity on the
natural environment, declared it a policy for the federal government, in cooperation with state
and local governments, to give proper consideration to the environment prior to undertaking any
major federal action that could significantly affect the environment.
The most visible NEPA requirements are environmental assessments (EAs) and environmental
impact statements (EISs). These studies are performed for any major federal action that could
January 1999 4-14 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
significantly impact the environment and consider the likelihood of environmental impacts,
alternatives to the proposed action, and the long-term effects the action could have on the
environment, resources, and humankind. The policy requirements are invoked when airports,
buildings, military complexes, highways, parkland purchases, and other federal activities are
proposed. EAs and EISs are required from all federal agencies.
Some activities undertaken by local governments may require compliance with provisions of
NEPA, including the preparation of an EA or EIS. Appendix D contains a detailed matrix of
activities and the specific statutes under which they are regulated.
4.9 RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, which amended the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, addresses nonhazardous (Subtitle D) and hazardous (Subtitle C) waste
management activities. The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984
strengthened RCRA's waste management provisions and added Subtitle I, which governs
underground storage tanks (USTs).
Regulations promulgated pursuant to Subtitle C of RCRA (40 CFR Parts 260-299) establish a
"cradle-to-grave" system governing hazardous waste from the point of generation to disposal.
RCRA hazardous wastes include the specific materials listed in the regulations (commercial
chemical products designated with the code "P" or "U", hazardous wastes from specific
industries/sources designated with the code "K", or hazardous wastes from non-specific sources,
designated with the code "F") or materials that exhibit a hazardous waste characteristic
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity and designated with the code "D").
Regulated entities that generate hazardous waste are subject to waste accumulation, manifesting,
and record keeping standards. Facilities generally must obtain a permit either from EPA or from
a state agency that EPA has authorized to implement the permitting program if they store
hazardous wastes for more than 90 days before treatment or disposal. Facilities may treat less-
than-90-day tanks or containers of hazardous wastes without a permit. Subtitle C permits contain
general facility standards, such as contingency plans, emergency procedures, record keeping and
reporting requirements, financial assurance mechanisms, and unit-specific standards. RCRA also
contains provisions (40 CFR Part 264 Subpart S and Section 264.101) for conducting corrective
actions that govern the cleanup of releases of hazardous waste or constituents from solid waste
management units at RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal facilities.
January 1999 4-15 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Although RCRA is a federal statute, many states implement the RCRA program. Currently, EPA
has delegated its authority to implement various provisions of RCRA to all states except Alaska,
Hawaii, Iowa and two U.S. territories.
Most RCRA requirements are not industry specific but apply to any entity that generates,
transports, treats, stores, or disposes of hazardous waste. The following are some important
RCRA regulatory requirements:
Identification of Solid and Hazardous Wastes (40 CFR Part 261) delineates the procedure
every generator must follow in determining whether the material in question is considered a
hazardous waste or solid waste or is exempted from regulation.
Standards for Generators of Hazardous Waste (40 CFR Part 262) establish the
responsibilities of hazardous waste generators. These include obtaining an EPA
identification number, preparing a manifest, ensuring proper packaging and labeling,
meeting standards for waste accumulation units, and meeting record keeping and reporting
requirements. Providing they meet additional requirements described in 40 CFR 262.34,
generators may accumulate hazardous waste for up to 90 days (or 180 or 270 days depending
on the amount of waste generated and the distance the waste will be transported).
Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) (40 CFR Part 268) are regulations prohibiting the
disposal of hazardous waste on land without prior treatment. Under the LDR program,
materials must meet LDR treatment standards prior to placement in a RCRA land disposal
unit (landfill, land treatment unit, waste pile, or surface impoundment). Generators of waste
subject to the LDR must provide notification of such to the designated TSD facility to ensure
proper treatment prior to disposal.
Used Oil Management Standards (40 CFR Part 279) impose management requirements
affecting the storage, transportation, burning, processing, and re-refining of the used oil. For
parties that merely generate used oil, regulations establish storage standards. For a party
considered a used oil processor, re-refiner, burner, or marketer (one who generates and sells
off-specification used oil directly to a used oil burner), additional tracking and paperwork
requirements must be satisfied.
Tanks and Containers, as well as any unit, used to store, treat, or dispose of hazardous
waste, are regulated under RCRA. Tanks and containers used to store hazardous waste with
a high volatile organic concentration must meet emission standards under RCRA.
January 1999 4-16 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Regulations (40 CFR Part 264-265, Subpart CC) require generators to test the waste to
determine the concentration of the waste, to satisfy tank and container emissions standards,
and to inspect and monitor regulated units. These regulations apply to all facilities that store
such waste, including large quantity generators accumulating waste prior to shipment offsite.
Underground Storage Tanks containing petroleum and hazardous substances are regulated
under Subtitle I of RCRA. Subtitle I regulations (40 CFR Part 280) contain tank design and
release detection requirements, as well as financial responsibility and corrective action
standards for USTs. The UST program also includes upgrade requirements for existing
tanks that must be met by December 22, 1998.
Boilers and Industrial Furnaces (BIFs) that use or burn fuel containing hazardous waste
must comply with design and operating standards. BIF regulations (40 CFR Part 266,
Subpart H) address unit design, provide performance standards, require emissions
monitoring, and restrict the type of waste that may be burned.
Solid Waste Management (RCRA Subtitle D) regulations establish standards and
guidelines for solid waste collection and disposal programs, as well as recycling programs.
The regulations also establish criteria for design, operation, maintenance, and closure for
municipal solid waste landfills. In addition, the regulations provide requirements for
thermal processing (incineration) and resource recovery facilities.
Local governments may have numerous operations that result in the generation and management
of different types of solid and hazardous waste. These operations may be subject to specific
parts of RCRA, depending on the type of waste generated, its management (e.g., stored,
transported), and its disposal. Appendix D contains a detailed matrix of activities and the
specific statutes under which they are regulated.
The following proposed regulations under RCRA are currently in the development process:
Amendments to Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. The purpose of this action is to
develop standards for regulating emissions of non-methane organic compounds from new
and modified municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills under Section 11 l(b). Section 11 l(d)
requires states to develop emission standards for existing landfills based on EPA guidelines.
The intended effect of the standards and guidelines is to require certain municipal solid
waste landfills to control emissions to the level achievable by the best demonstrated system
of continuous emission reduction, considering costs, non-air quality health, and
January 1999 4-17 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
environmental and energy impacts. EPA has worked with landfill owners and operators,
including local governments and private owners, to produce a regulation based on common-
sense techniques, providing maximum flexibility for owners and operators, while achieving
the desired emissions reductions in the most cost-effective way. The rule focuses on only
the largest sources of emissions, thereby avoiding regulation of small landfills where
controls would be inefficient and onerous. The rule also provides complete flexibility to
design a control system based on the site-specific conditions at each landfill. The direct final
rule was published June 16, 1998, at 63 FR 32743.
RCRA Subtitle D Solid Waste Facilities; State Permit Program Determination of
Adequacy (State Implementation Rule). This rule will establish criteria and procedures
for EPA to use in determining whether state MSW landfill permit programs and state permit
programs relating to non-municipal, nonhazardous waste disposal units that receive
conditionally exempt small quantity generator (CESQG) waste are adequate to ensure
compliance with the federal revised criteria in 40 CFR Parts 258 and 257, Subpart B,
respectively. While the federal revised criteria apply to all MSW landfills and non-
municipal, nonhazardous waste disposal units receiving CESQG waste, states with permit
programs deemed adequate under this rule can provide some flexibility on certain
requirements to owners and operators who meet the revised criteria's performance standards.
In providing this flexibility, this action offers an opportunity to reduce the regulatory burden
on state and local governments and on landfill owners and operators. The final rule is
scheduled for publication in 1999.
Hazardous Waste Management System; Modification of the Hazardous Waste
Program; Mercury-Containing Lamps. EPA is considering two deregulatory options for
the management of spent mercury-containing lamps based on data that indicate these lamps
may be safely managed outside of the RCRA hazardous waste system or with a reduced
regulatory structure under RCRA. The options were proposed in a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking on July 27, 1994 (59 FR 38288). Either option selected would have positive
impacts on small businesses and state, local, and tribal governments interested in collecting
and managing lamps. The EPA Administrator is expected to sign the final action in 1999.
Modifications to RCRA Rules Associated with Solvent-Contaminated Shop Towels and
Wipers. This action would modify RCRA rules that affect the management of solvent-
contaminated shop towels and wipers. Solvent-contaminated shop towels and wipers are
used throughout industry for equipment cleaning and other related facility operations. Many
times, the spent shop towels and wipers are considered a hazardous waste because the
January 1999 4-18 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
solvent used is either a characteristic or a listed solvent. Examination of industry use and
management practices reveals that many facilities use only small amounts of solvent on their
disposable wipers and small numbers of wipers daily, suggesting that these materials,
particularly if listed solvents are being used, pose little or no risk to human health and the
environment if disposed of in municipal landfills. Similarly, situations exist where both
disposable wipers and reusable shop towels are not being managed according to prescribed
federal and states rules and policies. Problems with this issue have persisted since the late
1980s. The EPA Administrator is expected to sign this final action in 1999.
4.10 RIVERS AND HARBORS ACT
The Rivers and Harbors Act addresses harbor and river improvements, projects and activities in
navigable waters. This Act provides a number of regulatory authorities, the implementation of
which has evolved over time. Section 10 of the act prohibits the unauthorized obstruction or
alteration of any navigable water of the United States. This section provides that the construction
of any structure in or over any navigable water of the United States or the accomplishment of any
other work affecting the course, location, condition, or physical capacity of such waters is
unlawful unless the work has been recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the
Secretary of the Army. The Secretary's approval authority has since been delegated to the Chief
of Engineers. If a local government is conducting activities that may affect navigable waters, it
may be subject to the Rivers and Harbors Act. Appendix D contains a detailed matrix of
activities and the specific statutes under which they are regulated.
4.11 SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) mandates that EPA establish regulations to protect
human health from contaminants in drinking water. The law authorizes EPA to develop national
drinking water standards and to create a joint federal-state system to ensure compliance with
these standards. The SDWA also directs EPA to protect underground sources of drinking water
through the control of underground injection of liquid wastes.
Local governments may be responsible for operating and maintaining drinking water systems and
providing drinking water to communities and the public. Whether it is providing drinking water
to a community or simply to visitors, the local government is responsible for providing safe
drinkable water that meets EPA standards. These standards stem from the SDWA, which
specifies standards for both community water systems and transient water systems. In addition,
any municipal operation that provides water to the public (other than water that it receives from a
January 1999 4-19 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
public water supply system [i.e., wells or other reservoirs]) may also be required to comply with
safe drinking water requirements.
Drinking Water Standards. EPA has developed primary and secondary drinking water
standards under its SDWA authority. EPA and authorized states enforce the primary
drinking water standards, which are contaminant-specific concentration limits that apply to
certain public drinking water supplies. Primary drinking water standards consist of
maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs), which are non-enforceable health-based goals,
and maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), which are enforceable limits set as close to
MCLGs as possible, considering cost and feasibility of attainment.
To assure these standards are maintained, SDWA regulations require sampling and
monitoring for various contaminants, such as fecal coliform and metals. In addition, the
SDWA regulations require specified disinfection and filtration activities, notification when
certain contaminants exceed specified levels, and reporting of contaminant limit
exceedences.
Underground Injection Control. The SDWA Underground Injection Control (UIC)
program (40 CFR Parts 144-148) is a permit program that protects underground sources of
drinking water by regulating five classes of injection wells. UIC permits include design,
operation, inspection, and monitoring requirements. Wells used to inject hazardous wastes
must also comply with RCRA corrective action standards to be granted a RCRA permit, and
must meet applicable RCRA land disposal restrictions standards. The UIC permit program
is primarily state-enforced, since EPA has authorized all but a few states to administer the
program.
Sole Source Aquifer Protection. The SDWA provides for a federally implemented sole
source aquifer protection program, which prohibits federal funds from being expended on
projects that may contaminate the sole or principal source of drinking water for a given area,
and for a state-implemented wellhead protection program, which is designed to protect
drinking water wells and drinking water recharge areas.
Appendix D contains a detailed matrix of activities and the specific statutes under which they are
regulated.
January 1999 4-20 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
The following proposed regulations under the SDWA are currently in the development process:
Revision of Existing Variances and Exemptions Regulation to Comply with
Requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act. This action will revise the existing
regulations in accordance with the SDWA Amendments of 1996, regarding the issuance and
availability of variances and exemptions (V&E) under the act. Mirroring the statutory
language, a section specifically addressing variances for small public water systems will be
added, and minor codification changes will be made elsewhere in the existing rule. EPA
anticipates that the revisions will have beneficial impacts on small systems. The final rule is
scheduled to be signed in 1999.
Public Water System Public Notification Regulation This action revises an existing
regulation to incorporate the new public notification provisions in section 1414(c) of the
SDWA. The basic requirement for public water systems with violations of drinking water
standards to give public notification is not changed by the 1996 SDWA amendments. A
public water system is required under Section 1414(c) of the SDWA to provide notification
to its customers whenever: 1) a violation of certain drinking water regulations occurs
(including MCL, treatment technique, and monitoring/reporting requirements); 2) a V&E to
those regulations is in place or the conditions of the V&E are violated, or 3) results from
unregulated contaminant monitoring required under Section 1445 of the SDWA are
received. This statute requires the Administrator to prescribe by regulation the manner,
frequency, form, and content for giving notice. The existing regulation is in 40 CFR Section
141.32.
The 1996 amendments significantly revise the public notification requirements. The
amendments: 1) alter the timing of the notification for certain violations, 2) establish a
specific requirement for EPA consultation with the states in issuing revised regulations, 3)
allow the state to prescribe alternative notification requirements by rule with respect to the
form and content of the notice, and 4) add a new requirement for the state to prepare an
annual report on violations and for EPA to prepare a follow-on report summarizing states'
reports and public notices submitted by public water systems serving Indian Tribes. One
other new requirementfor public water systems to prepare an annual consumer confidence
reportis being implemented under a separate regulatory action. The revised public
notification regulations will streamline the existing requirements, provide quicker and more
effective notification of violations that have a serious adverse effect, and better inform
customers of public water systems of the quality of their drinking water and the risk to their
health. The EPA Administrator is expected to sign this final action 1999.
January 1999 4-21 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
4.12 Toxic SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) granted EPA authority to create a regulatory
framework to collect data on chemicals to evaluate, assess, mitigate, and control risks that may
be posed by their manufacture, processing, and use. TSCA provides a variety of control methods
to prevent chemicals from posing unreasonable risk.
TSCA standards may apply at any point during a chemical's life cycle. Under TSCA Section 5,
EPA has established an inventory of chemical substances. If a chemical is not already on the
inventory and has not been excluded by TSCA, a premanufacture notice (PMN) must be
submitted to EPA prior to manufacture or import. The PMN must identify the chemical and
provide available information on health and environmental effects. If available data are not
sufficient to evaluate the chemicals effects, EPA can impose restrictions pending the
development of information on its health and environmental effects. EPA can also restrict
significant new uses of chemicals based upon various factors, such as the projected volume and
use of the chemical.
Under TSCA Section 6, EPA can ban the manufacture or distribution in commerce, limit the use,
require labeling, or place other restrictions on chemicals that pose unreasonable risks. Among
the chemicals EPA regulates under Section 6 authority are asbestos, chlorofluorocarbons, and
PCBs.
Local governments may handle asbestos, lead paint, and other toxic substances as part of overall
operations, as part of building renovations or inspections, or as part of general maintenance of
schools and housing units. TSCA regulates the management of and protection from toxic
substances. Appendix D contains a detailed matrix of activities and the specific statutes under
which they are regulated.
January 1999 4-22 Federal Statutes and Regulations
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
5. COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT HISTORY
Until recently, EPA has focused much of its attention on measuring compliance with specific
environmental statutes. This approach allows the Agency to track compliance with the Clean Air
Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Clean Water Act, and other
environmental statutes. Within the last several years, the Agency has begun to supplement
single-media compliance indicators with facility-specific, multimedia indicators of compliance.
In doing so, EPA is in a better position to track compliance with all statutes at the facility level
and within specific industrial sectors.
A major step in building the capacity to compile multimedia data for industrial sectors was the
creation of EPA's Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) system. IDEA has the
capacity to "read into" the Agency's single-media databases, extract compliance records, and
match the records to individual facilities. The IDEA system can match air, water, waste,
toxics/pesticides/EPCRA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), and enforcement docket records for a
given facility and generate a list of historical permit, inspection, and enforcement activity. IDEA
also has the capability to analyze data by geographic area and corporate holder. As the capacity
to generate multimedia compliance data improves, EPA will make available more in-depth
compliance and enforcement information. Additionally, EPA is developing sector-specific
measures of success for compliance assistance efforts.
This chapter uses inspection, violation, and enforcement data from the IDEA system, to provide
information about the historical compliance and enforcement activity of the local government
sector. While other sector notebooks have used Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) data
from the Toxics Release Inventory System (TRIS) to define their data sampling universes, none
of the SIC codes associated with local governments identifies facilities required to report to the
TRI program. As such, sector-defining data have been provided from EPA data systems linked
to EPA's Facility Indexing System (FINDS), which tracks facilities in all media databases. This
chapter does not attempt to define the actual number of facilities that fall within each sector.
Instead, the chapter portrays the records of a subset of facilities within the sector that are well
defined within EPA databases.
As a check on the relative size of the full sector universe, most notebooks contain an estimated
number of facilities within the sector according to the Bureau of Census. Census data were not
used for the local government sectors because the SIC codes used to identify them are not unique
to local government, and the aggregated Census data would not allow differentiation between
public and private, or local versus state or federal, operations. A number of alternative sources
January 1999 5-1 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
were evaluated before deciding to use the Dun and Bradstreet database as the primary reference,
supplemented by data from the U. S. Department of Education where appropriate. Since these
data sources are not aggregated, facility name and location data can be evaluated to help identify
local government facilities. Since the local government sector consists of facilities not typically
falling under environmental agency scrutiny (exceptions being water supply and waste/
wastewater treatment), the reporting universe within the EPA databases may be small compared
to full universe data (in some cases, much smaller). However, the groups selected for inclusion
in this data analysis chapter should be consistent with this sector's general makeup.
Before presenting the data, the next section defines general terms and the column heads used in
the data tables. The data represent a retrospective summary of inspections and enforcement
actions and solely reflect EPA, state, and local compliance assurance activities that have been
entered into EPA databases. To identify trends, EPA ran data queries for the past 5 years (July 1,
1993 to June 30, 1998). Other sector notebooks have run both 1-year and 5-year analyses for
comparative purposes. Again, because many of the SIC groups within the local government
sector have not received much environmental scrutiny, data are not sufficient over a 1-year
period to support a meaningful analysis.
The data illustrate the variations across EPA regions for certain sectors. This variation may be
attributable to state/local data entry variations, specific geographic concentrations, proximity to
population centers, sensitive ecosystems, highly toxic chemicals used in production, or historical
noncompliance. Hence, the exhibited data do not rank regional performance or necessarily
reflect which regions may have the most compliance problems.
5.1 COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT DATA DEFINITIONS
5.1.1 General Definitions
Below are the general definitions of terms used in the data tables:
Facility Indexing System (FINDS) assigns a common facility number to EPA single-
media permit records, establishing a linkage capability to the permit data. The FINDS
identification number allows EPA to compile and review all permit, compliance,
enforcement, and pollutant release data for any given regulated facility.
Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) is a data integration system that can
retrieve information from the major EPA program office databases. IDEA uses the
January 1999 5-2 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
FINDS identification number to link separate data records from EPA's databases. This
allows retrieval of records from across media or statutes for any given facility, thus
creating a "master list" of records for that facility. Some of the data systems accessible
through IDEA are AFS (Air Facility Indexing and Retrieval System, Office of Air and
Radiation), PCS (Permit Compliance System, Office of Water), RCRIS (Resource
Conservation and Recovery Information System, Office of Solid Waste), NCDB
(National Compliance Data Base, Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances), CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental and Liability Information
System, Superfund), and TRIS. IDEA also contains information from outside sources,
such as Dun and Bradstreet (DUN) and the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration. Most data queries displayed in this section were conducted using
IDEA.
5.1.2 Data Table Column Heading Definitions
Below are the following general definitions of terms used in the data tables:
Column A: Region-Is the EPA Region for which data are summarized.
Column B: Facilities in Universe-Is based on an analysis of the Dun and Bradstreet
Marketing Identifier (DMI) database within the listed SIC code range. The DMI tracks
more than 11 million currently operating public and private business entities. Data
records were retrieved by SIC code and then screened for business name keywords
indicative of local government operations. The SIC code range selected for each search
is defined by each notebook's selected SIC code coverage. While this method in no way
provides exact sector universe numbers, it does allow for reasonable approximations
from a uniform, verifiable source. The one exception to using DMI was in
approximating the elementary and secondary schools universe (SIC code 8211) and
public library universe (SIC code 8231). Data used for these sectors came from the
1995-1996 Public Elementary and Secondary School Universe and FY1994 Public
Library Survey, as compiled by the U. S. Department of Education, National Center for
Education Statistics.
Column C: Facilities in Search-Is based on the universe of FINDS-linked facilities
within the listed SIC code range. SIC codes were tested from AFS, PCS, RCRIS,
NCDB, and DUN, with a match from any one database qualifying the facility for
January 1999 5-3 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
inclusion. This subset of facilities with links to Agency databases is used to derive the
data in Columns D through K.
Column D: Facilities Inspected-lndicates the level of EPA and state agency
inspections for the facilities in this data search. These values show what percentage of
the facility universe is inspected in a 5-year period.
Column E: Number of Inspections-Measures the total number of inspections
conducted in this sector. An inspection event is counted each time it is entered into a
single media database.
Column F: Average Time Between Inspections-Provides an average length of time,
expressed in months, between compliance inspections for all facilities within the
defined universe.
Column G: Facilities with One or More Enforcement Actionsexpresses the number
of facilities that were the subject of at least one enforcement action within the defined
time period. This category is broken down further into federal and state actions. Data
are obtained for administrative, civil/judicial, and criminal enforcement actions. A
facility with multiple enforcement actions is only counted once in this column (e.g., a
facility with three enforcement actions counts as one facility).
Column H: Total Enforcement Actions-Describes the total number of enforcement
actions identified for a sector across all environmental statutes within the defined time
period. A facility with multiple enforcement actions is counted multiple times (e.g., a
facility with three enforcement actions counts as three).
Column I: State Lead Actions-Shows what percentage of the total enforcement actions
are taken by state and local environmental agencies. Varying levels of use by states of
EPA data systems may limit the volume of actions recorded as state enforcement
activity. Some states extensively report enforcement activities into EPA data systems,
while other states may use their own data systems.
Column J: Federal Lead Actions-Shows what percentage of the total enforcement
actions are taken by EPA. This value includes referrals from state agencies. Many of
these actions result from coordinated or joint state/federal efforts.
January 1999 5-4 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Column K: Enforcement to Inspection RateIs a ratio of enforcement actions to
inspections and is presented for comparative purposes only. This ratio is a rough
indicator of the relationship between inspections and enforcement. It relates the number
of enforcement actions and the number of inspections that occurred within the 5-year
period. This ratio includes the inspections and enforcement actions reported under the
CWA, CAA and RCRA. Inspections and actions from the TSCA/FIFRA/EPCRA
database are not factored into this ratio because most of the actions taken under these
programs are not the result of facility inspections. Also, this ratio does not account for
enforcement actions arising from non-inspection compliance monitoring activities (e.g.,
self-reported water discharges) that can result in enforcement action.
5.2 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPLIANCE HISTORY
Exhibit 5-1 presents the 5-year inspection and enforcement summary by statute for local
government SIC groups. This exhibit provides an overview of the reported compliance and
enforcement data for SIC codes over the past 5 years (July 1993 to June 1998). As shown in the
table, approximately 90 percent (79,725) of the 88,619 inspections conducted over the 5-year
period were conducted under the Clean Water Act. From the total 88,619 inspections, EPA took
4,961 enforcement actions. A total 5.6 percent of all inspections conducted of local government
operations resulted in an enforcement action. Nearly 80 percent (3,916) of all enforcement
actions were taken under the Clean Water Act. Other points of interest include:
Sewerage systems (SIC code 4952) have received the most inspections of any local
government operation, with 67,444 inspections over the 5 years. This translates to each
facility being inspected an average of seven to eight times over the 5-year period.
Ninety-eight percent of these inspections were conducted under the Clean Water Act.
From those 67,444 inspections, EPA took 4,037 enforcement actions. On average, 6
percent of all inspections resulted in an enforcement action. (It should be noted that this
number could be lower since one facility may have had numerous enforcement actions
taken against it within the 5-year period.)
Elementary and secondary schools (SIC code 8211) received a total of 9,587 inspections
over the 5 years, which is the second largest number of inspections across all SIC codes.
These inspections were spread across the statutes, with more than half (53 percent)
being conducted under the Clean Water Act. The 9,587 inspections resulted in 237
enforcement actions. On average, 2 percent of all inspections resulted in an
January 1999 5-5 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
enforcement action. Sixty-eight percent of these enforcement actions were taken under
the Clean Water Act.
Exhibits 5-2 through 5-17 present the compliance and enforcement data for each of the specific
local government operation SIC codes over the same 5-year period. These data are also broken
out by EPA region, thereby allowing geographical comparisons. Exhibit 5-18 presents the
compliance and enforcement data specifically for public water systems owned by local
governments. This information was taken from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System
(SDWIS), which is not a part of the IDEA system. Like the exhibits that precede it, this exhibit
displays the data by region to allow for geographical comparisons.
January 1999 5-6 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
C.
S
o
O
u
HH
CU
=
CU
>
3
o
-
ฃ
CU
"S
-^^
ซ
^
b
w
s
s
s
CU
s
CU
1
tij
a
=
R
=
*^
w
CU
a
VI
=
aป
i
^
E
w
Exhibit 5-1.
1
g
|
UJ
o
I-
i
LJ_
\L
o:
o
1
c
O
<
^
c
O
ซ.
I O
59
C
_ O
O +-> "Jj
S? 1- Q.
en
1- O
s?
c
sit
c
3.
1- O
55
en
c
sit
en
c
-
H.1
ss*
-ซl
o ฐ at
SS 1- Q.
c/>
~
jS o> o
ฐ 0 ^
is<
en
c
_ o
ro ^3
s s
1- Q.
C
81
ฑi o
o Q-
ro en
""
Industry Sector
^
CO
^p
o
CO
CO
^
CN
00
^
00
CN
b
te
CN
o
^~
J
O)
1 Water Supply (1 )
^
^_
-
O
o
o
^
O)
^
00
O)
CN
CN
8
^
|
r^T
CD
^:
h--
oo"
Sewerage Systems
^
CN
^p
?-
o
CN
^
CO
CD
^
CO
in
in
CN
!
r^
8
CN
j*
^~
Refuse Systems
^
o
^p
?-
00
CD
^
CN
O)
^
CD
00
b
s
CN
S
CO
Sanitary Systems, NEC
^
o
^p
CO
o
^
^
o
o
^
o
00
b
0)
CO
^
g:
1 Amusement & Recreation
Services, NEC
<
CN
CN
CN
in
CO
^
1
^
s
in
O)
CO
CN
00
in
oT
0
^~
^-"
tn
o
o
^
o
fr\
Elementary & Secondary 5
^
b
^
CN
b
CD
^
8
^
8
o
CD
0)
CN
CO
Libraries
^
b
^
S-
co
&
^
I
^
ฐ
o
CD
fi
CO
CO
00
Police Protection
^
b
^
b
CO
J
^
I
^
g
o
CD
83
in
o
CO
ง3
Fire Protection
^
b
^
b
1
8
^
o
^
in
in
ฃ_
CD
o
CO
CN
CD
in
O
LU
"Z.
2
CO
w
08
CD
g
O
o
5
CL
*
CN
in
r^
b
"*
^
3
^
0)
00
s
N
00
o
in
CD
CO
c
ซ Administration of Educatio
Programs
^
^_
^p
b
S
&)
^
s
^
s
CO
CN
CD
O)
O
00
CN
0)
CO
-O
"o
ซAir & Water Resource & S
Waste Management
^
b
^p
^-
S
b
^
S
^
ง
o
*
CD
O)
0)
CO
to
CD
O
1 1
ซLand, Mineral, Wildlife, & f
Conservation
^
b
^
CO
I
^
^
o
^
3
in
CN
1
*
o
CN
CO
ซ Administration of Housing
Programs
^
b
^Q
CO
1
&
^
s
^
s
o
CO
CD
ง
00
D)
C
'c
c.
CO
Administration of Urban PI
& Community & Rural
Development
^
b
^Q
b
b
ง3
^
8
^
0)
o
o
CN
CN
CN
CO
1 Regulation, Licensing, &
Inspection of MiscellaneoL
Commercial Sites
00
in
CD
CL
CO
CO
CD
to
o
5
3
Q.
w
CD
CD
E
CL
O
O
ฃ
Q.
00
January 1999
5-7
Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
o
+j
w
4*
=
4*
B
a
4>
o
O
13
w
o
I- a
o,
0,2
S^
ON
o *
U 4>
^^
a
I
UJ
t
C
IS
H
*
=
o
u.
LLI
Q
O
m
ง o
(1) Q) **
O Q. W
ฃ = a
LU 0
= ซTJ C
8 1 1 ง
0) a) _J O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
ฃ!|
^
S ซ o
o g~
LLI
E
e<- g ง g
= ฃ 0 o s
U ^ > *r tJ
LJJ
t/)
o) j2 o o
Hif
ซ_ in
2ง
E *
3 w
ซง
._ *J
II
ro in
u. ^
.S
s|
s ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
u.
in 01
0) in
= c *
o -
ra i
u. 3
O
I
CD
O
O
!ฃ
CT>
CN
-
-*
^
LO
^
CO
CN
LO
O
CN
CT>
O
O
CO
^
CT)
CO
CT)
CO
CO
CO
LO
CT>
S
T
O
CN
CN
O
O
CO
CN
LO
CN
CT)
O
CN
5
<-
CO
CO
T~
CT)
CO
CO
LO
CT>
LO
^.
O
O
1
CT)
CO
CD
CO
O
CO
CT>
<-
CO
CN
^
LO
O
LO
,
"
CO
o
o
LO
LO
CT>
O
CN
CD
CN
LO
CO
O
CD
LO
CD
^_
LO
CO
CD
o
CN
LO
CO
^f
CN
CN
CO
CO
o
CO
CO
CT>
^
CD
,
>
CN
O
O
O
O
o
CO
CO
CT>
CO
CD
LO
LO
CO
T
LO
o
>
CN
o
o
o
o
o
CO
CN
^.
CO
CO
CN
LO
o
^.
CO
>
CN
o
o
o
o
o
^
-*
CN
CO
CT>
CO
CO
CD
CN
o
CN
CD
,
"
^
T
o
o
o
o
-
CO
o
CD
A
CT>
LO
CN
CN
CO
CN
CO
X
^.
o
o
o
CN
O
CO
CD
-*
LO
CO
CN
CD
O
*
-*
a>
CN
CO
CN
CO
CD
1^
^
o
January 1999
Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
o
+j
w
4*
a
4>
o
O
13
w
o
o
S^
CC
S o>
fi 4ป
.^ t/3
~3. '
u 9
O 4>
a -a
^ o
U
a
g 05
U
I
UJ
tl
C
IS
H
*
1
o
u.
LLJ
Q
O
m
S o
(1) 4) **
o Q. w
ฃ = a
LU S
= ซTJ C
S 1 1 ง
O O) _l O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
III
E
S t/)
ซ S 0
o g~
HI
is. is
S T- C 01 o
= ฃ 0 o -x
U S > *r tJ
LU
t/)
o) j2 . O
^ T3
Eฃ
z =
ซง
._ *J
II
ro in
u. c
ฃ
01 o
5 ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
u.
0) in
= c g
o -
ra i
u. 3
O
I
CD
O
O
!ฃ
CT>
CN
-
"*
^
LO
^
CO
CN
LO
O
CN
CT>
O
O
CO
^
CT)
CO
CT)
CO
CO
CO
LO
CT>
S
O
CN
CN
O
O
CO
CN
LO
CN
CT>
O
CN
5
CO
CO
T~
CT)
CO
LO
CT>
LO
^.
O
O
1
CT>
CO
CD
CO
O
CO
CT>
CO
CN
O
LO
,
"
CO
o
o
LO
LO
CT)
O
CN
CD
CN
LO
CO
O
CD
LO
^_
LO
CO
CD
o
CN
LO
CO
^f
CN
CN
CO
CO
o
CO
CO
CT>
^
CD
,
>
CN
O
O
O
O
o
CO
CO
CT>
CO
CD
LO
LO
CO
LO
o
>
CN
o
o
o
o
o
CO
CN
^.
CO
CO
CN
LO
o
^.
CO
>
CN
o
o
o
o
o
-*
"*
CN
CO
CT>
CO
CO
CD
CN
o
CN
CD
,
"
^
T
o
o
o
o
-
CO
o
CD
A
CT>
LO
CN
CN
CO
CN
CO
X
CD
O
O
LO
LO
LO
CO
o
CO
CN
CN
5
h
CD
^
oo~
CN
co"
^.
CD
CT>
CO
CN
^
o
January 1999
5-9
Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
o
+j
w
4*
=
4*
B
a
4>
o
O
13
w
o
SfSl
>*
s <ป
S
"-fO
a in
a -a
= o
ซ U
I
UJ
tl
C
IS
H
*
=
o
LL
LLI
Q
O
m
S o
(1) Q) **
O Q. W
ฃ = a
LU S
= ซTJ C
S 1 1 ง
0) 0) ^ O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
III
^
S ซ o
o g~
LLI
8 0 c ป
i^ o s|
? s ฃ <
LLI
t/)
o J2 o> o
Soil
._ *j
u
ro in
u. ฃ
.E
8|
s ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
u.
in oi
01 in
= c *
o -
ra i
u. 3
O
I
^
O
o
o
o
o
CO
CN
o
CD
A
CD
-
CO
LO
CO
CO
CN
o
LO
LO
oo
-
o
CN
LO
o
CO
CD
CO
CD
oo
CN
^.
o
o
CN
CO
CO
CD
oo
CN
LO
<~
CN
CD
1*
oo
LO
T
^
CD
CD
o
o
CD
^
oo
LO
CN
LO
<~
CN
CN
O
LO
^~
CO
CD
CN
CD
CN
CN
"
LO
O
o
CO
^
LO
CN
LO
CO
LO
CD
CO
o
LO
LO
oo
LO
CN
oo
o
o
oo
o
CN
LO
CN
oo
oo
CO
oo
CO
T
CO
oo
CN
>
^.
o
o
CN
CN
CO
1^
CD
^
CN
oo
o
CO
CN
CD
o
-*
CO
CD
CD
>
LO
o
o
o
o
o
CN
CN
oo
5
-
LO
CO
oo
CO
>
LO
o
o
o
o
o
CD
^.
o
CN
CN
CN
CN
CO
o
oo
CD
"
LO
o
o
CD
CN
ฃ
1^
-
CD
CN
CO
CD
CN
CO
CN
CD
CD
^.
"*
X
oo
o
o
o
CO
o
1^
CD
^.
CD
LO
CN
O
CD
CN
ฃ
*
CD
O
,
OO
,
^
o
January 1999
5-10 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
a
4>
o
O
a
-M 4)
II
>> *
ซ
S
a
a
S 8
3 1
a
1
** "H
a o
tl
*
-J
I
0
u.
LLI
Q
O
m
<
C O
0) 0) S
o Qi "J
g oi
LU ฃ
S TS 5n ^ o
Q Q) (Q U
0 ot I o
Q. U. <
a
= s 2
S-1 o
SS|
1
ra 5 o
OPS
"ฃ<
LU
-
fll O ** (/)
. ฐ
i= c g
o -
to i
u. 3
O
I
,
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
-
^.
,
o
o
o
o
^
CO
CO
CN
oo
CD
*"
CD
O
o
1
CO
oo
CD
,fr
^_
^
oo
CD
CD
CN
CD
=
,
o
o
o
o
LO
^
CN
CO
CD
o
CO
~~
CD
o
o
1
CO
oo
CD
LO
^_
CN
o
o
CO
LO
CO
CN
,
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
o
,_
*"
>
,
o
o
o
o
oo
*"
^~
LO
CD
>
,
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
T~
LO
oo
>
,
o
o
o
o
CN
CO
LO
CD
^
^~
~~
!
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
CD
^.
X
LO
o
o
1
CO
oo
CN
CD
CN
CN
CD
CO
CN
CO
oo
o
CD
_l
<
o
January 1999
5-11 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
=
2 a
Is
2
o
-
I ฃ
(ซ <ซ
4* g
U O
= V5
ซ ซ
4*
a a
a ซ
w a
^ B
a g
S s
S *>
ง 2
a\
a\
i O
ta. u
^5 HH
i ^0
\f}
^^
2
'S
UJ
*
-)
LL
LLI
Q
O
m
<
= ง
lla
o Q. w
o w ^
ฃ0
'c 15 ^
S 5 g .1
OQ^O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
sal
Q. S <
|
s | ง
LLI
~
ia.ii
o u ^ ^ ?5
ฃ * ง<
LLI
tn
si |1
^ ^~ GO tf)
ซ_ U)
0 C
>. O
| HI
if
SE
il
ro tn
u. ^
U) -C
01 o
iS
0 CO
ro
u.
in 01
01 in
= c g
o -
ra i
u. 3
c
O
I
:
o
o
o
o
,
o
o
CO
CO
:
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
CN
CN
^
O
CO
CO
=
o
o
o
o
o
CN
,_
CN
o
CN
LO
^
LO
CO
E
:
o
o
o
o
^.
CO
CO
CN
CN
CD
O
O
^
i
i
O
o
o
o
o
CD
A
^
-
CN
LO
CO
^_
>
CO
o
o
LO
o
LO
^
.^
CO
CN
CN
CO
-f
CN
LO
LO
>
:
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
O
-f
2
CD
LO
CO
^
-
o
*
CD
CO
^
.^
CO
^
^
-f
LO
CD
CN
1
:
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
-
-
LO
CO
CO
*
1
1
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
CN
CN
^
LO
CO
X
-
o
CO
CN
ฃฃ
i^
CO
CO
CO
LO
CO
CN
5
CO
o
^
o
CN
CD
^j-
_l
g
1-
January 1999
5-12 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
o
+j
w
4*
=
4*
B
a
4>
o
O
13
So
u
5 **
t/2 -a
8 ซ
a ki
.2 ฃ
1 a
S g
o S
U 5
a W
a i
* -H
4* -n
S ฎ
ฃ W
au
tl
.a
la
*
*
1
o
U.
UJ
Q
O
m
<
1ง
(1) 4) **
O Q. W
ฃ0
ts =; ซ
C Co __ p-
oi ฃ: T2 ง
Q Q) (O U
(1) (I) 1 O
Q. LJ_ <
a
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
SSI
Q. S <
E
8j U)
ra S o
o g~
HI
(/) k. S
0) O j.. C 2
*; T- j. a) o
= ฃ 0 P s:
u ^ > *r tj
LJJ
t/)
1*1 s|
MS|
ซ_ U)
0 ง
E&
3 w
ซง
._ *J
II
ro in
u. ฃ
.E
8|
s ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
u.
in ai
ai in
= c *
o -
ra i
u. 3
c
o
I
CN
O
O
^
CD
CN
r-
^.
o
CD
A
CD
^~
CO
o
CO
LO
CD
CD
CO
oo
^J-
CD
O
O
O
O
CD
CO
LO
^
CD
o
CD
A
CD
O
CD
O
CO
CO
o
o
,
oo
CD
O
oo
o
o
o
CD
CO
CO
LO
CO
^
CD
LO
CN
CN
CN
CO
CO
CN
CO
CN
CD
T
CO
^.
CD
1^
CO
o
o
o
o
CD
CN
CO
CD
LO
CO
o
oo
CD
CN
LO
"""
CO
LO
,
^
CN
o
CO
^
o
o
CD
CD
CO
LO
CD
o
CD
A
CN
LO
CN
<-
CD
LO
CN
LO
O
CN
O
LO
OO
^
>
o
o
1
CD
LO
CN
LO
O
CD
A
CD
OO
CO
-
CO
CD
CD
CD
^
OO
,
^
>
o
o
CO
oo
*
*
CD
^
o
CD
A
CD
LO
CN
O
"*
CD
OO
1^
CN
OO
CD
5
O
o
o
LO
o
LO
CN
CN
O
CD
A
-
CN
LO
T~
LO
CO
oo
CN
LO
>
o
o
o
LO
o
LO
CN
CN
O
CD
A
O
LO
CD
CD
OO
LO
^.
OO
CD
X
o
o
o
o
o
CN
,_
O
CD
A
CN
CN
CD
CD
T~
jฃ
CD
^_
OO
oo
CO
X
CN
o
o
CD
CO
ฃ^
CD
CO
CN
CO
CN
CN
o
co
A
oo
LO
CD
o
5-
CD
oo
oo
,
^
LO
CO
CD
oo
-J
o
January 1999
5-13
Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
o
+j
w
4*
=
4*
B
a
4>
o
O
13
w
o
4*
W
s
4>
S
4>
U
tl
90*
*
-)
I
o
u.
UJ
Q
O
m
C Q
(1) Q) **
O Q. W
o w ^
ฃ s
ts =; ซ
C Co __ f
01 i: 12 0
Q Q) (O U
0 ot i o
Q. U. <
a
= s s?
S-1 o
ฃ!|
I
sfi
HI
~
i!eh
:= _ O o =
o s s t o
HI
tfl
Q) )2 Q) O
!|11
< ^ OQ . O
II
SE
il
ro in
H. ^
U) -C
ai o
iS
0 CO
ro
H.
in ai
ai in
= c 3J
o -
ra i
H. 3
O
I
O
CN
O
O
O
O
-
,-
O
CD
A
ซ
^~
CD
O
O
CO
,
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
*
^
ฃ
OO
,
IO
o
o
o
o
o
-
,_
o
CD
A
CN
CN
CO
O
CO
CO
CD
^_
CD
O
O
CD
O
IO
CN
CD
CN
CO
CD
O
CD
CN
CN
"
i
O
o
o
o
oo
CN
CO
10
ฃ
o
CO
CO
CN
CD
o
o
o
o
CN
CO
CN
CO
CO
^
-
oo
IO
^_
>
,
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
-
*"
CD
CO
^_
>
,
o
o
o
o
oo
o
CO
CO
CD
CD
>
,
o
o
o
o
,
o
o
5
CN
CO
^_
"
,
o
o
o
o
,
o
o
o
CD
X
T
o
CD
ฃ^
CN
CD
^
o
CD
A
CN
o
CO
o
^
oo
IO
_l
<
R
January 1999
5-14 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
o
+j
w
4*
=
4*
B
a
4>
o
O
13
w
o
CS
S 2
s o-
Ifl V
a o
^
M
o -a
S o
ซ rj
-w
u
I
UJ
tl
o\
C
la
tJ
*
=
o
u.
LLI
Q
O
m
<
S o
(1) 4) **
O Q. W
ฃ0
= ซTJ =
g | | 0
0) 0) ^ O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
III
E
S ซ o
o g~
LLI
E
fli O ? (/)
- fl) C C
|S S ง =
ฃlsฃ<
HI
tfl
O) ) 0) O
Hi|
ซ_ U)
0 C
>. o
II
aT8
il
ro in
u. c
in ฃ
01 0
*; ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
u.
01 in
= c g
o -
ra i
u. 3
O
I
,
CD
CD
O
O
LO
O
^~
^
LO
CD
CO
o
o
CD
CD
O
-
^
LO
CN
CO
CN
CD
CN
^
j^
,
CD
CD
O
O
CN
LO
S
CN
ฃ
CO
CO
CD
=
^_
o
o
CD
CD
O
-
^
^.
^
O
CO
LO
CN
CO
CN
,
^~
,
CD
CD
O
O
^_
^~
LO
CO
^
CN
CO
CO
,
CO
CO
o
CD
o
CD
CO
CN
CO
^_
CN
-
LO
LO
CN
^
O
,
>
CO
o
o
CD
CD
O
-
^
O
CD
A
CN
LO
CO
CO
CO
>
f^_
5
o
CD
CD
O
^
CN
^_
CO
CO
CN
CD
CN
CD
CO
CN
>
CN
O
CD
CD
O
CN
CN
CO
ฃ
^
?
CO
CD
LO
~~
!
o
o
o
o
^.
^~
LO
CD
-
CO
CD
CN
X
o
o
CD
*
CN
CO
CD
^_
CO
CO
CO
CO
o
CO
^
CO
o
1^
_l
<
o
January 1999
5-15 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
u
4*
4*
5
=
_
4>
o
o
u
o
+J
ฃ
k> C
- o
& *^
I ซ
s +^
I 2
S Si
'
a -a
= o
ซ u
a U
4* HH
S <ซ
4>
U
ti.
o
-^
la
la
u
*
_
1
o
LL
LLI
Q
O
m
<
1 1
(1) 4) **
O Q. TO
ฃo
= ซTJ =
8 5 g.|
OQ^O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
ฃ!|
^
S in
S S o
0 g~
LLI
-
W O - .2
E *
3 w
813
il
ro in
u. ฃ
E^
a! o
5 ra
= ai
0 CO
ro
u.
in a)
ai in
S c S
'o ~ -
ra i
u. 3
c
O
I
,
CD
CD
O
O
O
CD
A
-
CN
^
10
CT>
,
CD
CD
O
O
OO
CO
O
IO
OO
CN
CO
^
CO
, "
=
,
CD
CD
O
O
O
CD
A
IO
CD
IO
CO
^
OO
, "
E
CO
o
CD
CD
CD
O
CN
CN
CT>
^
J
CN
CN
OO
CD
CO
CN
^
^.
O
CD
CD
CD
O
-
^
CO
IO
CN
-
CN
OO
, "
>
OO
CN
CD
CD
O
CD
O
CN
CD
CT>
CN
J
CO
CN
OO
IO
, "
>
o
CD
CD
CD
O
-
,-
O
CD
O
CO
o
o
oo
CO
^
^
CN
CD
CD
CD
O
CO
^
CO
CO
-
CO
CD
CO
CO
CO
1
^
o
CD
CD
CD
O
-
,-
CN
IO
IO
-*
CO
CN
^
^.
O
CD
CD
O
CD
-
,-
O
CD
A
CO
CN
-
IO
CN
OO
X
o
CD
CN
OO
CN
CT)
CN
CO
T~
O
IO
o
CO
oo
CD
o
CN
CO
CT>
CN
, "
^_
_l
<
O
1-
January 1999
5-16
Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
u
4*
4*
5
=
ฃ -O
O oj
O fl
" 1ป
W K
3
a 2
31
a .Q
Si =
S -
a o\
U 4,
*
-)
0
LL
LLI
Q
O
m
C Q
O fl) S
o Qi rc
g Oi
LU 0
'c 15 ^
S 5 g .1
OQ^O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
sal
Q. S <
1
3gง
LU
ซ5 ซซ
fiifi
LJJ
t/)
si |1
^ ^ GO in
ซ_ U)
0 C
>. o
II
813
il
ro in
u. ^
a! o
iS
0 CO
ro
u.
"
i
O
o
o
o
o
CD
A
-
*"
CN
CD
CT>
i
O
O
o
o
,
o
o
CN
LO
CD
>
,
O
o
o
o
o
CO
CN
*"
-
CT>
CN
>
,
O
o
o
o
o
CD
-
*"
-
CO
>
1
o
o
o
o
o
CD
-
*"
-
5
"
1
o
o
o
o
,
o
o
-*
CT)
X
LO
o
o
o
o
o
CO
CO
LO
CN
CD
LO
ฃ
o
_l
<
R
January 1999
5-17 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
o
+J
W
4*
-M
a
i
=
^
o
o
"2 2
0 B
_J c*
hH
0) 0/J
.= o
M _
- o-
o _
<2 g
>* .2
SS *
S =
S "B
s W
C/J ซM
o
O) w
w J3
a o
1 Complia
ministrati
W _S
a 5
*
X
O
Li.
^
1 .2
(1) Q) **
O ^ W
2 c
LSS
ts =; ซ
C Co __ p-
01 >r ^ 5
M O (u U
O O) ^ O
Q. U. <
c
c g ซ
g -1 0
" 01 S
at -S o
Q. S <
?
S U)
= E c
S ai o
ฃ ^fl
O rf
*c
LJJ
*i
(/) k. S
1 ฐ ง ซ 1
ฃ1S|<
LJJ
t/)
S, ซ S o
s^ ||
ซ_ U)
^N e
^J.
5
CD
0
CD
O
^
O
CO
^
o
CD
A
CN
^j.
5
CD
0
^
^
CD
OO
CD
CO
CD
LO
CD
,_
O
CD
0
CD
O
0?
O
-
^
CO
CO
o
1
CD
^
O
o
o
o
CD
A
^
^j.
5
CD
0
CD
O
0?
O
CD
CD
O
CD
A
LO
|
CD
^
O
O
o
o
CD
A
CD
CN
O
CD
0
CD
O
0?
O
CN
CN
O
CD
A
CD
1
CD
^
O
O
o
o
CD
A
CN
LO
O
CD
CD
^
O
O
-
^
o
CD
A
,-
!
o
^
o
o
o
o
CD
A
^
LO
O
CD
0
CD
0?
CD
CO
LO
CN
I*
^
O
CD
A
OO
a\
5
o
January 1999
5-18
Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
3
u
1
I
u =
O ซ
4*
a ซ
S cc
S 73
S =
a S
| tf
U ซ
a ซ
4*
-a
O
ฃ U
*
I
o
u.
UJ
Q
O
m
S o
(1) 4) **
O Q. W
ฃ0
= ซTJ =
8 5 g.|
OQ^O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
sal
Q. S <
t
8j in
S S o
o g~
HI
U) 1 S
. ฐ
0 ง
E *
if
._ *j
u
ro in
u. ฃ
.E
a! o
ss ra
= ai
0 CO
ro
u.
in ai
ai in
= c S
o -
ra i
u. 3
O
I
oo
o
o
LO
oo
LO
ป
CO
CO
^
^
CO
o
CN
o
CD
CD
LO
CO
CN
o
LO
LO
LO
5
^
^
CO
CD
CD
CO
o
LO
oo
CN
^_
o
o
CO
CO
*
CD
CO
^
CD
o
CO
CD
LO
LO
CD
CD
CD
LO
o
o
1
CD
oo
-*
oo
^_
CO
CN
o
CD
LO
o
LO
"
^.
o
o
LO
LO
LO
o
CN
CO
CO
LO
^~
LO
CD
CO
oo
CN
CO
o
LO
CO
LO
CN
CN
o
oo
CN
CO
CD
LO
CN
CO
CO
CO
CO
>
^_
o
o
o
o
o
-
,_
CO
oo
oo
-
CO
CD
>
oo
o
o
CN
CN
oo
1^
CO
LO
LO
-
T
o
CN
o
CO
o
CD
>
^.
o
o
o
CO
o
1^
o
CO
^.
oo
CN
CN
oo
CO
LO
oo
CO
"
CD
o
o
o
o
o
LO
CN
^_
CO
o
oo
-
5
CO
CN
X
^0
o
o
y,
t-~
"*
t-
Os
oo
0
OS
0
oo
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
u
4*
4*
5
=
O -2
^' *^
4> O
5 U
_ -M
5ฎ 4*
^ O
IN ^b
I *
S ซ
a _f
S3 "
51
a B
a ^<
o> x
S -
o
a o\
O
>
tl
.c
la
u
*
-)
I
o
u.
LLI
Q
O
m
<
S o
O 0) S
O Q- RJ
g Qi
LU ฃ
'c 15 ^
S 5 g .1
O O) ^ O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
sal
Q. S <
E
ฃ w
ra S o
OPS
"ฃ<
LU
E
fli O ? (/)
- fl) C C
1^ ฐ ฃฃ
LU
(/>
ง, - .2
813
tl
ro in
u. ฃ
U) -C
01 0
s ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
u.
01 in
= c JJ
o -
ra S
u. 3
O
I
,
O
o
o
o
1
o
o
-
o
CN
CN
^.
O
O
O
o
o
^
^
CT>
CN
CN
CO
CO
LO
CO
CN
,
O
o
o
o
,
o
o
CO
CT>
CT)
=
CD
O
O
O
O
O
CO
CN
^.
LO
CT>
CN
^.
LO
~~
,
O
o
o
o
^.
CN
CD
LO
CN
CN
CN
CO
CN
,
O
o
o
o
o
CN
CT>
^~
CO
CO
>
,
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
CN
T~
CO
o
CT>
>
CO
o
o
o
o
o
^
^
o
CT)
CN
LO
LO
^.
CT)
>
CO
CO
o
o
o
o
^
^
o
CD
A
CO
CN
^
^.
^
~~
!
o
o
o
o
o
CD
CN
T~
CN
LO
"*
X
CO
o
o
o
o
o
CD
LO
^.
CN
CT>
CT)
CO
CO
^
CD
,
_l
<
O
January 1999
5-20 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
u
4*
4*
5
=
_
4>
o
o
ซ 's
2 s
S o
s w
4> =
w o
a +:
u s
in
13
*
-J
_
I
o
u.
UJ
Q
O
m
<
C O
งls
o Q. w
o w ^
ฃo
'c 15 ^
S 5 ro O
O O) ^ O
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
III
1
ra S o
0 ^ S
"1^
HI
-
W O - .2
| a
3 w
SE
il
ro in
H. C
.S
t/> ^
01 0
5 ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
H.
(A 0)
oi in
s c y
'o ~ -
ra i
H. 3
O
I
,
O
o
o
o
o
CD
A
O
CD
O
^
LO
CO
,
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
CD
CD
LO
CO
O
CO
CN
O
O
o
o
o
-
,-
CD
LO
LO
-
LO
CO
CD
CN
E
CD
O
O
O
O
O
CN
,-
O
CD
A
CO
CN
LO
LO
LO
CD
~~
,
O
o
o
o
o
CD
CO
LO
CO
CD
CD
>
,
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
CO
CO
-f
^
CO
>
LO
CN
o
o
o
o
-
^
LO
^-
*
-
CO
CN
LO
>
,
o
o
o
o
o
CD
A
-
-
CO
CD
CO
>
,
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
CO
^
CD
~~
\
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
-
CD
CO
X
CO
o
o
LO
CN
LO
1^
^
CO
o
CD
A
o
CN
CO
o
CN
CD
CO
co~
_l
<
o
January 1999
5-21 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
V e
M C
= a
P -
c a>
= >
=
2 rt
o -a
J g
4* ซ
i
ฐ
II
.2 ^
"5. R
= O
a *
c o
4* -S
" S
o i
"C
T3 rj
*
-)
I
o
Li.
UJ
Q
O
m
<
ง o
(1) Q) **
O Q. TO
o w ^
ฃ0
'c 15 ^
S 5 g .1
o> o> ^ o
Q. U. <
c
= 8 ฃ
S-1 o
SS|
E
2 U)
s ง ง
OPS
"ฃ<
HI
E
fli O ? (/)
- fl) C C
1^ ฐ ฃฃ
ฃlsฃ<
HI
tfl
S, ซ S o
s^ ||
._ U)
0 C
>- .2
a'
il
ro in
H. ^
U) -C
01 0
s ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
H.
oi in
= c 3J
o -
ra i
H. 3
O
I
,
O
o
o
o
1
o
o
-
^
LO
o
o
o
o
o
^
^
o
CD
A
T~
LO
CN
CO
CN
CT>
O
O
O
O
O
^
^
^.
^~
CO
oo
CN
oo
=
CT>
O
O
O
LO
o
LO
CN
^
^
CO
CN
CD
OO
oo
CN
~~
,
O
o
o
o
o
CD
A
T~
LO
OO
CN
CN
,
O
o
o
o
CN
LO
^~
-
^.
^J
>
,
O
o
o
o
o
o
-
CT>
"*
>
,
O
o
o
o
o
CD
A
CN
CN
CO
CO
CT>
>
OO
o
o
o
o
o
^
^
CO
CN
CO
CO
LO
CT>
CN
^~
^_
5
o
o
o
o
^
^
o
CD
A
CT)
^~
^
OO
"*
X
CT>
O
O
1
CO
oo
CD
LO
o
CD
A
OO
CD
oo
CD
^
CO
LO
,
_l
<
o
January 1999
5-22
Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
u
4)
a cc
v _
S .2
I
I
u
4*
s - .2
3 w
oT8
il
ro in
H. ฃ
in ฃ
01 0
*; ra
= 01
0 CO
ro
H.
ai in
= c g
o -
ra i
H. 3
O
I
:
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
o
CO
:
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
o
,_
CN
:
o
o
o
o
CT>
^
-
-
LO
CO
=
:
o
o
o
o
,
o
o
o
CD
~~
:
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
o
CO
"*
o
CD
o
o
o
CN
^
CN
LO
-
-
CD
CN
>
:
o
o
o
o
,
o
o
o
CO
T~
>
:
o
o
o
o
,
o
o
o
CO
>
:
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
CN
CO
CN
~~
\
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
o
LO
X
I-
o
o
o
o
CN
^
o
CN
CN
CN
^
CO
CN
CN
_l
<
O
January 1999
5-23 Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit 5-18 . SDWIS Enforcement and Compliance Summary Information Reported
for Local Government-Owned Public Water Systems
Region
1
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIM
IX
X
Facilities
in
Universe
22,499
36,155
38,443
57,558
106,252
28,233
12,979
13,623
20,139
20,607
Facilities in
Search
2,083
3,669
4,778
6,939
10,865
5,715
4,447
2,056
2,444
3,184
Number of
Visits *
722
1,891
535
3,672
6,060
638
1,620
836
251
267
Total
Enforcement
Actions **
3,897
4,521
9,575
14,863
27,908
8,138
13,459
6,277
1,591
4,313
% State
Lead
99%
95%
98%
97%
98%
95%
99%
97%
76%
97%
% Federal
Lead
1%
5%
2%
3%
2%
5%
1%
3%
24%
3%
* Number of visits is not a required field in SDWIS; much of the data are not reported by the states.
** Number of enforcement actions is a required field in SDWIS; therefore, there is no relationship between
number of visits and number of enforcement actions.
January 1999
5-24
Compliance and Enforcement History
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
6. REVIEW OF MAJOR LEGAL ACTIONS
This chapter summarizes major cases that have affected the local government sector and contains
information on supplemental environmental projects (SEPs) negotiated in some cases. As indicated in
EPA' s Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Accomplishments Reports from 1992 to 1997, many
significant enforcement actions were resolved involving the local government sector. Appendix E
presents examples of environment related law violations and enforcement cases against local
governments. As shown in Appendix E, the 147 cases can be categorized as follows:
CAA-8 cases
CERCLA-31 cases
CWA-67 cases
SOW A-12 cases
Ocean Dumping Ban Act and Marine Protective Research and Sanctuaries Act-4 cases
RCRA-7 cases
TSCA/FIFRA/EPCRA-14 cases
Multimedia-4 cases.
6.1 SELECTED ENFORCEMENT CASES
This section features 12 examples of enforcement cases resolved between 1992 and 1997 involving the
local government sector. One case involves CAA violations, three involve CWA violations, two
involve SDWA violations, one involves a RCRA violation, three involve CERCLA violations, and two
involve TSCA violations. Nine of the 12 cases resulted in the assessment of a penalty. Penalties
ranged from $5,500 to $2.8 million. In the CWA case U.S. v. City o/Hoboken, NJ (1994), the
Hoboken, Union City, Weehawken Sewerage Authority agreed to pay stipulated penalties in the
amount of $2.8 million for its violations of a January 1991 consent decree. This $2.8 million includes a
January 1999 6-1 Review of Major Legal Actions
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
payment of $1,152,000 that will be made to EPA, $850,000 to the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection, and the remainder to the Interstate Sanitation Commission.
Some of the settlements required defendants to initiate cleanup projects for the remedial action.
In U.S. v. School District of Philadelphia, PA (1997): a complaint and consent decree was filed that
seeks the cleanup and disposal of PCBs that are in 29 transformers located at 12 schools. The school
district must also comply with the PCB rule and implement a PCB management plan. The plan would
provide for the repair, inspection, cleanup, and proper disposal of PCB-contaminated materials. The
school district must remove or upgrade all of the PCB transformers within 3 years and submit bimonthly
progress reports to EPA to facilitate monitoring of the school district' s cleanup efforts.
U.S. v. Kansas Bureau of Water (1995) involved the Kansas' Bureau of Water issuing 25 wastewater
treatment orders against various municipalities and trailer courts in Kansas. The consent orders to
cities, including Lawrence, Topeka, and Leavenworth, initiate projects to eliminate the discharge of
water treatment sludge to streams. The orders to trailer courts in Pittsburg, Kansas, have resulted in
ongoing efforts to form sewer districts that will be connected to the Pittsburg wastewater treatment
plant. These sewer districts will help eliminate sewage discharges into abandoned mine shafts.
In U.S. v. City and County of Denver, CO (1995), violations included an exceedence of performance
standards by air emissions from the treatment plant on two occasions, failure to notify EPA and the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, failure to recycle vapor-phase carbon units
and implement change-out procedures, and failure to submit a schedule for proposed corrective
measures. The city will pay a penalty of $79,550.
In U.S. v. City of San Diego, CA (1997), a stipulated final order settled an enforcement action that
addressed deficiencies with San Diego' s sewage treatment facilities. The order calls for the city to
continue work on infrastructure projects, replace 200 miles of decaying concrete sewers, audit pump
stations and force mains, increase efforts to reduce grease loadings to the system, and upgrade its data
collection and modeling capabilities. The order also requires $60 to $200 million for projects.
In the 1996 CWA case of U.S. v. City ofBlackhawk, CO, the city allowed the illegal construction of
a water supply pump station on Clear Creek (without a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CWA permit),
including excavation and backfilling of about 1,800 square feet of river bed on the north fork of Clear
January 1999 6-2 Review of Major Legal Actions
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Creek. The result was a temporary loss of wetlands and destruction of aquatic life. The penalty
payment was $61,515.
In U.S. v. Town of Hempstead, 7VY(1997), the town had two violations: an unpermitted discharge
into an underground injection well and the endangerment of a Department of Highways facility in
Roosevelt. An administrative/consent order was issued that required the town to implement a
compliance/closure plan, pay a $5,500 penalty, perform a facility audit, and provide employee training.
The town will: 1) inventory and address facilities where there may be Class V injection wells, 2) test
for pesticides, and 3) keep the public informed of the status of closure implementation at the Roosevelt
facility.
In U.S. v. City of New York Department of Transportation, 7V7(1995 and 1997), the city
generated hazardous paint chips during bridge repainting operations without a RCRA identification
number or manifests, and stored wastes without a permit or authorization. A joint penalty (with
contractor) of $25,000 was assessed and an administrative consent agreement/consent order (CACO)
issued. The city drafted a lead-based paint removal protocol, the implementation of which will cost the
city more than $5 million. The city must pay a civil penalty of $145,000.
In the CERCLA case U.S. v. City ofAlgoma, Algoma Municipal Landfill, WI, settled in 1992, a
consent decree was issued requiring the city and eight potentially responsible parties to implement the
remedy selected by the record of decision. Defendants will reimburse EPA and the state for their future
oversight costs and pay 90 percent of EPA' s past oversight costs. Settlement is for $1.3 million.
Monitoring detected an exceedance of the maximum contaminant levels for cadmium, iron, and
manganese.
The case of U.S. v. City of Jacksonville, AR (1994), involved two consent decrees that were lodged
for the Jacksonville and Rogers Road Municipal Landfill Superfund Sites. Both sites have soils
contaminated with dioxin that was produced by a herbicide manufacturer. An estimated 800 cubic
yards of soil is contaminated. The city agreed to pay $100,000 in past costs.
In U.S. v. Montgomery County Solid Waste District (MCSWD), Moraine, OH (1996), excess
waste from an incinerator operated by the MCSWD was sent to a municipal landfill. Thirty-one
municipalities are members of the MCSWD. The landfilled waste included commercial or industrial
waste containing hazardous substances. The defendants will pay $60,000 for previous oversight costs
and 50 percent of remaining oversight costs.
January 1999 6-3 Review of Major Legal Actions
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
U.S. v. New York City, NY Board of Education, which was settled in 1996, involved an allegation
that the head of the board' s Asbestos Task Force knowingly submitted false information on 375
Asbestos Hazards Emergency Response Act (AHERA) management plans. A CACO was issued
under AHERA that requires a payment of $1.5 million, systematic reinspection of each of the 1,069
schools for asbestos, and the preparation of new management plans to ensure that all buildings are in
compliance.
6.2 SUPPLEMENTAL ENVTRONMENTAL PROJECTS
SEPs are compliance agreements that reduce a facility' s stipulated penally in return for an
environmental project that exceeds the value of the reduction. Often, these projects fund pollution
prevention activities that can significantly reduce the future pollutant loadings of a facility. Exhibit 6-1
presents examples of SEPs negotiated as part of case settlements with local governments. It should be
noted that the information contained in Exhibit 6-1 is not comprehensive and provides only a sample of
the types of SEPs developed for local governments.
January 1999 6-4 Review of Major Legal Actions
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
s
=
0)
o
o
u
o
u
4*
PH
=
o
M
u
"a
a
s
"a
S
C
X
>< o
w "ns <" "ns
i i ^ ^ .
CL ^
^>
(/) CB
.E , *t
I 1 of
'g o >
-^ o ce
o
o
o
O)
o
o
o
f>
Purchase of equipment used to
de-ice runways will reduce the
amount of the de-icing fluid,
ethylene glycol, that is needed.
o
c
c
c o
B ^
"3 =!
= T3
O
CL ce
EPCRA
^~
^2
til
2 O <
o
o
o
o
LO
O)
1
o
c
-^
Treatment and reuse of
wastewater and sludge. By the
year 2001, Honolulu will
recycle 10 million gallons of
wastewater per day.
O
E
CM
%
- ~ฐ E
^ ง ฃ ft
CO .- D) U-1
, !=
ฑฑ O
O I
January 1999
6-5
Review of Major Legal Actions
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
7. COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES
AND INITIATIVES
During the 1990s, many regulatory agencies, including EPA, have focused on designing
programs that help industry comply with environmental requirements. One of the sectors to
benefit from such programs is local governments. This chapter highlights the activities and
initiatives designed by EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to improve and
facilitate local government compliance with environmental statutes and regulations. The chapter
concludes with information on various associations and organizations relevant to local
governments.
7.1 EPA INITIATIVES AND VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS
National Small Flows Clearinghouse
Funded by EPA, the National Small Flows Clearinghouse (NSFC) provides information about
innovative, low-cost wastewater treatments for small communities (i.e., communities with
populations less than 10,000). Emphasis is placed on finding practical, alternative solutions for
"small flows" wastewater problems. A "small flows" system is one that has 1 million gallons or
less of wastewater flowing through it each day, ranging from septic systems to small sewage
treatment plants. NSFC helps homeowners, renters, citizens' groups, local industry leaders,
research scientists, educators, local and state government officials, and related professionals.
The program addresses a range of wastewater-related topics, including treatment technologies,
design and monitoring information, planning strategies, regulations, and education. (Contact:
NSFC at (800) 624-8301, email at webmaster@estd.wvu.edu, or visit NSFC's website at
http://names.nsfc.wvu.edu/nsfc/.)
Project XL for Communities
Project XL was initiated in March 1995 as part of President Clinton's Reinventing Environmental
Regulation initiative. This project seeks to achieve cost-effective environmental benefits by
providing participants regulatory flexibility on the condition that they produce greater
environmental benefits. EPA and program participants negotiate and sign a final project
agreement that details specific environmental objectives that the regulated entity shall satisfy.
EPA provides regulatory flexibility as an incentive for the participant's superior environmental
performance. Participants are encouraged to seek stakeholder support from local governments,
January 1999 7-1 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
businesses, and environmental groups. EPA hopes to implement 50 pilot projects in four
categories, including industrial facilities, communities, and government facilities regulated by
EPA. Applications will be accepted on a rolling basis. For additional information regarding XL
projects, including application procedures and criteria, see the April 23, 1997 Federal Register
Notice. (Contact: Fax-on-Demand Hotline at (202) 260-8590, Web: http://yosemite.epa.gov/
xl/xl_home.nsf/all/homepage or http://www.epa.gov/ProjectXL, or Christopher Knopes at EPA's
Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation at (202) 260-9298.)
Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Initiative
EPA's Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Initiative is designed to empower states,
communities, and other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together in a timely
manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and sustainably reuse Brownfields. A Brownfield is a
site, or portion thereof, that has actual or perceived contamination and an active potential for
redevelopment or reuse. EPA's Brownfields Initiative strategies include funding pilot programs
and other research efforts, clarifying liability issues, entering into partnerships, conducting
outreach activities, developing job training programs, and addressing environmental justice
concerns. (Contact: Linda Garczynski at (202) 260-4039 or visit the EPA Brownfields website at
http ://www. epa.gov/brownfields.)
Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed Protection
EPA's Office of Water has developed a Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed
Protection to inform watershed partners of federal money that may be available to fund a variety
of watershed protection projects. The information presented reflects sources available as of
September 1997. The Office of Water plans to update the catalog periodically. (Contact: This
catalog can be viewed at http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy/fund.html.)
The Watershed Academy
Public and private organizations, academic institutions, and citizens and their governments in
thousands of communities across the nation are forming partnerships and learning new ways to
manage their watersheds together. EPA's Office of Water established the Watershed Academy
to provide training for watershed managers based on local, state, tribal, and federal experiences
in implementing watershed approaches throughout the past decade. The Watershed Academy
provides technical watershed information and outreach through live training courses, the Internet,
and published documents. The academy also maintains a training catalog listing information
January 1999 7-2 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
regarding more advanced training. (Contact: Email the Watershed Academy at public-
access@epamail.epa.gov or visit the website at http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/
wacademy.htm.)
Climate Wise Program
In October 1993, President Clinton unveiled the Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) in honor
of the United States' commitment to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the
year 2000. Climate Wise, a project jointly sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and
EPA, is one of the projects initiated under CCAP.
Climate Wise is a partnership between government and industry that offers companies a
nonregulatory approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Climate Wise state and local
government "allies" work with U.S. industries to develop flexible, comprehensive strategies for
achieving energy efficiency and pollution prevention. They help local business identify and
implement projects that often require little capital investment, but promise a high rate of return.
Companies that become Climate Wise partners receive technical assistance and financing
information to help them develop and implement cost-effective changes. (Contact: Climate Wise
Clearinghouse at (301) 230-4736 or visit the Climate Wise website at
http://www.epa.gov/climatewise/allies.htm or http://www.epa.gov/climatewise/index.htm.)
State and Local Outreach Program
EPA's State and Local Outreach Program was created in 1989 and incorporated into the CCAP in
1993 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. This program forms
partnerships with state and local governments to help them increase their understanding of the
impacts of climate change and reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases. State and local
authorities are critical players in the effort to reduce these emissions, because they have
jurisdiction over activities that create direct and indirect impacts, including land use,
transportation, building codes, and waste management. Moreover, states and localities account
for a significant percentage of global emissions of greenhouse gases. The mission of the program
is to empower decision makers at the state and local level to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
providing them with specialized products and services.
Cities and counties become partners in the State and Local Outreach Program through initiatives
coordinated by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). ICLEI
organizes campaigns that provide incentives for local governments to conduct energy audits and
January 1999 7-3 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
emissions inventories, reduce energy consumption, and increase public awareness. The State and
Local Outreach Program supports energy and innovative ideas of states and localities by
providing a host of activities and services. These include technical and financial assistance
workshops and training, guidance documents, software tools, analytic models, and opportunities
for recognition and profile. (Contact: State and Local Outreach Program Website at
http://es.epa.gov/partners/ stateloc/stateloc.html.)
Small Community Outreach Project for Environmental Issues (SCOPe)
The Small Community Outreach Project for Environmental Issues (SCOPe) seeks to help small
communities obtain optimal environmental quality and public health while minimizing the
financial burdens of compliance by increasing the quantity and quality of local government
participation in the development of environmental regulations. SCOPe's mission is to minimize
the effects of environmental regulations on small entities by conveying the communities'
concerns and values to EPA at an early stage of the rulemaking process. SCOPe focuses on those
governments with populations under 50,000 that will be affected by a particular potential
regulation. SCOPe is funded through a cooperative agreement with EPA and is coordinated by
the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). NASPAA
is a nationwide network of 240 graduate schools of public affairs and administration and
university-based centers of governmental affairs. University faculty conduct the outreach
discussions and meet at least twice with local government officials to get their input into how a
potential environmental regulation might affect their community. Currently, SCOPe is limited to
small communities in the Southeast United States; however, NASPAA expects future expansion
of the program to other regions. (Contact: Deborah Rosenbloom of NASPAA at 202-628-8965
or visit the SCOPe website at www.naspaa.org.)
Transportation Partners
The Transportation Partners program was initiated as part of the CCAP, which directed EPA to
develop an innovative, non-regulatory approach to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the
transportation sector. The program was started in 1995 to support the voluntary efforts of local
officials, citizens, and businesses to improve the efficiency of transportation systems and reduce
the demand for vehicle travel. The goal of the Transportation Partners program is to reduce
carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector by voluntarily reducing vehicle miles
traveled. Effective measures include telecommuting, transit- and pedestrian-oriented community
design, and market-based reforms. These measures have significant side benefits, such as
reducing traffic congestion, increasing worker productivity, making neighborhoods safer and
January 1999 7-4 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
more livable, and generating revenues that can reduce the funding for transportation
infrastructure without increasing general taxes.
The Transportation Partners program has partnerships with approximately 100 local governments
and citizens' organizations. The program provides members with technical and outreach support
to assist them in implementing transportation measures that they have decided are appropriate for
their communities. The program also provides members with public recognition of their efforts
to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. (Contact: View the Transportation Partners' website at
http ://es. epa.gov/partners/transp/tranpart.html.)
Local Government Advisory Committee
The Local Government Advisory Committee is chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act. The purpose of the committee is to advise, consult with, and make recommendations to the
Administrator of EPA on matters related to the implementation of federal environmental
requirements by local governments. The committee's activities include changes in the regulatory
planning and development process to involve local governments more effectively; changes
needed to allow flexibility to accommodate local needs without compromising environmental
performance, accountability, or fairness; and ways EPA and states can help local governments
deal with the challenge of financing environmental protection, identify ways to encourage
innovation and explore ways to speed dissemination of new environmental protection techniques
and technologies. (Contact: EPA's Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
website: http://www.epa.gov/regional/lgac.htm.)
Small Community Advisory Committee
The Small Community Advisory Committee is a subcommittee of the Local Government
Advisory Committee. The purpose of the subcommittee is to be a standing advisory group to aid
small towns with environmental issues by improving and protecting the environment in which
they live. The committee is made up of 16 members from small towns across the country. The
members consist of elected local government officials, appointed officials, technical officials,
representatives from small water districts, and citizen activists. The objectives of the committee
include: changing how EPA and state agencies develop regulations; informing legislative bodies
of the cost of providing environmental protection to small towns; and advising EPA of the range
of technical service available to help. The Small Community Advisory Committee oversees the
implementation of the Small Town Task Force Report. The report was created by EPA in 1992
as mandated by Congress. The purpose of the task force was to advise EPA on how to work
January 1999 7-5 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
better with small communities to improve compliance with environmental regulations. (Contact:
Steve Wilson, EPA Small Community Coordinator at (202) 260-2294, or Small Town Task
Force website: http://www.epa.gov/regional/smalll.htm.)
Local Government Environmental Assistance Network
The Local Government Environmental Assistance Network (LGEAN) is a forum and
clearinghouse of environmental information for local governments. LGEAN provides
environmental management, planning, and regulatory information for local government elected
and appointed officials, managers, and staff. LGEAN enables local officials to interact with their
peers and others on-line. In an effort to reach all local governments, LGEAN publishes a
quarterly newsletter, SCAN, and manages both a toll-free and fax-on-demand service. EPA is a
partner in LGEAN and has provided technical and financial resources. (Contact: View the
website: http://www.lgean.org, or call toll-free 877-TO-LGEAN.)
Municipal Environmental Management Systems
EPA's Office of Wastewater Management and Office of Compliance have sponsored a two-year
project to assist small and medium-sized public sector organizations in developing and
implementing an ISO 14001 Environmental Management System (EMS). At the end of the two-
year project EPA expects that each of the participants will have all of the elements of an ISO
14001 EMS. Additional goals for this project include: evaluating the effect of the ISO 14001
EMS on the management of environmental issues; tracking costs, staff commitment, benefits,
hurdles, environmental performance, interested stakeholder involvement, and pollution
prevention activities; and communicating results and lessons learned across the public and
private sector. EPA selected the Global Environment & Technology Foundation to lead the
Municipalities Initiative and to provide on-going training, technical assistance, and EMS
coaching to each of the municipal organizations throughout the project. (Contact: EPA's website
http://www.epa.gov/ owmitnet/impiso.htm, or visit GlobeNet http://www.isol4000.net.)
The Mayors Desk
The Mayors Desk is an EPA-sponsored program started in August 1998. The purpose of this
program is to provide information dealing with environmental issues to mayors across the
country. The goal of providing such information is to improve the mayors' access to the policy
development process. An appointed EPA liaison operates the desk, acts as the Agency's point of
contact, and serves as an information resource who channels mayors to those people in the
January 1999 7-6 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
program offices who are working on specific issues and projects. (Contact: Richard Dickerson
of EPA at (202) 260-6029.)
Energy Starฎ Buildings and Green Lightsฎ Partnership
In 1991, EPA introduced Green Lightsฎ, a program designed for businesses and organizations to
proactively combat pollution by installing energy-efficient lighting technologies in their
commercial and industrial buildings. In April 1995, Green Lightsฎ expanded into Energy Starฎ
Buildingsa strategy that optimizes whole-building energy-efficiency opportunities.
The energy needed to run commercial and industrial buildings in the United States produces 19
percent of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions, 12 percent of nitrogen oxides, and 25 percent of sulfur
dioxide, at a cost of $110 billion a year. If implemented in every U.S. commercial and industrial
building, Energy Starฎ Buildings' upgrade approach could prevent up to 35 percent of the
emissions associated with these buildings and cut the nation's energy bill by up to $25 billion
annually.
The more than 2,500 participants include corporations, small businesses, universities, health care
facilities, nonprofit organizations, school districts, and federal and local governments. As of
January 1, 1998, Energy StarฎBuildings and Green Lightsฎ Program participants have reduced
their annual energy use by 7 billion kilowatt hours and annually save more than $517 million. By
joining, participants agree to upgrade 90 percent of their owned facilities with energy-efficient
lighting and 50 percent of their owned facilities with whole-building upgrades, where profitable,
over a seven-year period. Energy Starฎ participants first reduce their energy loads with the
Green Lightsฎ approach to building tune-ups, then focus on "right sizing" their heating and
cooling equipment to match their new energy needs. EPA predicts this strategy will prevent
more than 5.5 MMTCE of carbon dioxide by the year 2000. EPA's Office of Air and Radiation
is responsible for operating the Energy Starฎ Buildings and Green Lightsฎ Program. (Contact:
Energy Star Hotline, 1-888-STAR-YES (1-888-872-7937) or Maria Tikoff Vargas, Co-Director
at (202) 564-9178 or visit the website at http://www.epa.gov/buildings.)
Indoor Environments Program
The Indoor Environments Program was formed in 1995 to increase the public's understanding of
indoor air quality (IAQ) and its effect on public health. IAQ is widely recognized as among the
highest environmental risks people face on a day-to-day basis. To address this issue, the Agency
uses voluntary relationships with public and private organizations, as well as the general public,
January 1999 7-7 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
to inform individuals and institutions about simple and low-cost steps they can take to reduce
risks. Using the best science available, the Indoor Environments Program develops and
disseminates information, guidance, and solution-based technologies. The program serves as a
catalyst for action by guiding research, using innovative and creative risk communication tools,
and building public/private partnerships. (Contact: View the Indoor Environments Program's
website at http://es.epa.gov/partners/indoor/indoor.html.)
WasteWiSe Program
The WasteWiSe Program was started in 1994 by EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response. The program is aimed at reducing municipal solid wastes by promoting waste
prevention, recycling collection, and the manufacturing and purchase of recycled products. As of
1998, the program had about 700 business, government, and institutional partners. Partners agree
to identify and implement actions to reduce their solid wastes by setting waste reduction goals
and providing EPA with yearly progress reports for a three-year period. EPA, in turn, provides
partners with technical assistance, publications, networking opportunities, and national and
regional recognition. (Contact: WasteWiSe Hotline at (800) 372-9473 or Joanne Oxley, EPA
Program Manager, (703) 308-0199.)
NICE3
The U.S. Department of Energy sponsors a grant program called National Industrial
Competitiveness through Energy, Environment, and Economics (NICE3). The NICE3 program
provides funding to state and industry partnerships (large and small businesses) for projects
demonstrating advances in energy efficiency and clean production technologies. The goal of the
NICE3 program is to demonstrate the performance and economics of innovative technologies in
the U.S., leading to the commercialization of improved industrial manufacturing processes.
These processes should conserve energy, reduce waste, and improve industrial cost-
competitiveness. Industry applicants must submit project proposals through a state energy,
pollution prevention, or business development office. Awardees receive a one-time, three-year
grant of up to $400,000, representing up to 50 percent of a project's total cost. In addition, up to
$25,000 is available to support the state applicant's cost share. (Contact: View the website at
http//www.oit.doe.gov/Access/nice3; Steve Blazek, DOE, (303) 75-4723; orEricHass, DOE,
(303) 275-4728.)
January 1999 7-8 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Design for the Environment
The Design for the Environment (DfE) is working with several industries to identify cost-
effective pollution prevention strategies that reduce risks to workers and the environment. DfE
helps businesses compare and evaluate the performance, cost, pollution prevention benefits, and
human health and environmental risks associated with existing and alternative technologies. The
goal of these projects is to encourage businesses to consider and use cleaner products, processes,
and technologies. For more information about the DfE Program, call (202) 260-1678. (Contact:
EPA's Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse at (202) 260-1023 or visit the DfE
Website at http://www.epa.gov/dfe.)
Clean Water Action Plan
In 1998, EPA and the USD A were charged with developing a Clean Water Action Plan designed
to speed the restoration of the nation's waterways. This plan aims to achieve clean water by
strengthening public health protections, targeting community-based watershed protection efforts
at high priority areas, and providing communities with new resources to control polluted runoff.
This action plan is being built around four key tools: 1) watershed approaches, 2) strong federal
and state standards, 3) natural resource stewardship, and 4) informed citizens and officials.
(Contact: View the Clean Water Action Plan website at http://www.epa.gov/cleanwater/action/
overview.html.)
7.2 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE INITIATIVES AND VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS
National Drinking Water Clearinghouse
The National Drinking Water Clearinghouse (NDWC) was established in 1991 at West Virginia
University to develop and maintain services and information related to small community
drinking water systems. Funded by the Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service, the
NDWC is an extension of that organization's commitment to provide technical assistance to
America's rural water facilities. NDWC assists small communities (fewer than 10,000) by
collecting, developing, and providing timely information relevant to drinking water issues. Two
quarterly newsletters (On Tap and Water Sense) are available to help small communities with
their drinking water needs. NDWC also offers approximately 200 free or low-cost educational
products, including brochures, videotapes, and government publications, on topics ranging from
drinking water regulations to financial management. Furthermore, NDWC's databases offer a
variety of drinking water information relating to groundwater protection, water system design,
January 1999 7-9 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
water treatment processes, water conservation, and drinking water regulations. Technical
assistants are available to conduct a search to help individuals find answers to questions or refer
individuals to the appropriate organization. (Contact: Call NDWC at (800) 624-8301 or visit
NDWC's website at http://names.nsfc.wvu.edu/ndwc/.)
Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Community
The Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Community (EZ/EC) program is designed to afford
communities real opportunities for growth and revitalization. The framework of the program
addresses four key principles: economic opportunities (e.g., create jobs within the community
and throughout the region), sustainable community development, community-based partnerships
(e.g., partnerships with local governments, community groups, health and social service groups,
and environmental groups), and strategic vision for change (e.g., what the community will
become). This program is designed to empower people and communities all across the nation by
inspiring Americans to work together to create jobs and opportunity. (Contact: EZ/EC Team at
(800) 645-4712, email to ezec@rurdev.gov, or view EZ/EC's website at http://www.ezec.gov.)
National Rural Development Partnership
The National Rural Development Partnership, through 37 State Rural Development Councils and
a National Rural Development Council, brings together federal, state, local, and tribal
governments, as well as the private for-profit and non-profit sectors, to work in partnership for
the improvement of rural America's communities. Through an information-based, learning-
while-doing approach, the National Rural Development Partnership addresses complex rural
problems in new ways: building crucial intergovernmental and intragovernmental relations;
promoting strategic development; conducting partnership activities; making better use of existing
resources; intervening in a problem-solving role; addressing regulatory and administrative
impediments; and representing a new model of governance. (Contact: National Rural
Development Partnership at (202) 690-2394, or view the website at
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/nrdp.)
January 1999 7-10 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
7.3 SUMMARY OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
International City/County Management Association
777 North Capitol Street, NE
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20002
Phone: (202) 289-4262
Fax: (202) 962-3500
Website: http://www.icma.org/
Founded in 1914, the International City/County Management Association is the professional and
educational association for more than 8,000 appointed administrators and assistant administrators
serving cities, counties, other local governments, and regional entities around the world.
National Association of County & City Health Officials
1100 17th Street, Second Floor
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 783-5550
Fax: (202)783-1583
Email: info@NACCHO.org
Website: http://www.naccho.org/
In July 1994, the National Association of County Health Officials and the U.S. Conference of
Local Health Officers combined to form a unified organization representing local public health.
NACCHO is a nonprofit membership organization serving all of nearly 3,000 local health
departments nationwide-in cities, counties, townships, and districts. NACCHO provides
education, information, research, and technical assistance to local health departments and
facilitates partnerships among local, state, and federal agencies to promote and strengthen public
health.
January 1999 7-11 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
National Association of Counties
440 1 st Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 393-6226
Fax:(202)393-2630
Website: http://www.naco.org/
The National Association of Counties (NACo) was created in 1935 when county officials wanted
to have a strong voice in the nation's capital. NACo's membership totals nearly 1,800 counties,
representing more than 85 percent of the nation's population. NACo, the only national
organization that represents county governments in the United States, continues to follow the
traditions established by those early county officials. NACo provides an extensive line of
services, including legislative, research, and technical, as well as public affairs. The association
acts as a liaison with other levels of government, works to improve public understanding of
counties, serves as a national advocate for counties, and provides them with resources to help
them find innovative methods to meet the challenges they face. NACo is involved in a number
of special projects that deal with such issues as the environment, sustainable communities,
volunteerism, and intergenerational studies.
National Association of Towns and Townships
444 N. Capitol Street, NW, Suite 208
Washington, DC 20001-1202
Phone: (202) 624-3550
Fax: (202) 624-3554
Website: http://natat.org/
The purpose of the National Association of Towns and Townships (NATaT) is to strengthen the
effectiveness of town and township governments. It does so by educating lawmakers and public
policy officials about how small town governments operate and by advocating policies on their
behalf in Washington, DC. NATaT works to assure smaller local governments equal access to
vital federal resources.
January 1999 7-12 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
National Center for Small Communities
444 N. Capitol Street, NW, Suite 208
Washington, DC 20001-1202
Phone: (202) 624-3550
Fax: (202) 624-3554
Website: http://natat.org/
The National Center for Small Communities (NCSC) is the only national, nonprofit organization
devoted to serving the leaders of America's smaller communities. The mission of NCSC is to
provide small town decision makers with the tools to govern effectively and the skills to expand
local economies, protect natural resources, and preserve community character.
National Environmental Training Association
3020 East Camelback Road, Suite 399
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Phone: (602) 956-6099
Fax:(602)956-6399
Web site: http://www.envirotraining.org/
Founded in 1977 with support from EPA, the National Environmental Training Association
(NETA) is an international nonprofit educational and professional society dedicated to promoting
competency and excellence in environmental and safety and health training. With 1,600
members worldwide, NETA is the network for academic, government, industrial, utility, and
consulting trainers and training managers responsible for protecting public health, workers, and
the environment. NETA's programs and services include a certified environmental trainer
program; annual conference and workshops; environmental, health, and safety training skills
workshops; development of standards in environmental occupations; Internet trainers forum; and
a newsletter.
January 1999 7-13 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
National League of Cities
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20004
Phone: (202) 626-3000
Fax: (202) 626-3043
Website: http://www.nlc.org/
The National League of Cities (NLC) is the country's largest and most representative
organization serving municipal governments. Founded in 1924 by 10 state municipal leagues,
today its direct members include 49 state municipal leagues and 1,500 communities of all sizes.
Through the membership of the state municipal leagues, NLC represents more than 18,000
municipalities. Acting on behalf of local governments, NLC's goals include influencing national
policy and building understanding and support for cities and towns. Through a wide range of
programs and services, NLC assists local leaders in their jobs as policy makers and public
servants.
The National Pollution Prevention Roundtable
2000 P Street NW, Suite 708
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 466-7272
Fax: (202) 466-7964
Website: http://www.p2.org/
The National Pollution Prevention Roundtable (the Roundtable) is the largest membership
organization in the United States devoted solely to pollution prevention. The Roundtable
provides a national forum for promoting the development, implementation, and evaluation of
efforts to avoid, eliminate, or reduce pollution at the source. The Roundtable's voting
membership includes state, local, and tribal government pollution prevention programs. Affiliate
members include representatives from federal agencies, non-profit organizations, trade
associations, academic institutions, and private industry. Public sector members located in every
state and internationally operate programs that provide pollution prevention information and
technical assistance to thousands of industrial, commercial, and agricultural facilities each year.
This information helps many of these facilities reduce the cost of both production and
environmental compliance. The result is improved efficiency, increased competitiveness and a
better environment.
January 1999 7-14 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
National Rural Water Association
2915 S. 13th Street
Duncan, OK 73533
Phone: (580) 252-0629
Fax: (580) 255-4476
Website: http://www.nrwa.org
The National Rural Water Association (NRWA) is a federation of 45 state rural water
associations. These state associations represent more than 18,000 water and wastewater utilities
across America, making NRWA the largest utility membership organization in the nation. In
cooperation with state associations, NRWA is constantly working to improve the quality of
utility services for rural Americans, while protecting natural resources.
Public Technology, Inc.
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue., NW
Washington, DC 20004
Phone: (800) 852-4934
Fax: (202) 626-2498
Website: http://www.pti.nw.dc.us/
Public Technology, Inc. (PTI), is the nonprofit technology research, development, and
commercialization organization for all cities and counties in the United States. The National
League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, and the International City/County
Management Association provide PTI with its policy direction, while a select group of city and
county members conduct applied R&D and technology transfer functions.
January 1999 7-15 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the Association of Local
Air Pollution Control Officials
444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 307
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 624-7864
Fax: (202) 624-7863
Email: 4clair@sso.org
Website: http://www.4cleanair.org/
The State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators (STAPPA) and the Association
of Local Air Pollution Control Officials (ALAPCO) are the two national associations
representing air pollution control agencies in the 54 states and territories and more than 150
major metropolitan areas across the United States. State and local air pollution control officials
formed STAPPA and ALAPCO over 25 years ago to improve their effectiveness as managers of
air quality programs. The associations encourage the exchange of information among air
pollution control officials; enhance communication and cooperation among federal, state, and
local regulatory agencies; and promote good management of air resources.
Water Environment Federation
601 Wythe Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: (703) 684-2400
Fax: (703) 684-2492
Website: http://www.wef.org
The Water Environment Federation (WEF) is a federation of local educational and technical
associations, including some specific to wastewater operations. WEF guides technical
developments in water quality and provides the public with the latest information on wastewater
treatment and water quality protection. WEF also participates in the development and review of
government policies on water and environmental issues. WEF is involved in nonpoint source
pollution, hazardous waste, biosolid recycling, and groundwater contamination.
January 1999 7-16 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
CSO Partnership
P.O. Box 26505
Richmond, VA 23261
Phone: (804) 780-5293
Fax: (804) 649-9661
Email: CSOInfo@csop.com
Website: http://www.csop.com
CSO Partnership is a nationwide coalition of small and medium-sized communities with
combined sewer systems. The Partnership provides its members, and on a more limited basis,
members of the public, with critical information on all aspects of CSO regulation and control.
American Public Works Association
2345 Grand Blvd., Suite 500
Kansas City, MO 64108
Telephone: (202)393-2792
Email: apwa@bbs.pubworks.org
Website: http://www.pubworks.org
The American Public Works Association (APWA) provides manuals and technical information
on municipal management and regulations. Its Internet site provides general information on
emergency management, public buildings, solid waste, and water, as well as contacts for
acquiring additional information.
January 1999 7-17 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
American Water Works Association
6666 West Quincy Avenue
Denver, CO 80235
Telephone: (303) 794-7711
Fax: (303) 795-1440
Website: http://www.awwa.org
American Water Works Association's (AWWA) educational service provides teleconferences,
conferences, workshops, and seminars on various topics relating to water resources and
management, technical support on water issues, and Internet access. The small utility network is
a free service designed for water systems serving fewer than 3,300 people in the United States
and Canada.
International Conference of Building Officials
5360 Workman Mill Road
Whittier, CA 90601-2290
Telephone: (800) 284-4406
Fax: (562) 692-3853
Website: http://www.icbo.org
The International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) provides building service codes,
guidelines for new buildings, and assistance and education in building and managing municipal
facilities. The ICBO Internet site provides building standards, a building resource guide, and
links to related sites.
January 1999 7-18 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
National Association of Local Government Environmental Professionals
1350 New York Avenue, NW
Suite 1100
Washington, DC 200005-4798
Telephone: (202) 879-4093
Website: http://www.nalgep.org
The National Association of Local Government Environmental Professionals (NALGEP) works
to meet the training and information needs of professionals responsible for environmental
compliance and policy at the local level.
National Association of Regional Councils
1700 K Street, Suite 1300
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 437-0710
Website address: http://www.narc.org
The National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) is a membership organization of
regional councils that offers technical assistance, educational services, and public policy support
to regional government officials. Topics include economic development, water quality, water
supply, air quality, aging, housing, workforce training, and solid waste.
January 1999 7-19 Activities and Initiatives
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
REFERENCES
American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 801,
Washington, DC, 20036 (aceee.org).
American Water Works Association Small System Hotline
Aronson, J. Richard. Financing State and Local Governments. The Brookings Institution,
Washington, D.C. 1986.
Association of Municipal Sewerage Authorities, (www.amsa-cleamvater.org).
Azimi and Saphire. "Rethinking Resources: New Ideas for Community Waste Reduction."
(www. informinc. org/rethinking. html).
Barren, Thomas S., "Pollution Prevention In The Construction Industry: A Workbook Covering
The Chemicals Used And Wastes Generated By Construction Trades." Construction Industry
Workshop. 1997.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, (www. baaqmd.gov).
Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA). "Blueprint For A Clean
Bay: Best Management Practices To Prevent Stormwater Pollution From Construction-Related
Activities." 1995.
Bingham, Richard. Managing Local Government. SAGE Publications, Inc. 1991.
California Air Resources Board, (www.arb.ca.gov/html/brochure/arb.htm).
California Environmental Protection Agency. "Hazardous Waste Minimization Checklist and
Assessment Manual for the Building Construction Industry," Department of Toxic Substances
Control, Office of Pollution Prevention and Technology Development. Sacramento, CA. May
1993.
Center for Disease Control. " Cryptosporidium and Water." CDC Working Group on Waterborne
Crypto, (www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/crypto/crypto.htm).
Center for Technology Transfer and Pollution Prevention.
(ingis. acn.purdue. edu: 9999/cttpp/cttpp. html).
Cincinnati Water Works. "Database and Geographic Information System (GIS) for Management
of a Multi-Jurisdictional Wellhead Protection Area." Proceedings from the NWRI Source Water
Assessment and Protection 98 Conference, Dallas, TX.
January 1999 R-l References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
City of Rockville, Maryland. " City Services." July 1995. (www.ci.rockville.md.us/service.htni).
City of Rockville, Maryland, Annual Report FY 1996.
Clean Air Technology Center. {www.epa.gov/ttn/catcCenter).
Comprehensive Municipal Pollution Prevention Project: Inventory Phase, Regional Municipality
of Hamilton-Wentworth. April, 1995.
Cooperative Extension Service, The Ohio State University. "Conservation Improvement Projects
through Soil and Water Conservation Districts."
Cornwell, T.L. and Speltz, N. "Management of Cultural and Recreational Services."
Elliot, J.M., and Ali, S.R.. The State and Local Government Political Dictionary. ABC-CLIO,
Santa Barbara. 1988.
Environmental Health Coalition. " Toxic Turnaround - A Guide to Reducing Pollution for Local
Governments." San Diego, CA {www.environmentalhealth.org).
Environmental Defense Fund. "Pollution Prevention Questionnaire for Municipal Departments"
and "Procurement Recommendations Applicable to Multiple City Departments and Agencies."
Washington, DC, 20009.
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Listserve (EPPNET). Established and maintained by the
Northeast Recycling Council (802) 254-3636. To subscribe to EPPNET, send an e-mail
message to (lyris@aladdin.webrover.com) with SUBSCRIBE EPPNET
on the subject line or in the body of the message.
Epstein, L.N. and Skavroneck, S.A. "Promoting Pollution Prevention Among Dischargers to
POTWs." Water Environment Federation conference, Miami, FL, October 25, 1995. Available
from the Environmental Defense Fund.
Fairfax County Government: OEM's Preserve Brochure.
(www. co.fairfax. va. us/gov/dem/brochure/preserve. htm).
Fairfax County Department of Public Works, {www. co.fairfax. va. us/gov/dpw. htm).
Farm*A*Syst/Home*A*Syst. "Beyond Delineation and Assessment: Community Action to
Protect Source Water Using Farm*A*Syst\Home*A*Syst."
(www.ctic.purdue.edu/Abstracts/Castelnuovo.html).
Fisher, MJ. and Bishop, D.G. Municipal and Other Local Government. Prentice -Hall, Inc.:
New York. 1950.
January 1999 R-2 References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Florida Sustainable Communities Center, (sustainable, state.fl.us).
Forrest, CJ. "Risk Management Planning: Will It Lead to Inherently Safer Operations?" In
Pollution Prevention Review. Summer 1997.
Goodrich, J.A. (Editor). "Safe Drinking Water From Small System: Treatment Options."
AWWA Journal. May 1992.
Green Seal. "Office Green Buying Guide" and "Choose Green Reports." Washington, DC.
(www.gr eenseal. org).
Gruder, S. "Construction Resources: A Waste Reduction And Recycling Guide for
Wisconsin Builders and Contractors," University of Wisconsin-Extension, Solid and
Hazardous Waste Education Center, Madison, WI. November 1997.
Hunter, C.S. "Suppliers of Beneficial Organisms in North America." California Environmental
Protection Agency, Department of Pesticide Regulation, Environmental Monitoring and Pest
Management Branch.
International City/County Management Association, Smart Growth Network (SGN).
(www. smartgrow th. org).
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. U.S. Office, Cities for Climate
Protection Campaign Case Studies, San Jose, California Growth Management Plan.
(www.iclei.org).
LA Network. " Construction And Demolition Waste Recycling Guide: Recycling Construction
and Demolition Waste In The Los Angeles Area." August 1992.
League of Women Voters. " Tools for Drinking Water Protection." Video Workshop.
(www. Iwv. org/pubweb/resources.html).
Leslie, A.R. (Editor). Handbook of Integrated Pest Management for Turf and Ornamentals.
Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL. 1989.
Local Government Environmental Assistance Network (LGEAN) through the International
County and City Managers Association.
Maryland Department of Public Works and Transportation, Montgomery County. Dickerson
Compost Facility. (www.dpwt.com/SolWstSvcDiv/solid/compos).
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, A Current Assessment of Urban Best
Management Practices. 1992.
January 1999 R-3 References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. "When it Rains, It Drains-What Everyone
Should Know About Storm Water." Surface Water Quality Division.
Minneapolis Community Development Agency, (www.mtn.org/mcda).
Missouri Department of Natural Resources Environmental Services Program. National Ambient
Air Quality Program. (www. state, mo. us/dnr/deq/esp/aqm/standard. htm).
National Academy Press. "Safe Water from Every Tap - Improving Water Service to Small
Communities." 1998.
National Association of City and County Health Departments, 440 First Street NW, Suite 450,
Washington, DC 20001
National Association of Counties, (www.naco.org).
National Association of Counties. "Environmental Purchasing Model Resolutions from Local
Governments." (www.naco.org/programs/environ/purchase.cfm).
National Association of Home Builders. "Residential Construction Waste: From Disposal to
Management," interim document. NAHB Research Center, Inc., Upper Marlboro, MD.
National Environmental Law Center. "Accidents Do Happen: Toxic Chemical Accidents in the
United States." December 1996.
National Environmental Law Center. "Too Close to Home."
National Integrated Pest Management Network. Colorado State University.
(www.colostate.edu/Depts/IPM/csuipm.html).
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable. Washington, DC. (www.p2.org).
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable, National Association of Counties, National
Association of City and County Health Officials, and U.S. Conference of Mayors. "Preventing
Pollution in Our Cities and Counties: A Compendium of Case Studies." 1995.
National Rural Water Association.
Nonattainment Areas for All Criteria Pollutants, (www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/ancl.html).
Northern Virginia BMP Handbook. 1992.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. DRAFT "Pollution Prevention in Enforcement - Village
of South Charleston, Ohio." Office of Pollution Prevention. 1998.
January 1999 R-4 References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Olkowski, W., Daar, S., Olkowski, H. Common Sense Pest Control. The Tauton Press,
Newtown, CT. 1991.
Palermini and Associates. "Environmental Handbook For Oregon General Construction
Contractors: Regulatory Guidance." Oregon Waste Reduction Assistance Program. April 1994.
Palo Alto Regional Quality Control Plant. " Cooling Water Systems, Management Guidelines for
Water Quality Protection." Palo Alto, CA.
Pontius, F.W. (Editor) "Setting Standards: Risk Assessment Issues." AWWA Journal. July 1995.
Porter, D.R., Lin, B.C., and Peiser, R.B. Special Districts: A Useful Technique for Financing
Infrastructure. Washington, DC. Urban Land Institute. 1987.
Public Technology, Inc., the U.S. Green Building Council, U.S. Department of Energy, and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Sustainable Building Technical Manual - Green
Building Design, Construction, and Operations.
Putman, S.W. (Editor). "Chemicals Versus Microbial in Drinking Water: A Decision Sciences
Perspective." A WWA Journal. Boston, MA. March 1993.
Raupp, M.J., Van Driesche, R.G., Davidson, J.A. "Biological Control of Insect and Mite Pests of
Woody Landscape Plants: concepts, agents and methods." Maryland Cooperative Extension
Service. 1993.
River City Resources Group, Inc. "Environmental Handbook For Oregon Construction
Contractors: Best Pollution Prevent!on Practices." May 1994.
San Jose/Santa Clara Valley Water District and Water Pollution Control Plant. Water Efficiency
Program. San Jose, CA.
Santa Clara Valley Non-point Source Pollution Control Program. "Blueprint for a Clean Bay,
Construction-related Industries." San Jose, CA. 1992.
Science Applications International Corporation. "Pollution Prevention Training Instructors'
Guide. "March 1996.
Smart Growth Network: (202)260-2750. (www.smartgrowth.org).
Smith, J.W. and Klemanski, J.S. The Urban Politics Dictionary. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara.
1990.
State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators / Association of Local Air Pollution
Control Officials (STAPPA/ALAPCO). (www.4cleanair.org).
January 1999 R-5 References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Stegman, M. The Role of Public Housing in a Revitalized National Housing Policy. Cambridge:
Massachusetts Institution of Technology, Center for Real Estate Development. April 1988.
Stiefel, HJ. Municipal Wastewater Treatment: Privatization and Compliance. Reason
Foundation, LA. February 1994.
Sustich R., et al. "Chicago's 503 Enforcement Initiative: A Great Industrial Clean-up
Experience." Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, presented at the
Water Environment Federation Technical Expo & Conference, Chicago, Illinois. October 1997.
Taylor, A. The 1996IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion Directory of United States Facilities.
Washington D.C.: Integrated Waste Services Association. 1996.
Telephone conversation with Dr. Jonsson Balgard, Deputy Commissioner of City of St. Louis Air
Pollution Control Division, September 11, 1997.
The Hamilton to New Baltimore Groundwater Consortium, {www.gwconsortium.org).
Tim Richman & Associates. "Start at the Source: Residential Site Planning & Design Guidance
Manual For Stormwater Quality Protection." January 1997.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Environmental Assessment and Management Guide.
September 1996.
U.S. Conference of Mayors. Washington, DC. {www.usmayors.org/uscm).
U.S. Conference of Mayors and National Association of Counties. "Innovative City/County
Partnerships - A Report from the Joint Center for Sustainable Communities." 1998.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic and Statistics Administration. 1992 Census of
Governments. Volume 4: Government Finances. Number 3: Finances of County Governments.
1992.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic and Statistics Administration. 1992 Census of
Governments. Volume 1: Government Organization. Number 3: Government Organization.
1992.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Federal Register, Volume 61, Number 45. Lead; Requirements for Disclosure of
known Lead-based Paint and/or Lead-based Paint Hazards in Housing; Final Rule. March 6,
1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Combined Sewer Overflow Control Manual. Office of
Research and Development (EPA/625/R-93/007). September 1993.
January 1999 R-6 References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
(www. epa.gov/oar/oaqps).
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Technical and Economic Capacity of States and Public
Water Systems to Implement Drinking Water Regulations Report to Congress. Office of Water
(EPA 810-R-93-001). September 1993.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Plain English Guide to the Clean Air Act. Office of Air
Quality, Planning, and Standards.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Asbestos-in Buildings Technical Bulletin. Office of
Toxic Substances. March 12, 1985.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1996 Update. Office of Solid Waste (EPA 530-R-97-015). June 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1992 Needs Survey Report to Congress. Office of Water
(EPA 832-R-93-002). September 1993.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Community Water System Survey. Volume II: Detailed
Survey Result Tables and Methodology Report. Office of Water (EPA 815-R-97-00 Ib). January
1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Accomplishments Report, FY1996. Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (EPA
300-R-97-003). May 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program.
(www. epa.gov/opptintr/epp).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse
(www. epa.gov/opptintr/p2home).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Community Water System Survey. Volume I: Overview.
Office of Water. January 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Accomplishments Report, FY 1995. Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (EPA
300-R-96-006). July 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey, First
Report to Congress. Office of Water (EPA 812-R-97-001). January 1997.
January 1999 R-7 References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Part 1 of the
NPDES Permit Applications for Discharges From Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems.
Office of Water (EPA-505/8-91-003A). 1993.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Design for the Environment (DfE). (es.inel.gov/dfe).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. NationalPretreatment Program Report to Congress.
Office of Water (21W-4004). July 1991.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Enforcement Accomplishments Report, FY1993.
Office of Enforcement (EPA 300-R-94-003). April 1994.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Accomplishments Report, FY 1994. Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (EPA
300-R-95-004). May 1995.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Public-Private Partnership Case Studies: Profiles of
Success in Providing Environmental Services. The National Drinking Water Clearinghouse.
September 1990.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Enforcement Accomplishments Report, FY 1992.
Office of Enforcement (EPA230-R-93-001). April 1993.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Drinking Water Hotline/National Drinking Water
Clearinghouse
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Energy. Energy Star Program.
(www. epa.gov/appdstar/buildings. html).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Smart Investments for City and County Managers:
Energy, Environment and Community Development." Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation,
EPA231-R-98-004. April 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Study of Asbestos-Containing Materials in Public
Buildings: A Report to Congress. February, 1988.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Building State and Local Pollution Prevention
Programs." Office of the Administrator, EPA-130-R-93-001. December 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. WAVE Program. Office of Water. Technical Support
Hotline: 800/993-WAVE.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Drinking Water, Pollution Prevention and Public
Health." EPA/742/F-97/004. 1997.
January 1999 R-8 References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Incentives and Disincentives for Adoption of P2
Measures Under EPA's Water Program." EPA/742/R-94/006. 1994.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Wellhead Protection Programs: Tools for Local
Governments. 1989.
Water Environment Federation. A Global Perspective for Reducing CSOs: Balancing
Technologies, Costs, and Water Quality. July 10-13, 1994.
Wise, M. and Kenworth, L. "Preventing Industrial Toxic Hazards: A Guide for Communities."
INFORM.
January 1999 R-9 References
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Appendix A
Statistical Overview of Local Governments
[Note: Because direct education services constitute the overwhelming majority
of a school district's budget (i.e. school districts do not usually perform services
such as wastewater treatment, air quality monitoring) and have limited
responsibility for managing environmental issues, the discussion of local
governments in this appendix does not include school district-only data/
information. However, when data/information are provided for "total local
governments, " it does include school districts.]
The majority of data used in this appendix were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau. In all
instances, the most recent data available were used; however, because different data are collected
and published at different times, the dates may vary. That is, for one statistical category the most
recent data may be from 1992. For other categories, the most recent data may be from 1993.
The historic data presented in this chapter are in actual dollars and do not consider inflation.
During the 10-year period between 1982 and 1992, the consumer price index rose 25 percent (see
Exhibit A-l). Most of the data presented indicate that revenues, expenses and other variables
increased significantly more than this inflation rate.
While data in this document do not provide definitive cause for these increases, general increases
may be due to increases in local government responsibility for environment-related activities that
previously may have been managed by the state, increased regulatory requirements, or increases
in population. For example, many local governments saw their responsibilities for landfill
upgrades significantly increase in the late 1980s and early 1990s in preparation for the
implementation of new federal landfill standards in 1991. Wastewater treatment budgets also
increased significantly during this time in efforts to upgrade deteriorating systems and meet new
CWA requirements. This section highlights some of the details of these increasing budgets.
January 1999 A-l Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-l. The Real Value of $100 Million: 1982-1992
130
100
1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Year
A.I TYPES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
The three types of local governments discussed in this document are counties, subcounties, and
special districts. The following sections define each of these types of local government and
present information on the various structures and management systems that are typical of each. It
should be noted that while examples are included in each of the sections, the specifics of each
local government may vary. The organization, structure, and responsibilities of each local
government are dependent on the specific characteristics of that local government, including size,
location, and demographics.
A.1.1 Counties
A county government is a unit of local government established to implement state and county
policies, programs, and services. Counties can be distinguished from other local governments in
that they are the only local government entity established as a formal arm of the state
government. In most states1, counties were originally established to implement state services so
that citizens would not have to travel to the state capital. They may perform functions such as
In New England states, counties have only a minor role, and towns (townships) are used to implement state
government services. (Managing local government: public administration in practice. Richard Bingham et al.
1991.)
January 1999
A-2
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
budgeting and tax collection, and
provide services such as wastewater
treatment, water supply, solid waste
management, police and fire protection,
and housing. Many counties provide
services such as centralized
recordkeeping (county clerk's office)
and highway maintenance, and play an
important role in education,
transportation, and health services.
Typically, larger counties provide a
wider range of services.
Exhibit A-2. Populations of U.S.
Counties in 1992
Populations <25,000
Populations 25,001 - 249,999
Populations >250,000
Counties generally have higher
populations than subcounties or special
districts. Nevertheless, most counties
are small. As shown in Exhibit A-2,
more than half (54 percent) of the 3,043 counties in the U.S. had a population of less than
25,000. Conversely, 6 percent had populations greater than 250,000.
While county government structures can vary, usually the principal governing body is the county
board, also known as the board of county commissioners or county commission. County boards
vary in size and method of election. Boards will often have members representing a specific
portion of the county, as well as those elected at large. The chair of the board is appointed by the
board members or elected by the voters. This board performs administrative functions, oversees
general administration of county services and functions, and conducts legislative functions such
as approving county budgets or local ordinances. While the county board may oversee many
county operations, counties will often have some departments, such as the sheriff, treasurers, or
school board, whose heads are elected directly by county residents.
The county board often appoints a county administrator, or manager, to implement board
policies, and direct and supervise the administrative functions of county government. County
manager responsibilities may include appointing county officials, supervising all county offices
and departments, executing regulations, and submitting an annual budget to the board. Exhibit
A-3 presents the structure of Johnson County, Kansas, which is typical of a county management
structure.
January 1999
A-3
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-3. County Government Structure
(Johnson County, KS)
Board of County
Commissioners
County
Administrator
Bingham, Richard D. et al. Managing Local Government: Public Administration in Practice. SAGE Publications, Inc.: California, 1991, p. 42.
A.1.2 Subcounties
Subcounties include two specific types of governments: 1) municipalities and 2) townships.
Municipalities and townships have the same definition, but are distinguished by the historical
circumstances regarding their incorporation. Both are organized local governments authorized in
state constitutions and statutes and established to provide direct general government for those
living a defined area.
January 1999
A-4
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Perhaps the most distinguishing characteristic of municipalities is that they are generally defined
by population. Municipalities can take several forms, but are most commonly organized as
cities, boroughs (except in Alaska), villages, and towns (except in Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Minnesota, New York and Wisconsin).2 In a
typical state, those municipalities that have the largest populations and areas are classified as
cities, while smaller municipalities are classified as towns or villages. The classifications are
important because they often determine the nature of certain municipal boards or commissions.
However, these classifications are not permanent and can change as a municipality's population
increases or decreases.
Township governments (which include "towns" in Connecticut, Maine (including organized
plantations), Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire (including organized locations), New
York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin) are also organized by their state constitutions. In
contrast to municipal governments, townships are defined without regard to population.
Townships typically include a central urban area and its surrounding rural area(s). Townships are
typically subdivisions of a county covering a predetermined land area, as a result of the
Congressional township system of identifying land, with the exception of New England towns,
where township size varies considerably. Township functions are almost identical to those of
municipalities. Some towns or townships permit voters to make policy through direct
participation in local meetings. Other towns perform few formal functions, relying on county or
state governments, or private organizations for public services.
Approximately 96 percent of all subcounty governments had populations of less than 25,000.
Those same subcounty governments, however, accounted for 40 percent of the total population of
all subcounties. As shown in Exhibit A-4 and Exhibit A-5, the 53 subcounties with more than
300,000 people represented more than 20 percent of the population, but less than 1 percent of
total subcounty governments.
2 For the purposes of U.S. Census Bureau data and this document, municipalities include certain cities that are
completely or substantially consolidated with their county governments, operate outside the geographic limits of
any county, or for other reasons have no organized county government operations within their boundaries. The
following cities are included in this group: Anaconda (MT), Anchorage (AK), Athens (GA), Baltimore (MD),
Baton Rouge (LA), Boston (MA), Butte (MT), Carson City (NV), Columbus (GA), Denver (CO), Honolulu (HI),
Houma (LA), Indianapolis (IN), Jacksonville (FL), Juneau (AK), Lexington (KY), Lynchburg (TN), Nashville
(TN), New Orleans (LA), New York (NY), Philadelphia (PA), St. Louis (MO), Sitka (AK), San Francisco (CA),
and Washington, DC, as well as the "independent cities" in Virginia.
January 1999 A-5 Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-4. Subcounty Governments by Population Size, 1992
Size (based on
population)
<24,999
25,000 -
299,999
>300,000
Totals
Number of
Subcounty
Governments
34505
1977
53
35,935
Percent of Total
Subcounty
Governments
96
3.8
0.0015
100.0
Population (in
millions)
82150
81979
42,748
206,877
Percent of Total
Population
39.7
39.6
20.7
100
Source: 1992 Census of Governments. Government Organization, Volume 1, Number 4, Tables 7 and 8.
Exhibit A-5. Percent of Total Subcounty
Governments by Population, 1992
J
G <24,999
n 25,000-299,999
| >300,000
At the subcounty level, there can be a variety of potential government structures. The three most
common are:
Commission
Council-mayor
Council-manager.
January 1999
A-6
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
In the commission structure (see Exhibit A-6), a group of elected commissioners oversee the
city's executive departments, with each commissioner heading a different specific department.
Though commission forms of government may vary widely, all share several characteristics,
including small boards, at-large elections, and legislative and executive powers. The
commission possesses the authority to enact ordinances and establish spending (budget)
priorities; the commissioner is empowered to supervise administrative/executive departments
(public works, for example); and the mayor is elected from the ranks of the city council but has
few if any formal powers. The commission form of government gives both legislative and
administrative (executive) powers to one body. One drawback of this form is that commissioners
tend to become advocates of the departments they head, and that commissioners might not be
interested in issues that are not directly related to their specific department.
Exhibit A-6. Commission Form of Subcounty Government
Development Corporation
Board of Directors
As shown in Exhibit A-7, in the council-mayor form of subcounty government, the mayor is the
chief executive or leader. Both the councilmen and the mayor typically are elected. The mayor -
- as the administrative/executive chief of the city is directly responsible for overseeing the
various city departments. The board of directors has the same responsibilities and links to the
council as in the other forms of subcounty government. Most mayors serve two- or four-year
terms and exercise a wide range of formal and informal powers. They have influence over city
January 1999
A-7
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
council, oversee executive departments, enforce the law, resolve crises, and process citizen
complaints. Mayors that are selected by a city council typically exercise less power than an
elected mayor.
Exhibit A-7. Council-Mayor Form of Subcounty Government
(Madison, WI)
Development Corporation
Board of Directors
Executive
Director/
Utilities
ber 1
Mem
'^COUNClT
ber 2 Mem
Mem
ber 3
b^y
Partisan
Electorate
f
/
Mayor
/PLANNING\
s COMMISSION^
Water
Streets
Housing
Budget
Health
Parks
Bingham, Richard D. etal. Managing Local Government: Public Administration in Practice. SAGE Publications, Inc.: California, 1991, p. 41.
Finally, in the council-manager structure shown in Exhibit A-8, the elected city council has
policymaking/legislative responsibilities, and the city managera professional administratoris
responsible for administrative (executive) functions. The city manager is appointed by the city
council to act as chief executive. In this manner, legislative and executive functions are
conducted by separate bodies. That is, the council develops policy, while the city manager
implements council initiatives and supervises personnel.
In this form of government, the mayor may be elected, or selected from within the city council,
but has few executive responsibilities. This form of government is one of the most popular,
January 1999
A-8
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
particularly for small- and medium-sized cities and for suburban cities. However, few large
cities implement this form. This form is useful because it offers functional simplicity, clear lines
of authority, and utilizes professional experts.
Exhibit A-8. Council-Manager Form of Subcounty Government
(City of Rockville, MD)
Development Corporation
City Electorate
Operations Personnel
Bingham, Richard D. et al. Managing Local Government Public Administration in Practice. SAGE Publications, Inc.: California, 1991, p. 43.
A. 1.3 Special Districts
Special district are local government units that perform one or more specific services that are not
being supplied by other government units. Special districts are known by a variety of titles,
including districts, authorities, boards, and commissions. A majority of special districts are
established to perform a single function, but some have been given authority to provide several,
usually related large-scale services such as water supply, wastewater treatment, or solid waste
management. They may exist within the boundaries of a single city, across city and county
January 1999
A-9
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
boundaries, or across state lines. Special districts have been formed for a wide variety of
purposes, including:
Sewer districts
Water districts
Irrigation districts
Storm water management districts
Regional solid waste authorities
Water resource authorities
Regional port authorities
Regional air quality management districts
Fire protection
Vector control.
Examples of special districts include the Tennessee Valley Authority, which provides water,
electricity, and flood control services in the southeast, the Port Authority of New York/New
Jersey, which provides transportation services in New York and New Jersey, and the Sanitary
District of Decatur, which manages the sanitary sewer system in parts of several local
governments in Illinois. Exhibit A-9 presents the structure of the Sanitary District of Decator;
Exhibit A-10 presents the structure of the South Coast Air Quality Management District of
California, which is responsible for all aspects of air pollution control in four counties.
Special districts are the fastest growing local government unit in the United States, comprising
more than 35 percent of all local government units in 1992, compared to 10 percent in 1952.
This growth can be attributed to the benefits that other local governments see in developing
special districts as an alternative to the local government providing public services. Special
districts can often provide a service more efficiently, as their boundaries can be tailored to
provide services where they are specifically required. In addition, they are independent financial
entities, and thus are able to levy user fees or special assessments, rather than relying on taxes or
municipal bonds to fund their services.
While the Census Bureau does not provide population data for special districts, it does provide
data for the types of special districts. Special districts may be either a single-function or a
multiple-function district. A single-function district has been established to provide only one
service, such as sewerage or water supply, to the population it serves. More than 90 percent
(29,036) of all special districts are single-function in nature. The
January 1999 A-10 Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
D)
LLJ
CD
o
=
4*
Q
^
Ifj
Q
ki
ซ
+j
'S
O CD
o oj
cc ซ
o 2
CD H
o
O CD
CD .^
X Q
L1J LJ
cc <-
o o
'c "o
.C CD
o .^
CD Q
^
w
s
C
IS
w
CD
"ro o
11
CD
E
-l-ป
cc
CD
o
"ro
o
CD
Q-
o
D)
o
o
CD
= S
CD .ฃ
E g
LU
ro o
'O CD
CD '&
Q. i-
CO CL
5.1
w S
= S
Occ
n
CD
o
cc
cc
January 1999
A-ll
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
ซ
=
1
-w 13
.a u
+^ '
as -<
s-s
_ -^
ซ 2
'3 fl
i*
a -S
ซ5 S -o
ซM ซ ^ ^
0 S co o
4* O E
ซ oe m o
B S i5 ฐ
W * -p -^
ss | 1
*t IS
o ซ
-. s
O Q 'CO
5 v
ง ro <
ฃ 8
ง
c
L_
g;l
o E
O CD
c o
.i =
O CO
CD >
H3
nical
Services
*3t
CD O
>- a
^
w
CD
g
3 CD
M
Stationa
Comp
ECD
CO
c c
CD o
0 0
4 '
C
CD
CD
a
CO
c
CO
January 1999
A-12
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
remaining special districts are multiple-function in that they provide a combination of services to
their populations. Exhibit A-l 1 presents data regarding the type and number of single-function
districts, as well as their percent of the total.
Exhibit A-ll. Types of Single-Function Special
Districts
7000n
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
6228
1800
8
-a
Natural
esources
3470
5260
D) .9 >
1 *l
i
1156
3302
1710
395
CO
0 ^ ra
a: o c
co 5
A.2 THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET PROCESS
Local governments, like the federal and state governments, operate on a 1-year budget cycle.
During that one year, it is the absolute responsibility of the local government to manage its
resources and, for the most part, determine how and when the budget is spent. The specific
budget can be developed by several different parties, depending on the structure of the local
government. Basically, there are two types of budget processes: 1) executive and 2) legislative.
These processes are named for the party who develops the actual budget. Under the executive
process, the local government executive proposes a budget, which is then sent to the legislative
body for approval. This is the process used by the federal government. In the legislative process,
the local legislative body is responsible for proposing and approving the budget. In the cases of
local governments, the legislative body is usually the council or commission. This process is
practiced primarily by small local governments with a city (or similar) council.
January 1999
A-13
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
As with any entity that operates on a budget, the local government is tasked with balancing its
incoming money (revenues) with its outgoing money (expenditures). To accomplish this task, a
local government may use one of three types of budgeting:
Incremental budgeting - This is a process of setting annual appropriations based on the
previous year's budget, with small changes, usually reflecting the rate of inflation.
Line-item budgeting - This process lists annual agency expenditures for items such as
salaries, equipment, supplies, maintenance, and contractual services. This most
resembles a traditional budget because it lists the item and cost of each item. This is the
type of budget employed by most local governments.
Planning-Programming-Budgeting System (PPBS) - PPBS is a tool that requires
agencies to submit objectives and the most cost-effective manner to meet these
objectives. It is predicated on concepts such as cost-benefit analysis, program
budgeting, systems analysis, and cost effectiveness. Although not popular on the federal
level, PPBS may be practiced in the local level because of its efficiency. It has
generated more success in agencies that deal in material benefits rather than social
benefits.
A.3 REVENUE GENERATION
Local government revenue includes all the money it receives for use in providing services to its
population. These revenues are generated through several mechanisms, including:
Taxes
User fees
Bond offerings
Intergovernmental revenues
Local government-owned utilities
Employee retirement programs.
A.3.1 Taxes
Collecting taxes is the most common form of revenue generation associated with government at
all levels. The primary source of revenue for local governments is the assessment and collection
of property taxes. Property tax is a local levy on real or personal, tangible or intangible, property
January 1999 A-14 Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
(such as cars or real estate) collected once per year. Property taxes typically range from $.05 to
$4.50 per $100 of assessed value of the property. Sales tax is another major producer of
revenues for local governments. Sales tax is a levy on goods and services, derived as a
percentage of the price at the point of sale. The sales tax usually ranges from less than one
percent to five percent and can apply to most retail items and services. Local governments may
also implement local use taxes on hotels, automobile rentals or other items that are not
purchased. Use taxes are typically in the same percentage range as sales taxes. Local wage and
income taxes are another important source of local tax revenue. Income tax includes levies on
salaries, rents, interests, dividends, commissions, royalties, business profits, and other income. A
severance tax is sometimes levied on natural resources (e.g., minerals) extracted from the land.
Severance taxes are mostly used in the West, Southwest, and South for revenue and conservation.
A.3.2 User Fees
User fees are levied on individuals and businesses who use various public services and are
frequently used to fund the specific service for which the fee was collected. The implementation
of user fees has increased in recent years as local governments have been forced to reduce their
reliance on property taxes as a major revenue source. User fees have also increased because they
help local governments track the fiscal efficiency of each operation or service. Examples of user
fees include the following:
Sewage - Sewer system fees, including local hookup, maintenance, and use fees
Drinking water - Fees based on water use, connection fees, and system development
changes
Other sanitation - Trash collection fees and industrial waste charges
Education - School lunches, adult education tuition, municipal college tuition, charges
for books, gymnasium uniforms or equipment
Transportation - Road and bridge tolls, airport fees, water transportation fees, and
parking
Health and hospitals - Hospital charges (including per diem rates and service charges),
ambulance charges, and inoculation charges
January 1999 A-15 Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Parks and recreation - Parking charges, concession rental, golf course greens fees,
softball league enrollment fees, tennis class charges, day camp charges, admission
charges to municipal swimming pools, zoos, and museums
Housing/community development - Rent from public housing, street light installation
charges, and convention center charges
Electricity and natural gas usage.
A.3.3 Bond Offerings
A local government may also raise revenue through bond offerings. Bonds are basically an
"IOU" issued by the local government for a specific amount. Holders or "buyers" of the bonds
are promised full repayment of the IOU plus interest. Local government can offer both 1)
general obligation bonds, and 2) revenue bonds. General obligation bonds, often referred to as
guaranteed bonds, are backed by the local government, and as such, are deemed to involve less
risk to the bond holder. The lower risk to the bond holder allows the local government to pay
lower interest rates. Issuing general obligation bonds are the least costly method of borrowing
for the local government, but are usually subject to a voter referendum to approve a tax increase
to pay the interest on and fulfill the obligations of the bond.
A revenue bond is backed by the specific project it was issued to support. For example, if a local
government issued bonds to build a wastewater treatment plant, revenue generated from
operating the wastewater treatment plant (i.e., sewer use fees) would be used to pay the interest
on and fulfill the obligations of the bond. Similarly, revenue bonds may be issued for
construction of a landfill with the intention that tipping
fees will generate revenue to repay the bondholders.
Because these bonds are not guaranteed by the local
government, they involve a higher risk, but pay higher
interest rates. A voter referendum is usually not
required to issue revenue bonds. Such bonds may be
either short or long term.
It should be noted that many state constitutions and
laws impose, or have the ability to impose, restrictions
on a local government's debt limit. These limits are
usually calculated as a percentage of the total assessed
User Fees and Privatization
Contracting solid waste management
services to private entities is becoming
increasingly popular with local
governments. Approximately 30% of
the solid waste management
operations are contracted out by local
governments. Depending on the
contract or privatization agreement,
user fees may be collected by the local
government, or directly by the
privatized entity.
January 1999 A-16 Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
value of real estate within the local government's boundaries. The debt limit generally ranges
from 5 to 10 percent.
A.3.4 Intergovernmental Revenue
Three forms of intergovernmental revenue can be provided
to local governments by government entities at the state
and federal level: 1) categorical grants, 2) block grants,
and 3) revenue sharing.
For sewer and wastewater
projects, most local governments
depend on local revenue bonds or
State Revolving Fund (SRF) loans
as their major sources of capital
funding, while relying on user fees
to fund annual operating
expenses.
Categorical grants are tied to a specific program that the
federal government initiated. They allow little flexibility or discretion on the part of the recipient
(i.e., local government). The state revolving fund for wastewater treatment plant upgrades is an
example of a categorical grant. A block grant, or discretionary grant is under direction of a
national administrator. Block grants are available to local governments for a number of projects
within broad guidelines. An example of a block grant is the federal Community Development
Block Grant program, which can be used for almost any infrastructure improvement program.
In revenue sharing programs, local governments may receive a percentage of fees collected by
another government entity, such as state liquor revenues. Revenue sharing may also include
formula grants, where the recipient is allowed to receive and budget expenditures for assistance
based on an established formula. Often, these formula grants are awarded on the basis that the
funds must be matched (i.e., if the local government puts up $1,000 for a project, the state
government will provide an additional $1,000) by the recipient government. Federal and state
agencies will often provide formula grants for
road construction or environmental projects
that benefit more than one local government.
With each of these intergovernmental revenue
sources, the funding can be front-end funded or
funded through reimbursement. In front-end
funding, the donor gives assistance as soon as
the spending plan is approved. Funding
through reimbursement allows for more control
by the donor government because funds are not
given by the donor until the project is nearly
complete.
Local Government-Owned Utilities
Many local government operations pay for
environment-related services such as water
supply and solid waste disposal as a utility,
funding them through user fees set to cover to
the costs of the operation. Rather than
operating out of general funds, solid waste
disposal facilities may be operated with the
goal of paying its own way or making a profit.
Fees may be collected for residential pickup,
with surcharges for non-citizens, commercial
entities, and industrial disposers. In some
local landfills, citizens are allowed to dispose of
any nonhazardous or hazardous waste without
charge, while commercial entities are required
to pay a fee.
January 1999
A-17
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
A.3.5 Utilities and Liquor
Utility and liquor revenue includes revenue generated through user fees or other revenues
generated by a government-owned water supply, electric light and power, gas supply, transit
system, or liquor store. It does not include other revenues, such as those generated by utilities
owned by the local government, but leased to other governments or persons, or other
commercial-type activities such a sport facilities, airports, housing projects, radio stations, steam
plants, ferries, or similar activities that are considered "general government activities." Its also
excludes any revenue from taxes (including excise or liquor taxes), special assessments, and
intergovernmental revenue.
A.3.6 Employee Retirement Revenue
Employee retirement revenue includes contributions required of employees for financing
government administered employee-retirement systems (e.g., social security), earnings on
investments held for such systems, and the receipts of state payments for employees covered by
government systems.
A.3.7 Use of Various Funding Sources
Few projects will use only a single revenue source. Capital or construction projects such as
building wastewater treatment plants or adding capacity to a water supply system are often
funded by debt or grants, while operating, maintenance, and employee costs are generally funded
through taxes or user fees. It should be noted
that although bond offerings are a major
revenue generator, they are not included in
the data presented in this appendix. They are
included as debt and discussed later in the
appendix.
Revenue generation varies not only by type of
government, but also by government size.
Smaller local governments may depend
heavily on one or two revenue sources, while
larger local governments may have more
diverse sources. Funding also varies among
environment-related projects. Based on a
Throughout this appendix, the term
environment-related is used to describe
categories of both revenues and expenditures.
While nearly all operations conducted by local
governments have environmental aspects and
impacts, the ones identified below are
considered environment-related for the purposes
of this statistical overview:
Natural resources
Parks and recreation
Sewerage
Solid waste management
Water supply (Note: The Census Bureau does
not break out data for water supply for counties
and subcounties; it does, however, provide
data for special districts.)
January 1999
A-18
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
survey of small local governments conducted by EPA, it appears taxes are the most commonly
used method for funding storm water management, UST and AST programs, while water supply,
wastewater treatment systems, and solid waste handling and disposal are most often funded by
user fees. For more detail on local government financing of various environment-related
activities, see Results of the 1994 EPA Survey of Small Local Governments, EPA Publication
270-R-97-001, 1997.
In 1992 alone, local governments generated $679.4 billion in revenues. Of that amount, only 4
percent was generated through environment-related operations (Exhibits A-12). When
examining the environment-related revenues, approximately 60 percent was generated by solid
waste management.
Exhibit A-12. Environment-Related Revenues
for Local Governments: 1992-1993
Category of Revenue
Natural resources
Parks and recreation
Sewerage
Solid waste management
Total environment-related
Non-environment-related
Total local government revenues
Revenues
(thousands of dollars)
$495,014
$3,193,308
$6,913,062
$15,829,079
$26,430,463
$652,998,192
$679,428,655
Source: United States Total State and Local Government Finances by Level of Governments: 1992-1993.
Local governments will use a combination of funding sources for most of their operations and
services. Exhibits A-13, A-14, and A-15 provide examples of revenue generation for solid waste
management operations, special projects, and wastewater treatment operations. Note that within
each operation, individual activities may be funded by different sources. In particular, capital
projects are often funded through general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, or grants, while day-
to-day operations are often funded through taxes and user fees.
January 1999 A-19 Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-13. Funding Municipal Solid Waste Operations
Operation and
Management
Exhibit A-14. Funding Special Projects
Intergovernmental Funds
- Categorical Grants
General Funds
Property Tax Revenues
- Sales Tax
- Block Grants
Project Specific Funds
- Categorical Grants
- Revenue Bonds
- GO Bonds
PROJECT
Charges/User Fees
January 1999
A-20
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
4*
a
O
=
4*
H
ฃ
OS)
3
=
s
O L^ W
.0/0 C
OJ O
1 "i'
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
A. 3.7.1 County Government Revenue Generation
County government revenues increased by more than 130 percent from 1982 to 1992, or over
five times the rate of inflation. The most common methods of generating revenue are taxes and
intergovernmental revenue. These two financing methods provided more than 70 percent of the
$155 billion in total county government revenues in 1992. As indicated in Exhibits A-16 and A-
17, county governments have used each of the revenue sources in nearly the same proportions for
each of the periods shown.
Exhibit A-16. Revenues of County Governments (in millions of $)
Category of Expenditure
Intergovernmental
Taxes
Charges and miscellaneous
Utilities and liquor
Employee retirement revenue
Total county revenues
1991-1992
55,292
55,463
37,612
2,025
4,027
154,419
1986-1987
37,268
37,341
26,681
1,426
3,159
105,875
1981-1982
28,002
22,970
15,682
874
1,092
68,620
Source: 1992 Census of Governments, Volume 4, Number 2, Table 1
January 1999
A-22
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-17. Revenue Sources for County Governments
1992,1987,1982
1992
1987
35.2%
3.0%
33.5%
1.3%
1982
35.8%
2.6%
35.9%
1.3% 24.4%
CH Intergovernmental
CH Taxes
CH Charges and Miscellaneous
Utilities and Liquor
^ Employee Retirement Revenue
January 1999
A-23
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
A.3.7.2 Subcounty Revenue Generation
Subcounty revenue generation increased slightly less than 100 percent between 1982 and 1992,
or nearly four times the rate of inflation. Subcounty revenue generation was spread more broadly
among the available methods than was county revenue generation. The three most commonly
used methodsintergovernmental revenues, taxes and user feesaccounted for 80 percent of all
revenues. As shown in Exhibits A-18 and A-19, taxes were the most common revenue source,
followed by intergovernmental revenues and user fees.
Exhibit A-18. Revenues of Subcounty Governments
(in millions of $)
Category of Expenditure
Intergovernmental
Taxes
Charges and miscellaneous
Utilities and liquor
Employee retirement revenue
Total subcounty revenues
1991-1992
54,476
88,801
52,462
37,021
14,121
246,881
1986-1987
41,735
63,675
39,267
29,839
10,529
185,045
1981-1982
34,519
42,427
23,933
21,286
3,483
125,648
Source: 1992 Census of Governments, Volume 4, Number 4, Tables 1 and 14
January 1999
A-24
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-19. Revenue Sources for Subcounty Governments
1992,1987,1982
22%
15%
27.5%
22.5%
21%
1982
5.6%
33.8%
21.2%
16.0%
2.7%
19.0%
17.0%
Intergovernmental
Taxes
Charges and Miscellaneous
Utilities and Liquor
Employee Retirement Revenue
January 1999
A-25
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
A. 3.7.3 Special District Revenue Generation
As with other local governments, a special district may generate revenue through any of the
mechanisms described above, as legislated in the special district's charter.3 As shown in Exhibits
A-20 and A-21, charges and miscellaneous revenues (i.e., user fees) accounted for the largest
percentage of revenues for special districts in all three years shown.
Exhibit A-20. Revenues of Special Districts (in millions of $)
Category of Revenue
Intergovernmental
Taxes
Charges and miscellaneous
Utilities and liquor
Employee retirement revenue
Total special district revenues
1991-1992
14,843
8,087
27,502
17,626
490
68,548
1986-1987
10,783
5,491
20,847
13,115
416
50,652
1981-1982
8,271
2,846
12,687
6,940
217
30,961
Source: 1992 Census of Governments, Volume 4, Number 2, Table 1
1 Note that the "Utilities" category, while separate from " Charges and Miscellaneous," also includes user fees, such
as water fees that are based on water use. If these fees were included, the total for user fees/charges would be
closer to 50 percent.
January 1999
A-26
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
40.1%
0.7%
Exhibit A-21. Revenue Sources for Special Districts
1992,1987,1982
1992
1987
25.7%
41.2%
0.8%
21.7%
9%
11.8%
1982
41.0%
0.7%
n Intergovernmental
CH Taxes
CH Charges and Miscellaneous
CH Utilities and Liquor
Employee Retirement Revenue
9.2%
10.8%
22.4%
26.7%
21.3%
January 1999
A-27
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Special districts often collect user fees to generate revenue from the operation of water supply or
solid waste management systems. For example, 86 percent of the revenues to operate and
maintain publicly owned water systems are generated directly from the sale of water to
customers. Water systems also generate revenue through other types of water-related user fees
such as connection fees, inspection fees, and interest earnings. Exhibit A-22 illustrates the
significance of user fees in providing drinking water. Note that approximately two thirds of all
water supply districts generate revenue through user fees.4
Exhibit A-22 . Revenue Sources for Water Utility Special Districts*
Revenue Source
Total number of water utility special districts
No. of Special
Districts
3302
Charges/User fees
Service charges and sales
Special assessments
2260
644
Taxes
District-wide property taxes
Other taxes (sales, payroll, etc.) imposed by the
district
1475
99
Intergovernmental revenues
Grants, shared taxes, rentals, and
reimbursements from other governments
861
* The number of special districts in each revenue category will not add up to the total since
reporting districts may have more than one revenue source.
Source: 1992 Census of Governments, Volume 1, Number 1, Table 19
The 395 solid waste management special districts obtain nearly half of their revenues through
special assessments and service charges and sales. The remaining revenues for these special
districts come from district-wide property taxes, other taxes (sales, payroll, etc.) imposed by the
district, and grants, shared taxes, rentals, and reimbursements from other governments.
4 As presented inEPA's Community Water System Survey Volume 1: Overview (from all sources, total annual
revenues for publicly owned water supply are $22.2 billion).
January 1999
A-28
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
In addition to being a significant revenue source for environmental projects, user fees from
environmental projects represent a significant source of revenue for the special district as a
whole. In 1992, as shown in Exhibit A-23, environment related user fees (not including utilities)
accounted for nearly $4.7 billion, or approximately 17 percent of the $27.5 billion total revenues
collected through charges and user fees, and 7 percent of $68.5 billion total revenues collected.
Wastewater or sewerage fees accounted for the largest percentage of this revenue (see Exhibit A-
24).
Exhibit A-23. Environment-Related User Fee Collected by Special Districts, 1992
Type of User Fee
Natural resource related charges
Parks and recreation
Solid waste management
Sewerage
Total user fees collected
Revenue
(in thousands of dollars)
417,000
516,000
599,000
3,147,000
4,679,000
Source: 1992 Census of Governments, Volume 1, Number 1, Table 19
Exhibit A-24. Revenues Collected Through
Environment-Related User Fees Collected By
Special Districts, 1992
13%
11%
9%
67%
Natural Resource Related Charges
D Parks and Recreation
Solid Waste Management
D Sewerage
January 1999
A-29
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
A.4 EXPENDITURES
The expenditures incurred by a local government are those dollars it spends to provide services to
its population. Such expenditures can includes salaries for local government employees,
operation of facilities (e.g., wastewater treatment plants, libraries, schools), maintenance of roads
and sewer systems, social service programs, or debt on outstanding loans. Except in the case of
categorical grants or block grants that limit a local government's discretion, it is the decision of
the local government how and when it expends its budget to the extent it is authorized under state
law.
In 1992 alone, local governments expended approximately $685.3 billion. Of those
expenditures, approximately seven percent was spent on environment-related operations (see
Exhibit A-25). Within the environment-related expenditures, approximately 44 percent was
spent on sewerage.
Exhibit A-25. Environment-Related Expenditures of Local
Governments: 1992-1993
Category of Expenditure
Natural Resources
Parks and Recreation
Sewerage
Solid Waste Management
Total environment-related
Non-environment-related
Total expenditures
Amount
(thousands of
dollars)
2,653,440
13,321,667
21,594,594
11,412,627
48,982,328
636,332,492
685,314,820
Source: United States Total State and Local Government Finances by Level of Governments: 1992-
1993.
January 1999
A-30
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
A.4.1 County Government Expenditures
Counties expended more than $155 billion in 1991-1992. Of this, slightly more than 6 percent,
or $9.5 billion, was directed toward environment-related operations (see Exhibits A-26 and A-
27). This percentage was only a slight increase from 1981-82, when environment-related
operations accounted for just less than 6 percent of all expenditures. The largest increase in
expenses was for solid waste management, which increased nearly 400 percent between 1982 and
1992, or sixteen times the rate of inflation (note that the consumer price index increased 25
percent during this time period). Expenditures for natural resources and parks and recreation
increased by more than 100 percent, while expenditures for sewerage/wastewater treatment
increased by 80 percent.
Per capita data enable comparisons of expenditures across counties of different sizes. Exhibit A-
28 presents per capita data for environment-related expenditures, based on population size.
Exhibit A-26. Environment-Related Expenditures of County Governments
(in millions of $)
Category of Expenditure
Natural Resources
Parks and Recreation
Sewerage
Solid Waste Management
Total Environment-related
Non-environment-related
Total County Expenditures
1991-1992
1,562
2,810
2,406
2,711
9,489
145,825
155,314
1986-1987
1,203
1,770
1,951
1,356
6,280
96,959
103,239
1981-1982
666
1,242
1,333
680
3,921
63,186
67,107
Source: 1992 Census of Governments, Volume 4, Number 3, Table 1
January 1999
A-31
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-27. Environment-Related Expenditures by Counties
1992,1987,1982
1991-1992
30%
17%
25%
28%
19%
1986-1987
28%
31%
22%
Natural Resource Related Charges
D Parks and Recreation
Solid Waste Management
d Sewerage
17%
1981-1982
32%
17%
34%
January 1999
A-32
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-28. Per Capita Environment-Related Expenditures of Counties
(in dollars) for 1991-1992, by Population
Population
Average for all
counties
<10,000
10,000-24,999
25,000 - 49,999
50,000 - 99,999
100,000-149,999
150,000-249,999
250,000 -499,999
>500,000
Expenditures
Natural
Resources
6.95
13.32
6.41
6.16
4.43
3.60
3.82
4.20
10.08
Parks and
Recreation
12.49
7.49
5.17
4.69
5.92
7.88
10.31
13.65
18.83
Sewerage
10.70
3.55
1.81
2.57
4.95
9.81
9.74
12.13
16.12
Solid Waste
Management
12.05
11.38
9.73
10.77
11.36
11.86
9.97
12.27
13.44
Source: 1992 Census of Government, Government Finances, Finances of County Governments, Volume 4,
Numbers, Table 12
A.4.2 Subcounty Expenditures
In 1992, subcounty governments (which include both municipalities and townships, unless
otherwise noted) expended more than $246 billion. Of this, 13 percent was spent on
environment-related expenditures. Exhibit A-29 provides historic environment-related
expenditures for subcounties. It should be noted that by percent, environment-related
expenditures did not change significantly in comparison to total expenditures over the 10-year
period examined. As for the percentages of specific environment-related expenditures, they did
not change over the 10-year period either. It should also be noted that data for natural resources
were not available for subcounties. It was, however, available for municipalities only, and is
presented on the following page.
January 1999
A-33
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-29. Environment-Related Expenditures of Subcounty Governments
1992,1987, and 1982 (in millions of dollars)
Category of Expenditure
Parks and Recreation
Sewerage
Solid Waste Management
Environment-related
Non-environment-related
Total Subcounty Expenditures
1991-1992
9,032
15,439
7,808
32,279
214,396
246,675
1986-1987
6,343
9,803
4,970
21,116
157,643
178,759
1981-1982
4,342
6,906
3,424
14,672
108,298
122,970
Source: 1992 Census of Governments. Government Organization, Volume 1, Number 4, Tables 1 and 14
A.4.3 Municipal Government Expenditures
In 1992, municipalities expended $224.3 billion. Environment-related expenditures, which are
broken out below, accounted for 12 percent ($27.6 billion) of those expenditures. Specifically:
Sewerage expenditures totaled $12.4 billion, which is 45 percent of the environment-
related expenditures, and 5.5 percent of total municipality expenditures
Expenditures for parks and recreation totaled $8.4 billion, or 30 percent of environment-
related expenditures, and 3.7 percent of total municipality expenditures
Solid waste management expenditures accounted for $6.6 billion or 24 percent of
environment-related expenditures, and 2.9 percent of total municipality expenditures
Natural resources expenditures totaled $196 million, or just 0.1 percent of all
environment-related expenditures and .01 percent of total municipality expenditures for
1992.
Water supply expenditures, which are not included in the above numbers, totaled $15 billion.
This amount represents 7 percent of the total municipality expenditures for the year.
Exhibit A-30 presents per capita data for environment-related expenditures, based on population
size. It is generally noted that as population increased, so did the cost of environment-related
January 1999
A-34
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
services per person. For a comparison of expenditures of some geographically and
demographically diverse municipalities, Exhibit A-31 presents the total environment-related
expenditures, as well as per capita data, for five municipalities in various locations around the
United States.
Exhibit A-30. Per Capita Environment-Related Expenditures of Municipalities
(in dollars) for 1991-1992, by Population
Population
Average for all
municipalities
<10,000
10,000-24,999
25,000 - 49,999
50,000 - 99,999
100,000-199,999
200,000 -299,999
>300,000
Expenditures
Natural
Resources
1.28
0.64
0.53
1.17
1.54
1.35
1.83
1.94
Parks and
Recreation
54.67
29.35
42.28
51.36
57.71
60.93
82.67
70.99
Sewerage
80.69
68.28
73.46
74.66
63.16
69.10
78.99
108.46
Solid Waste
Management
42.89
32.94
38.96
36.99
34.26
41.42
51.95
57.76
Source: 1992 Census of Government, Government Finances, Finances of Municipal and Township Governments,
Volume 4, Number 4, Table 13
Exhibit A-31. Environment-Related Expenditures of Selected Municipalities, 1991-1992
Municipality
City of El Paso,TX
Santa Barbara, CA
Seattle, WA
Homestead, FL
New York City, NY
Population
(1990)
515,342
85,571
516,259
26,866
7,322,564
Parks and Recreation
Expenditures
(in thousand $)
21,427
8,019
112,370
8,241
360,889
Per
Capita
41.57
93.71
217.66
306.74
49.28
Sewerage and Solid Waste
Management
Expenditures
(in thousands $)
55,890
6,242
162,440
2,180
1,608,624
Per
Capita
108.45
72.95
314.65
81.14
219.68
Sources: United States City Governments Having 500,000 Population or more: 1993-1994; and 1992 Census of Governments,
Government Finances, Finances of Municipal and Township Governments, Volume 4, Number 4, Table 18.
January 1999
A-3 5
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
A.4.4 Special District Expenditures
Exhibit A-32 presents special district environment-related expenditures. Since 1982,
environment-related expenditures have accounted for approximately 20 percent of the total
expenditures for special districts, compared to 13 percent for subcounties and 7 percent for
counties. Exhibit A-33 provides additional detail on the environment-related expenditures for
1992, while Exhibit A-34 provides data on the purpose of the special district expenditures.
It should be noted that environment-related expenditures are considered differently for special
districts than they are for counties and subcounties. Since most special districts are single
function, their budget goes to providing for that one function only (e.g., sewerage). As such, the
comparison of environment-related expenditures to total expenditures basically provides a
comparison of environment-related special districts to total special districts.
Exhibit A-32. Expenditures of Special Districts 1992,1987, and 1982
(in millions of $)
Category of Expenditure
Natural Resources
Parks and Recreation
Sewerage
Solid Waste Management
Water Supply
Environment-related
Non-environment-related
Total Special District Expenditures
Number of
Single-function
Special Districts
6,288
1,156
1,710
395
3,302
12,851
16,185
29,036
1991-1992
1,169
1,624
5,375
724
6,852
15,744
55,187
70,931
1986-1987
1,291
1,138
3,695
221
4,821
11,166
41,273
52,439
1981-1982
707
670
2,634
63
2,523
6,597
28,224
34,821
Source: 1992 Census of Governments, Volume 4, Number 2, Table 1
January 1999
A-36
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-33. Environment-Related Expenditures of Special District
1992,1987,1982
10%
1991-1992
34%
44%
12%
43%
1981-1982
40%
11%
Natural Resource Related Charges
CH Parks and Recreation
CH Solid Waste Management
CH Sewerage
HH Water Supply
38%
January 1999
A-37
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-34. Purpose of Special District Expenditures, 1992
Expenditure
Natural Resources
Parks and Recreation
Sewerage
Solid Waste Management
Water Supply
Percent of Expenditures
Operation
80%
77%
53%
77%
50%
Construction
16%
18%
45%
17%
34%
Other Capital
Outlays
4%
5%
2%
6%
2%
Interest on
Debt
-
-
-
-
14%
Source: 1992 Census of Governments, Volume 4, Number 2, Table 6
B.5 CASH AND DEBT TRANSACTIONS
To meet the daily financial demands of operation and, when necessary, replace or expand
infrastructure, it is necessary for local governments to have immediate access to cash or
securities that can easily be converted to cash. Cash is defined as funds that can be used for
immediate cash disbursements, such as a checking account or actual currency. It is held by local
governments for a variety of reasons, including:
Daily transactions, such as paying suppliers or creditors
Maintaining credit ratings
Meeting unexpected cash needs.
Securities are defined as governmental or private stocks, bonds, notes, or mortgages that can be
sold on short notice without loss of principal or original investment. Investing in securities is
generally thought of "as temporarily putting cash balances to work," since the securities provide
a higher rate of return than do checking or savings accounts. Local governments may hold
securities to:
Pay for employee benefit programs, such as unemployment compensation, employee
retirement, and worker's compensation
January 1999
A-38
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Finance seasonal or cyclical operations
Meet known financial requirements.
Debt represents the amount of money a local government owes another entity, such as a bank,
individual, corporation, or other government unit. It is defined by the Census Bureau as all long-
term credit obligations and all interest-bearing short-term credit obligations. Short-term debt is
defined as any liability originally scheduled for repayment within one year; it is generally
incurred in the course of normal operations. Types of short-term debt include:
Accruals, which are defined as recurring costs of operations, such as wages and taxes
Accounts payable (i.e., money owed for materials, resources, etc.)
Bank loans, such as a line of credit or loan.
Long-term debt, defined as any liability with a repayment period greater than one year, can
generally be divided into two distinct groupsguaranteed and non-guaranteed. Guaranteed debt
has the "full faith and credit" of the local government, which means it is virtually risk free to the
entity who holds the debt paper. Types of guaranteed debt include mortgages, notes, and general
obligation bonds. Non-guaranteed debt does not have the "full faith and credit" of the local
government unit and is usually issued in the form of revenue bonds that have been offered for
capital improvements or construction. These types of bonds are paid back based on the ultimate
financial success of the specific project for which the bonds were issued.
Data on both local government cash and security holdings and debt are presented in Exhibits A-
35andA-36.
January 1999 A-39 Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Exhibit A-35 Cash and Security Holdings of Local Governments
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
Dollars
(Millions)
/ / /
/
County Subcounty
Government Sectors
Special
Districts
Cash
Securities
Employee Retirement
Funds
Exhibit A-36. Debt of Local Governments
300,000 -
250,000 -
Dollars 200,000 -
(Millions)
150,000 -
100,000 -
50,000 -
0
J
y
ฃ.
__
?
X
x
X
X
^=
7
X
X
X*
^
*
s
^
^
?
X
X
^1
i
g
7
2
^
^
^
/ / / / / / / / /
County Subcounty
Government Sectors
Special
Districts
Long-term, Guaranteed
Long-term, Non-guaranteed
Short-term
January 1999
A-40
Appendix A
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
APPENDIX B
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Public participation is a critical component of local government environmental compliance in
that it adds a layer of accountability to the performance of the local government. Public
participation ensures that citizens are informed of environmental issues affecting them and that
citizens are involved in decision-making processes from the outset, to avoid conflicts,
misunderstandings, and any consequent potential delays in municipal operations. Opportunities
for public participation involve a variety of activities that can be divided into two basic
categories: public outreach and education, and public involvement. Public outreach and
education tools are designed to increase the public's awareness, in this case, of environmental
issues pertaining to municipal operations. Public involvement tools are designed not only to
inform the public, but also (as is implicit) to encourage activism and involve the public in
decision-making processes. Public involvement also is important to foster good relationships
and open communication between citizens, operators of municipal facilities, local governments,
and other stakeholders. Tools that fall under each of these categories are described in greater
detail below.
B.I PUBLIC OUTREACH AND EDUCATIONAL TOOLS
Public outreach and educational tools are designed to gather and disseminate information and
increase awareness among the public. They are usually conducted through a variety of methods,
including:
Electronic access to environmental information
Training sessions
Public service announcements
Educational materials
Public surveys
Publications.
The following sections describe the various mechanisms used to facilitate public participation
and provide specific examples of each mechanism.
January 1999 B-l Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
B.I.I Access to Environmental Information
Citizens, local governments, and industry can access environmental information in many
different ways. Hotlines, clearinghouses (accessible electronically or in-person), bulletin board
systems, and networks all exist to facilitate access to environmental information.
For example, the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse operated by and located at
EPA's Headquarters in Washington, D.C. provides information on a wide range of national, state
and local pollution prevention and environmental management topics geared toward a variety of
audiences. EPA also provides telephone hotlines on a variety of topics including safe drinking
water and related regulations/compliance/protection measures. The National Pollution
Prevention Center for Higher Education at the University of Michigan collects, develops and
disseminates educational materials on pollution prevention, primarily for industry, academia,
government and non-profit organizations.
EnviroLink claims to be the largest on-line environmental information resource "on the planet."
The EnviroLink Library contains a comprehensive listing of organizations, publications,
government agencies, and more on almost 200 environmental topics, organized by environmental
medium. The Sustainable Earth Electronic Library serves as a clearinghouse for environmental
related publications. EnviroLink's Environmental Education Network is a clearinghouse of
environmental education materials. See www.envirolink.org for more details.
The Committee for the National Institute for the Environment operates an online National
Library for the Environment, which can be accessed at: www.cnie.org/nle. For the Chesapeake
Bay Program, the Chesapeake Regional Information Service (CRIS) furnishes a hotline that
thousands of citizens, students and teachers have used to find publications, fact sheets, technical
reports, referrals, and personal assistance to learn more about the Bay. The hotline can be
accessed by calling: 1-800-662-CRIS.
The Great Lakes Information Network links data, information, and individuals in the Great Lakes
region via the Internet. Linked information providers include the Great Lakes Commission,
Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory/NOAA, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago,
Michigan State University, and many others on topics, such as the environment and natural
resources; commerce, industry, and the economy; and education. The Network provides fact
sheets, newsletters, draft documents for review, current events, and more.
January 1999 B-2 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
B.1.2 Training Sessions
Training can be provided to a variety of audiences including teachers, municipal and/or industry
representatives and the general public. Training can be presented through workshops, seminars,
or conferences. Increasingly, training courses are provided to a select group of local trainers who
then train others and thereby create on-going, sustainable education programs. This latter format
is known as "training-the-trainer."
In 1995, the National Environmental Education and Training Foundation, in conjunction with
five other federal agencies, held a workshop entitled "Sustaining Healthy Ecosystems: Building
Partnerships for the Future." This workshop brought together representatives from public and
private organizations to work toward the design of an ecosystem management education program
for various target audiences. Workshop participants reviewed critical ecosystem concepts for
environmental education, defined target audiences, identified existing materials, and determined
strategies for teaching ecosystem management educational concepts and programs. This
workshop was designed to develop a strategy to teach ecosystem management; the products of
this workshop could include training sessions that teach these concepts to public citizens, and
private, public and non-profit organizations.
One Chesapeake Bay Program activity involved four workshops for residents of the Susquehanna
watershed entitled "Into the Susquehanna, Into the Chesapeake." These workshops were
designed to educate residents on the impacts of their pollution not only for the Susquehanna
River, but often ultimately for the Chesapeake Bay. The workshops identified the variety of
general sources of pollution; exposed pollutant pathways from a typical home to these water
bodies; and the impacts of such pollutants on these water bodies, particularly on water quality
and on wildlife. A major activity of the workshops was a "hands-on" project of painting the
sewers and drains with "Chesapeake Bay Drainage" stencils as a constant reminder to area
residents of the final destination of their pollution.
Other examples of actual training programs already in existence are as follows. In Michigan, for
instance, the Department for Environmental Quality's Environmental Assistance Division
provides outreach and training activities to Michigan municipalities, institutions, businesses, and
the general public on topics such as technical compliance, pollution prevention, waste reduction,
clean air, innovative technology and site redevelopment. The Illinois Department of Energy and
Natural Resources sponsored a major conference on energy-efficient residential construction.
The conference was cosponsored by ENR and the Energy Resources Center of the University of
Illinois at Chicago. For more information contact: Jan Halford, (217) 785-3412.
January 1999 B-3 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
B.1.3 Public Service Announcements
Public service announcements are designed to inform the public about events that have occurred
or will occur, and promote these upcoming events and/or products, using the various media
(radio, television, press). In Washington, the Department of Ecology produced 30-second public
service announcements for local radio stations across the state to inform the public about Earth
Day and related events, and thereby promote environmental awareness and encourage public
participation in environmental activities. The message asked listeners, "during April, try one
new way to help the environment." The Department of Ecology also discussed television
coverage with local television stations. Press releases were distributed to media statewide. In
addition, county/city coordinators sent Earth Day packets in response to 1-800-RECYCLE
requests from citizens in their area.
As another example, to follow up on a number of television newscasts on energy efficiency, the
North Carolina Energy Division decided to expand its energy awareness program through
television programming. In October, the Division began a television series on various
energy-related issues affecting state residents. The first one-hour show gave viewers an
understanding of the energy regulatory process in North Carolina. Another show had a "how-to"
format that provided a wide variety of measures that homeowners and businesses can take to save
energy and reduce their energy bills. The second show was timed to encourage energy
conservation measures before the onset of winter. Other TV shows slated for the future include
discussions on day lighting, renewables, energy efficiency on the farm and another how-to show.
The shows are done through the North Carolina Agency for Public Telecommunications, which
is a state agency.
B.I.4 Educational Materials
Dissemination of educational materials means distribution of these materials. Dissemination can
occur at the federal, state, and local levels on a variety of environmental topics pertaining to all
environmental media. Dissemination of information on any topic or issue facilitates access to
information on that subject. Information dissemination thereby heightens awareness of the target
audience - in this case, the public/local audiences, encourages public involvement and, in some
cases, promotes behavior change. Dissemination can occur electronically via the Internet;
through physical distribution of pamphlets and brochures (e.g., via mail); and through local
businesses or organizations that serve as distribution centers, (e.g., libraries, grocery stores,
utilities, and environmental organizations).
January 1999 B-4 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
One outreach program, the "Planet Protection Program," is run by EPA's Atlanta office and the
National Retail Hardware Association. EPA's local office provides (i.e., disseminates)
educational materials and point-of-purchase displays to 46,000 hardware stores and home centers
to encourage consumers to buy energy-efficient home products.
Similarly, municipal facilities (e.g., utilities) can disseminate information to consumers to
promote energy conservation and environmental protection. Electric utilities, for example, often
include information that is mailed along with monthly billing statements regarding installation of
compact flourescent lighting (CFLs) to save energy, and ultimately save on electric bills and the
cost of replacement bulbs. Utilities will often conduct free home audits to identify measures
such as this one that will reduce energy use and save money. Other measures include use of
newer, energy-efficient refrigerators. Home/office insulation improvements can be made to
reduce heating costs and energy loss.
The Water Environment Federation sells bill staffers (mailers) that utilities can include with
monthly billing statements on topics such as groundwater protection, water recycling, disposal of
household hazardous wastes, and more. WEF also publishes brochures, magazines, and other
outreach and educational materials. Over one million copies of the brochure, "Nature's Way:
How Wastewater Treatment Works For You," have been distributed to municipalities,
corporations, and consultants who want to provide consumers with an overview of the
wastewater treatment process.
B.I.5 Public Surveys
A survey or poll is one method of collecting information directly from people about people
usually through the use of a written questionnaire or an in-person or telephone interview.
Information obtained through surveys provides descriptions of individuals' ideas and feelings
regarding a particular issue; knowledge of an issue; beliefs; social, education, and economic
background; and plans for the future.
The Chesapeake Bay Attitudes Survey identified a difference between the public perception of
the Bay's problems and the realities. The public identified industrial pollution as the primary
source of the Bay's contamination; in reality, nutrient pollution poses the greatest risk to the Bay.
Using the results of this survey, the Bay Program can educate the public to rectify this
misconception, heighten awareness, and encourage greater involvement in restoring the estuary
and preventing further pollution.
January 1999 B-5 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
B.I.6 Publications (newspaper articles/newsletters/journals)
Countless publications, articles, and magazines contain articles on the environment as a forum
for informing the public about items ranging from regulations to events/conferences,
environmental degradation, remediation efforts, and sustainable development efforts. EPA's
Landfill Methane Outreach Program is designed to recover methane from landfills to use the
methane for energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). EPA recognizes program
participants and increases public awareness of state, utility and industry efforts to reduce GHGs,
while developing an alternative energy source, through newsletters, articles, media events, and
public service advertisements.
For example, Pollution Prevention Northwest is a newsletter published bimonthly by the Pacific
Northwest Pollution Prevention Research Center (PPRC). This newsletter regularly contains the
following sections: Featured Topics (up to three each month), which contains in-depth articles on
selected topics; Pacific Northwest Government Newswatch - summaries of pollution prevention
related activities occurring in the government agencies of the Pacific Northwest; Pollution
Prevention Digest - short bits of interesting information on pollution prevention from around the
country; aP2 Calendar - listing of some major meetings and conferences related to pollution
prevention; and About the PPRC - a brief introduction to the PPRC, including contact
information.
The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) is the international
environmental agency for local governments. ICLEI was established in 1990 through a
partnership of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Union of Local
Authorities, and the Center for Innovative Diplomacy.1 ICLEI publishes a newsletter, Initiatives,
that disseminates information to its members and to the general public.
B.2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT TOOLS
Public involvement tools differ from public outreach in that they actually give citizens an
opportunity to take part in decision-making and information gathering. Such mechanisms for
public involvement include:
1 ICLEI is designed to serve as an international clearinghouse on sustainable development and environmental
protection policies, programs, and techniques being implemented at the local level; to initiate joint projects or
campaigns among groups of local governments; to organize training programs and publish reports and technical
manuals on state of the art environmental management practices; and to serve as an advocate for local government
before national and international governments, agencies and organizations to increase their understanding and
support of local environmental protection and sustainable development activities.
January 1999 B-6 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Public meetings
Community visioning/brainstorming
Citizen/volunteer monitoring
Citizen advisory groups/committees
Referenda.
The remainder of this section discusses each of the above public involvement tools and provides
specific examples of each.
B.2.1 Public Meetings
Public meetings provide a forum for citizens and members of different agencies, groups, and
associations to come together to share information and voice opinions regarding a particular issue
and address the issue at hand using an organized, inclusive approach. For example, the Southern
Appalachian region is experiencing degradation of environmental resources, due to human
development pressures. An assessment was conducted to acquire information on the ecosystems,
determine the actual extent of environmental damage, and examine development trends. Public
meetings were held to solicit public concerns regarding terrestrial health, atmospheric quality,
aquatic environments, and social/cultural/economic issues. Citizens and members of national,
state, and local agencies cooperated to create a vision to manage resources in the region in a
sustainable, balanced manner. Based on the concerns raised and on this vision, technical teams
were established to address individual issue areas and promote sustainable ecosystem
management.
An EPA Region 5 " Gateway" initiative has resulted in a consent decree with Trade Waste
Incinerator (TWI) (Sauget, Illinois), which included a $200,000 allocation for the disposal of
tires and other garbage that have accumulated in vacant lots and abandoned housing.
Fly-dumping (the unauthorized disposal of construction and household waste material) is one of
the Gateway community's highest concerns. Town meetings will be held to enable community
members to provide input as to where TWI will place large disposal containers within East St.
Louis, Alorton and Washington Park.
B.2.2 Community Visioning/Brainstorming
Community visioning involves uniting stakeholders (public, private, and civic) from across a
community to create a vision for the future, define short and long term goals, and, in most cases,
establish plans or a strategy for action. Community visioning may also be referred to as strategic
January 1999 B-7 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
planning, because visioning projects inherently are planning projects (rather than
implementation). Community visioning/planning is based on a form of group dialogue that relies
on conflict resolution facilitation that attempts to build on decisions and ideas that are reached by
group consensus. Community visions are designed to reflect the full range of values of the
community's members, as well as a community's social, physical, and economic strengths and
needs. (Note that visions will include impacts (e.g., physical) that are both positive and
negative.) In certain instances, visioning/planning initiatives may be comprehensive, in terms of
including planning and implementation.
Chattanooga, Tennessee, was voted as the city with the worst air pollution in the United States in
1969. Its residents also faced deep problems of job layoffs, a deteriorating city infrastructure,
racial tensions and social division. Recognizing these recurring and deeply impacting problems,
several community leaders, including people from the Chamber of Commerce and the City's
Planning Commission, created Chattanooga Venture - a nonprofit organization with the goal of
using city-wide planning, with the full participation of the community, to restore the City's air
quality and develop a model of environmental, economic, and social maintainability.
Chattanooga Venture's first monumental task was to design and implement a project called
"Vision 2000," which brought together more than 1700 people, to take part in city planning over
a four-month period in 1984. During a series of meetings led by involved community members
trained in facilitation, strategic visioning, and nominal group technique processes, community
members were encouraged to dream about the way they wanted their city to be, and to organize
these dreams and ideas into a formal list of shared ideals. The community participants
collectively set goals and established priorities for improving their city. Diverse groups of
community members brainstormed, debated, categorized and organized their concerns. The result
of the many community meetings was a set of 40 goals for the city to achieve by the year 2000.
These goals fell under the categories of future alternatives, places, people, work, play and
government. The goals ranged from creating a distribution and transportation center to
strengthening the downtown area to solving air, water, toxic waste and noise pollution problems.
Today, many of these original goals have been realized.
The action from the goals led to 223 projects and programs with an investment in the community
of more than $800 million, and the creation of 1,381 jobs and 7,300 temporary construction jobs.
Because of the success of this visioning process, it is currently being modeled in cities
throughout the United States as well as internationally. Chattanooga Venture has compiled a
step-by-step guide for community groups to assist them with brainstorming, visioning,
January 1999 B-8 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
developing plans, and making choices. The projects that have resulted are varied in scope, but all
work to create a more sustainable community - as defined by the people who live there.
Environmental problems, the impetus for this community-wide action, led to the creation of the
Environmental City project, which is working for the expansion or relocation of "clean industry"
(unpolluting) to the area, the retention of environmentally sound businesses, and the creation of
environmental awareness throughout the city. Public/private partnerships have proven extremely
successful in the Environmental City project. The Chattanooga Environmental Initiative, another
project, strives to have the city become the nationwide center for environmental information and
business and is complemented by clean air work to maintain EPA standards (which have been
met since 1988) and create a zero emissions industrial park; electric bus technology, which has
led to the creation of the largest fleet of free, electric buses in the U.S. and free public parking
downtown; and the Greenways Planning Project, which is creating a network of protected areas
of open space and linear parkways through eight counties.
Information communication has been paramount to all of these projects. The Chattanooga News
Bureau serves as a central source of information for the community projects and is remarkably
active in initiating, coordinating, and facilitating regional, national and international news
coverage on stories from Chattanooga and the surrounding area. Nearly a hundred cities from
around the world have solicited information on economic development and urban design, the
Chattanooga Neighborhood Enterprise, the electric buses, community visioning and citizen
involvement. There is also an initiative to create a Chattanooga Community Link, which would
share information online for all interested community members and further provide the essential
local-global link to the many sustainable community initiatives in Chattanooga.
Another example involves communities in Hawaii that are developing proactive visions and
strategic initiatives aimed at a sustainable future (i.e., one that promotes development of local
economies while protecting resources). These communities are using a new communications
structure (i.e., consensus-based) and modern technology to transfer information within and
among communities across the globe to help achieve such visions. Promoting sustainable
tourism would be one method for achieving sustainable development in Hawaii.
B.2.3 Citizen/Volunteer Monitoring
Citizen monitoring involves citizens in environmental compliance by having them participate in
monitoring programs and activities, such as water quality monitoring, ground water protection,
environmental cleanup activities, or even voluntary environmental audits.
January 1999 B-9 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
The Chesapeake Bay Program encourages citizen/volunteer monitoring through a variety of
activities. One project, conducted in Quarryville, PA, aimed to demonstrate the value of
establishing erosion control measures along streams flowing into the Chesapeake Bay, and
procedures for preserving and increasing aquatic life through various stream bank conservation
control measures. A significant component of this project involved teaching high school students
the importance of stream monitoring and development of water sampling protocols. Once stream
bank conservation control measures had been implemented, the students took water samples
every two weeks and tested for nitrates, phosphates, pH, dissolved oxygen, water and air
temperature, and established a baseline for chemical and physical parameters for the site. The
sustenance of invertebrates indicated the stream was capable of supporting all forms of aquatic
life and provided an ideal marine freshwater habitat.
Audits are assessments or site visits that are conducted to identify areas where environmental
improvements or conservation measures can be undertaken. Increasingly, audits are designed to
use a holistic approach to environmental management, and beyond that, to incorporate
environmental management into overall business management procedures and decision-making
processes. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, for example, encourages
companies, local governments and individuals to diagnose and remedy environmental problems
by voluntarily conducting environmental compliance audits. Problems disclosed and corrected
are not penalized.
B.2.4 Citizen Advisory Groups/Committees
A citizen's advisory committee serves as a forum for a municipal entity or business to interact
and work cooperatively with the surrounding community. The Ohio Prevention First is a
voluntary planning initiative for business, industry, municipalities, and citizens to help reduce the
amount of pollution generated throughout Ohio. The goal of the Ohio Prevention First initiative
is to reduce pollution in Ohio by 50 percent by the year 2000. One effort that can be undertaken
to achieve this goal involves the formation of citizen advisory committees to work cooperatively
with local government or industry on environmental action plans or pollution
prevention/pollution reduction programs that address one or more types of pollution.
The goal of the Chesapeake Bay Agreement is to reduce the nutrients, nitrogen and phosphorus
entering the Chesapeake Bay as part of an overall program to restore and protect this estuary (and
its resources). A local government advisory committee was formed to communicate information
about the ongoing and evolving Chesapeake Bay Program activities to local governments. The
committee also is responsible for communicating the opinions, concerns, and recommendations
January 1999 B-10 Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
of local governments to the Chesapeake Executive Council. In addition, the committee provides
comments on strategies and other documents, giving a local perspective on Bay issues. The
committee also provides a forum for the Executive Council to disseminate information to local
governments.
B.2.5 Referenda
Initiatives or referenda are binding laws that are initiated by, or referred to, the public for
approval or rejection, usually by petition or popular vote. The Washington Department of
Ecology and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation announced they will spend $700,000 this year to
begin the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project. This is the first expenditure in an
effort that could cost $185 million over the next ten years to improve water supply for irrigation
and increase flows for fish. Voters approved a referendum for state funding ($50 million bond)
for initial improvements in irrigation water systems.
As shown throughout this chapter, public outreach/education and public involvement tools can
be used for the different types of municipal operations discussed in this document. Most of these
tools can be tailored to a variety of these operations and are useful in a variety of settings. A
range of tools is provided here, so that the most appropriate tool(s) can be selected for each
specific situation and for each type of operation.
January 1999 B-ll Appendix B
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
APPENDIX C
EXAMPLES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
POLLUTION PREVENTION AND PURCHASING PROJECTS
C.I CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
The City and County of San Francisco employs an active pollution prevention program focused
on reducing the amount of hazardous waste generated, as well as decreasing the amount of
pollutants that enters the City's sewer system. The Office of the Chief Administrative Officer's
Hazardous Waste Management Program started pollution prevention activities in 1988 in
response to passage of a 1986 state law that authorized counties to develop County hazardous
waste management plans for the reduction and management of hazardous waste to the year 2000.
The program was initially established to target specific small businesses that had the potential to
significantly reduce waste, to minimize illegal disposal, and to achieve the year 2000 goal of 10
to 40 percent waste reduction. (In San Francisco, small quantity generators generate most of the
hazardous waste.) The program now also focuses on larger businesses extending its on-site
assessments and information to all businesses in the City and County. It also addresses
hazardous waste generated by City agencies and households through multimedia pollution
prevention information.
The Department of Public Work's Bureau of Environmental Regulation and Management created
a Water Pollution Prevention Program (WPPP) in 1990 as a result of criteria outlined in the
City's "Best Management Practices Implementation Plan," which was required by the City's
Oceanside NPDES permit requirements. The WPPP was charged with qualifying and
quantifying the City's pollutants of concern, identifying the pollutants, developing and
implementing source reduction/pollution prevention strategies, and initiating evaluation
methodologies to determine the effectiveness of the program. Its activities target business,
industry, and residential sectors through educational and technical assistance materials.
D.2 BROWARD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION, FLORIDA
The Broward County Department of Natural Resource Protection established its Pollution
Prevention Section of the Pollution Prevention and Remediation Programs Division in 1992 as a
non-regulatory program with the mission of encouraging businesses to operate more efficiently,
comply with regulations, and prevent pollution at the source. This multi-pronged program
focuses its pollution prevention efforts on both the business community and County facilities.
January 1999 C-l Appendix C
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
The section's program approaches pollution prevention from two angles: 1) collaborate with
regulated business and the industrial community, and 2) set an example by examining pollution
prevention opportunities in County buildings and operations. The department hopes to
accomplish environmental protection through voluntary pollution prevention and increased
regulatory compliance. Through its Pollution Prevention in County Operations Program and
Pollution Prevention and Best Management Practices (P2-BMP), which is a collaborative
approach to regulatory compliance and pollution prevention in the regulated community, the
pollution prevention section hopes to help the County achieve its goals. The program has three
P2-BMP programs in place: 1) the marine facilities P2-BMP, 2) the metal finishing facilities P2-
BMP, and the automobile salvage yards P2-BMP.
C.3 LINCOLN-LANCASTER COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT, NEBRASKA
The Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department (LLCHD) runs a pollution prevention program
that integrates pollution prevention into all of its media programs, thereby moving up the waste
management hierarchy to prevent the generation of waste. The program evolved from a waste
disposal permitting program that began in 1986. The program stemmed from a recommendation
of their local Hazardous Pollutants Advisory Committee to define public concerns and issues
dealing with threats to environmental health. As a result, LLCHD has formed the following
programs to infuse pollution prevention into all its activities.
The department has a pollution prevention program that increases public awareness of chemical
toxicity in relation to decisions made on product purchase, use, handling, storage, and disposal.
LLCHD has also integrated pollution prevention into the following programs: special waste
program (regulatory and toxics use on-site assistance); household hazardous waste program
(identification and reduction of public chemical consumption); outdoor air quality program
(small business technical assistance on multimedia pollution prevention information to improve
air quality); water-wastewater program (pollution prevention in planning new subdivisions and
sewer extensions); wellhead protection program (identification of potential contamination
sources and on-site farm pollution prevention assessments); clean community system (education
displays on non-point source water pollution for schools, citizen groups, and neighborhoods);
and special recognition program.
C.4 CITY OF SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA
The City of Santa Monica, California, transformed its purchasing practices to promote
environmentally-friendly products without compromising performance standards or budgetary
January 1999 C-2 Appendix C
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
requirements. As a result, Santa Monica has reduced its annual use of chemicals considered to
be hazardous or toxic by 3,200 pounds and has proven the City's commitment to provide a safe
and healthy environment for its employees and the public. Other accomplishments include:
Replaced cleaning products with less toxic or nontoxic alternatives in 15 or 17 product
categories, reducing spending on custodial products by approximately 5 percent
Reduced pesticide use by developing an effective integrated pest management system
covering all City facilities, saving 30 percent in pest management costs
Purchasing re-refined motor oil, which costs up to 25 percent less than virgin motor oil,
for all vehicles maintained by the fleet maintenance division and using less-toxic, water-
based brake cleaners and parts washers
Powering 20 percent of its 585-vehicle fleet with less-polluting alternative fuels,
including compressed natural gas, electricity, and propane
Purchasing a wide range of recycled products, including office paper, recycled paint,
trash can liners, and retread tires.
For more information about Santa Monica's environmental purchasing efforts, including
specifications for Integrated Pest Management and custodial products, contact Deborah Raphael
of the Environmental Programs Division at 310-458-2255. To receive a copy of the Santa
Monica Environmental Purchasing Case Study, contact the U.S. EPA Pollution Prevention
Information Clearinghouse at 202-260-1023 or E-mail: ppic@epamail.epa.gov To learn more
about local government environmental purchasing, contact the National Association of Counties
(NACo) Environmental Purchasing Project, 202-393-6226 or
www.naco.org/programs/environ/purchase.cfm
NACo's Environmental Purchasing Project assists counties with environmental purchasing
initiatives and is developing a clearinghouse of information including model purchasing
resolutions, sample product specifications, case studies, environmental criteria, and product
resources.
January 1999 C-3 Appendix C
-------
Sector Notebook Project Profile of Local Government Operations
Resources
"Preventing Pollution in our Cities and Counties: A Compendium of Case Studies," NPPR,
NACo, NACCHO and U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1995.
U.S. EPA Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse, 401 M Street, SW (7409),
Washington, DC 20460 (http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/p2home)
Enviro$en$e, U.S. EPA Operations Research Development Division, 401 M Street, SW (MC-
8722R), Washington, DC 20460 (http://www.epa.gov/envirosense)
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable, 2000 P Street NW, Suite 708, Washington, DC 20036
(http://www.p2.org)
National Association of Counties, 440 First Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001
(http://www.naco.org)
National Association of City and County Health Departments, 440 First Street NW, Suite 450,
Washington, DC 20001
U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1620 I Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006
(http://www.usmayors.org/uscm)
American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 801,
Washington, DC 20036 (http://aceee.org)
January 1999 C-4 Appendix C
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
APPENDIX D
STATUTORY MATRIX OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
AND ASSOCIATED ACTIVITIESI
OPERATION
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
3.3 CONSTRUCTION/PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
3.3.1 General Activities
1. Zoning issues
2. Coordination of activities
(e.g., BMPs) across
local governments
3. Planning and design
(apply EMS concept)
4. Monitoring contractors
3.3.2 Roads/Bridges/
Tunnels
3.3.2.1 New Construction
Clearing and grading
activities
Storm water management
(e.g., stream stabilization)
Erosion and sediment
(E&S) control
Dredging (wetlands)
Road spoils/debris disposal
(if hazardous)
Redoing utility (power, gas,
sewer) lines (in wetlands)
New construction (roads)
Fly ash in concrete
(hazardous wastes
mixed in asphalt/
concrete)
Laying asphalt
Recycling asphalt
(make up mineral
content by adding
shredded glass,
slag); VOCs from
asphalt
Although there are no specific federal requirements, these activities can affect the significance of
the environmental impacts associated with local government operations. When conducting these
activities, the local government should consider the potential environmental impacts.
This matrix may include some activities that are not specifically discussed in Chapter 3.
2
This table indicates whether federal requirements may apply. Even if federal requirements do not apply, state requirements may apply. The
local government needs to be aware of state requirements.
January 1999
D-l
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
New construction (curbs
and sidewalks)
Concrete laying
Chemicals used to
harden sidewalks
Noise abatement
Dust control
3.3.2.2 Maintenance and
Renovation
Street sweeping
Maintaining storm sewers
and impoundments
Salt application and
removing snow
Painting (e.g., guardrails)
Removing and disposing of
lead-based paints
3.3.2.3 Traffic
Management
Design (e.g., painting,
speed bumps, yield
signs preferable to stop
signs)
Modeling air pollution
Traffic boxes
Old batteries (e.g.,
replace Pb batteries with
solar packs)
3.3.3 Buildings
3.3.3.1 New Construction
3.3.3.2 Maintenance and
Repair
Monitoring indoor air quality
Boiler operations
(hazardous waste fuels,
used oil for fuel)
Cooling systems/CFCs
Pesticide application
Energy conservation issues
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
No specific federal regulatory requirements.
See Section 3.7 Wastewater Management.
. 3
. 3
See New Construction under Section 3.3.2 Roads/Bridges/Tunnels.
No specific federal regulatory requirements
See Section 3.4 Pesticide/Vector Management.
No specific federal regulatory requirements
Under State Implementation Plan.
January 1999
D-2
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
Fluorescent bulbs
Mercury-containing
bulbs
Mercury-thermostat
(covered under
Universal Waste rule)
Parking lots/storm water
management
Chemical
storage/hazardous
materials management
(e.g., paints, solvents)
Management of generated
wastes
Food wastes (school
cafeterias)
Laboratory/medical
wastes (schools,
coroner's office, police
department)
Laundry (jails)
Furniture finishing (jails)
3.3.3.3 Renovation and
Demolition
Building dewatering/
contaminated groundwater
Demolition wastes
Pressure-treated wood
Asbestos
Lead-based paint
3.3.4 Outdoor Recreation
Facilities (including
stadiums and golf course)
3.3.4.1 New Construction
3.3.4.2 Facility
Maintenance and
Renovation
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
No specific federal regulatory requirements.
See New Construction under Section 3.3.2 Roads/Bridges/Tunnels.
January 1999
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
ftDEDATIftM
Or tKA 1 IUN
Swimming pool
Adjusting ozone,
chlorine, and chemical
composition
Testing for and adjusting
pH
Maintaining and
repairing filter systems,
recirculation pipes,
valves, fittings, and
pumps (welding,
brazing, fabricating)
Operation of electrical
and heating systems
Solid waste
management
Backwashing filters,
circulating water, and
filter water
Installing, maintaining,
and repairing electronic
control systems and
timers
Drainage issues
(pretreatment program)
Chemical storage/
hazardous materials
management (e.g.,
chlorine)
Parking lots (storm
water management)
Stadium, playing field, and
golf course
Field maintenance
Watering, fertilizing,
resodding, pesticide
spraying, mowing,
aerification, soil
sampling, overseeding,
weed control
Planting, pruning trees
and shrubs
Mowing fields, operating
hydraulic mowers, lawn
sweepers, forklifts,
skiploaders, small
tractors, self-propelled
roller compactors,
renovators, verticutters,
top dressers, paint
sprayers, aerifiers, sod
cutters, rototillers, dump
trucks, and motor
sweepers
Grading land and
moving soil
Pesticide management/
IPM
Landscaping/xeriscape
Bio-retention facilities
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
January 1999
D-4
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
Stadium, playing field, and
golf course continued
Food preparation and
disposal
Parking lots (storm
water management)
WWTP (used only on
weekends)
Cleaning stadium,
buildings, and grounds
Using cleaning
chemicals
Solid waste
management
3.3.5 Vehicle/Equipment
Maintenance
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES2
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
3.4 PESTICIDE/VECTOR MANAGEMENT
3.4.1 Purchasing
Pesticides
Purchasing proper
amounts
Selecting appropriate
pesticides
Determining shelf life
3.4.2 Applying Pesticides
Mixing pesticides
3.4.2.1 Applying
Pesticides Indoors
3.4.2.2 Applying
Pesticides Outdoors
Helicopters/tractor
drives
Maintaining green ways
- herbicides/round up for
right of way wild flowers
3.4.2.3 Cleaning
Application Equipment
3.4.2.4 Certifying
Applicators
3.4.2.5 Keeping Records
3.4.3 Storing Pesticides
3.4.3.1 Risk Management
Planning
(CAA Section 112(r))
3.4.3.2 Notification of a
Canceled or Suspended
Pesticide
No specific federal regulatory requirements.
January 1999
D-5
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
3.4.4 Disposing of
pesticides
3.4.5 Vehicle/Equipment
Maintenance
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES2
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
3.5 PUBLIC SAFETY
3.5.1 Emergency
Planning
3.5.1.1 Planning
Catastrophic events
Flooded rivers (e.g.,
flood control)/debris
management
Solid waste debris
management from
catastrophes
3.5.1.2 Providing
Chemical Information to
the Public
3.5.2 Fire Protection and
Emergency Response
3.5.2.1 Fire Protection
3.5.2.2 Emergency
Planning
3.5.2.3 Fire Response and
Suppression
Practicing Firefighting
3.5.2.4 Hazardous
Materials Response
Generation of hazardous
wastes
Management and
disposal of
contaminated media
3.5.3 Police Protection
3.5.3.1 Photoprocessing
3.5.3.2 Firing Ranges
3.5.3.3 Laboratory
Operations
(forensics, fingerprinting)
3.5.4 Vehicle/Equipment
Maintenance
No specific federal regulatory requirements, but local governments participate in planning for and
responding to these types of events. Check with the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(http://www.fema.gov).
See Section 3.5. 1 Emergency Planning.
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
January 1999
D-6
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES2
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
3.6 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
3.6.1 Collecting and
Storing Municipal Solid
Waste
3.6.1.1 Collection
Yard materials, batteries,
large appliances
3.6.1 .2 Storage Operation
of Transfer Stations
Truck wash areas (e.g.,
spray units to clean bottom
of trucks)
3.6.2 Recycling and
Composting
3.6.2.1 Recycling
3.6.2.2 Composting
3.6.3 Source Reduction
Pollution prevention/
waste minimization
programs
3.6.4 Disposal
3.6.4.1 Landfill Operation
Waste analysis
Leachate collection
Methane gas collection
Daily cover
Pesticide application
Disposal practices
3.6.4.2 Municipal Waste
Combustion
Monitoring (air quality
issues)
Disposal of residual ash
3.6.5 Household
Hazardous Waste
Collection and Storage
3.6.6 Vehicle/Equipment
Maintenance
Federal guidelines, but no specific federal regulatory requirement.
No specific federal regulatory requirements.
No specific federal regulatory requirements.
See Section 3.4 Pesticide/Vector Management.
No specific federal regulatory requirements.
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
January 1999
D-7
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES2
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
3.7 WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT
Construction of
lines/planning design
Construction of wastewater
treatment plant
Upgrades for additional
capacity
3.7.1 Operation and
Maintenance of Sewer
Systems
3.7.1.1 Sanitary Sewer
Systems
3.7.1.2 Combined Sewer
Systems
3.7.1.3 Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer Systems
3.7.1 .4 Water Line
Repair/Replacement
3.7.2 Wastewater
Treatment
3.7.2.1 Wastewater
Treatment Process
Air emissions (MACT
standard)
Nuisance odor control
Pesticide/vector control
Digester operation and
maintenance (methane
burners, scrubbers)
Painting
Debris (e.g., grit)
management (if hazardous)
Stand-by generators
Diesel spills
Transformers-PCBs
Vehicle maintenance
3.7.2.2 NPDES Permit
Compliance
Beach monitoring (CSOs)
Nontraditional treatment
systems
See Section 3.3 Construction/Property Management.
See Section 3.3 Construction/Property Management.
Generally regulated under local ordinance.
See Section 3.4 Pesticide/Vector Management.
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
January 1999
D-8
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
Artificial wetlands
Groundwater monitoring
in NPDES permit
application
Surface applications
Point/nonpoint pollution
trading
3.7.2.3 Laboratory
Operations
Toxicity evaluation
reduction
3.7.2.4 Pretreatment
Program
Source control to improve
compliance, biosolids reuse
Hauled wastes/manifest/
waste characterization
3.7.2.5 Biosolids
Management and
Disposal
(land application, surface
disposal, incineration,
landfilling)
3.7.2.6 Chemical
Storage/Hazardous
Materials Management
(e.g., solvents for building
maintenance,
chlorination, chemicals to
control erosion)
3.7.3 Vehicle/Equipment
Maintenance
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES2
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
No specific federal regulatory requirements.
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
3.8 WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
3.8.1 Surface Water Protection
3.8.1.1 Best Management
Practices
3.8.1.2 Nonstructural
BMPs
Street sweeping
Vegetative buffer areas
Marsh vegetation
Watershed monitoring
Reservoir management
Pollution prevention
No specific federal regulatory requirements, but local governments are encouraged to develop
surface water protection programs.
No specific federal regulatory requirements, but local governments are encouraged to develop
surface water protection programs.
3.8.2 Groundwater (Wellhead) Protection
January 1999
D-9
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
Zoning and subdivision
ordinances
Site plan reviews
Design and operating
standards
Property or easement
purchases
Public education
Household hazardous
waste collection
Groundwater monitoring
Dams, canals, levees
New construction
Design issues (NEPA)
Flood control/
management (e.g., flood
walls)
Storm water channeling
Dam decommissioning/
demolition
Erosion and sediment
control
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES2
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
States must develop their own wellhead protection programs. No specific federal regulatory
requirements, but local governments are encouraged to become involved in wellhead protection
programs.
See Section 3.3 Construction/Property Management.
3.9 WATER SUPPLY
3.9.1 Water Treatment
Treating water
3.9.1.1 Chemical
Storage/Hazardous
Materials Management
3.9.1.2 Laboratory
Operations
3.9.1.3 Residual
Management
3.9.2 Water Distribution
System Operation and
Maintenance
3.9.2.1 Cross Connection
Control and Backflow
Prevention
3.9.2.2 Water Pipe
Flushing
3.9.2.3 Water Main Repair/
Replacement
Lead pipes
Lost water through old
or broken pipes
3.9.2.4 Storage Tank
Maintenance (painting)
3.9.2.5 Pump Maintenance
No specific federal regulatory requirements
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
January 1999
D-10
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
OPERATION
3.9.2.6 SDWA
Compliance
Water reuse
Water conservation
3.9.3 Vehicle/Equipment
Maintenance
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES2
CWA
CAA
CERCLA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
TSCA
SDWA
NEPA
ESA
RHA
No specific federal regulatory requirements.
See Section 3.10 Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
3.10 VEHICLE/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
3.10.1 Vehicle Repair
Shops
3.10.1.1 Changing
Vehicle Fluids
(hydraulic fluids, used oil,
use coolants, radiator
fluid)
3.10.1.2 Washing Vehicle
Parts
3.10.1.3 Maintaining
Vehicle Batteries
3.10.1.4 Repairing Air
Conditioners
3.10.1.5 Washing
Vehicles and Shop Floors
3.10.1.6 Repairing or
Replacing Exhaust
Systems
3.10.1.7 Painting Vehicles
3.10.1.8 Storing Materials
Outside
Storm water
management
Used asbestos brake
pads
Used tires
3.10.2 Fueling Stations
3.10.2.1 Fuel Storage
3.10.2.2 Fuel Dispensing
3.10.2.3 Disposing of
Unused Fuel
3.10.2.4 Storm Water
Management
3.10.3 Purchasing (e.g.,
vehicles, chemicals)
No specific federal regulatory requirements
January 1999
D-ll
Appendix D
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
APPENDIX E
EXAMPLES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT VIOLATIONS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS (1992-1997)
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
Township of North Brunswick,
NJ(1992)
An intentional disabling of catalytic converters on eight township-owned
police vehicles was found. The Township agreed to a $16,000 penalty.
City of Vero Beach (Indian River
County, FL)(1993)
The recorder for a continuous opacity monitoring system had been removed.
Subsequent reports were submitted, and the City failed to mention downtime
of the recorder. The City chose an in-kind penalty option to pay $71,528 to
be used in construction of a wet lab for a learning center.
New York City Board of
Education, NY
(1993)
A complaint was filed against the Board of Education and seven contractors
for failure to notify EPA of renovations involving asbestos removal in City
schools. The defendants violated EPA's asbestos "notification rule." The City
is to pay $200,000 in civil penalties.
New York City, NY
(1993)
Of the over 300 gasoline dispensing stations leased and/or operated by the
City, approximately 55 of the facilities were not equipped with Stage I and /or
Stage II vapor collection systems. The City is to award contracts to
construction managers who will provide enforceable work schedules to bring
the facilities into compliance. The City is to pay $200,000 in civil penalties.
Columbus Solid Waste
Reduction Plant, Office of
Regulatory Enforcement, OH
(1994)
Columbus agreed to shut down the Columbus Solid Waste Reduction Plant in
response to an administrative order and community concerns about dioxin
emissions. The order required the facility to design systems to achieve
lowest dioxin emissions. The City decided to authorize closure of facility.
City and County of Denver, CO
(1995)
Violations included: an exceedance of performance standards by air
emissions from the treatment plant on two occasions; failure to notify EPA
and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment; failure to
recycle vapor-phase carbon units and implement changeout procedures; and
failure to submit a schedule for proposed corrective measures. The City will
pay $79,550.
City of Providence, Central High
School, (1995)
The City failed to meet opacity emissions limits, to operate opacity monitors in
accordance with regulations, and to combust fuel with the required sulfur
dioxide content under federal regulations. The City agreed to pay a $91,000
penalty, purchase fuel with the required sulfur dioxide content, and to operate
its opacity monitor as required by regulations.
Allegheny County Department of
Aviation, PA (1997)
CLEAN WATER ACT
City of Adrian, Ml (1992)
Demolition activities at the airport resulted in a disturbance of asbestos
materials. CAA NESHAP regulations were violated. The facility was cleaned
up and a work plan was developed.
The City must pay a civil penalty of $25,000. The City will: (1) install a
dechlorination system at the wastewater treatment facility [$15,000]; (2)
perform a water quality study of the South Branch of the River Raisin
[$38,937]; and (3) perform a comprehensive study of the Pho-Strip process
[$61,000].
January 1999
E-l
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
City of Altamonte Springs, FL
(1992)
A settlement included a civil penalty of $55,000 and the construction of a
distribution system for reuse of the City's wastewater treatment plant effluent.
Construction activities are valued at $3,300,000.
City of Beaumont, TX (1992)
The City will pay a civil penalty of $400,000 for failing to implement an
industrial pretreatment program.
Clifton Water District, CO (1992)
Clifton Water District will pay a $20,000 penalty for constructing a municipal
water supply diversion structure in the Colorado River in violation of ง404 of
CWA. The discharges affected the reach of river inhabited by the Colorado
Squawfish and the razorback sucker.
Escambia Counties Utilities
Authority (ECUA), Pensacola,
FL(1992)
Violation of NPDES permit limits of fecal coliform and total residual chlorine at
the Main Street wastewater treatment facility, discharging to Pensacola Bay
were found. The Authority must pay a civil penalty of $26,000 and be
involved in an eighteen-month water quality data collection effort in
Pensacola Bay and parts of contiguous water bodies. The effort is valued at
$50,000.
Township of Franklin Sewerage
Authority (1992)
The Township of Woodbridge, the Borough of Carteret and the City of Perth
Amboy are to pay a collective civil penalty of $950,000 for past violations of
CWA at sewage treatment plants.
Village of Sauget, IL(1992)
The Village failed to develop an approvable pretreatment program and
exceeded NPDES effluent limits for BOD, iron, mercury, TSS and zinc. The
Village also failed to demonstrate compliance with the whole effluent toxicity
limit. A penalty of $750,000 was assessed. The Village must also make a
payment to EPA of $50,000 for at least one year that will be used to hire an
independent consultant to act as on-site "observer" of the implementation of
Sauget's Pretreatment Program.
Washington City, UT (1992)
The City will pay $70,000 in administrative penalties for unauthorized fill in
wetlands. The discharges of fill material affected nearly six acres of spring-
fed desert wetlands that contained the uncommon wetland plant Yerba
Mansa. The City performed wetland restoration and mitigation work on site.
City of Bossier, LA and State of
Louisiana
(1993)
The City failed to properly operate and maintain a publicly owned treatment
works, to comply with effluent limitations of a NPDES permit, and to fully
implement its industrial pretreatment program. The City agreed to pay a civil
penalty of $200,000 and conduct a SEP that will promote EPA's policy of
providing beneficial use of municipal wastewater sludge. As part of the SEP,
the City will also install sludge treatment facilities that will produce a reusable
final product. The cost is estimated at $375,000.
City of Cocoa, FL
(1993)
The City violated ง301 (a) of the CWA for failure to monitor pH on continuous
basis and for exceeding other NPDES permit limitations at various times. The
City is to pay $32,593 and implement SEPs valued at $1,963,600. The SEPs
involve the installation of 5,000 feet of storm water swales; expansion of the
City's wastewater reuse; restoration of a 300,000 gallon storage tank and
accelerated compliance with the Florida Indian River Lagoon Act.
City of Reading, PA
(1993)
The Reading Sewage Treatment Plant had mercury seal trickling filters at the
plant for years that have leaked, resulting in an estimated 5 tons of mercury
released. DER's policy was changed to prohibit the use of mercury seal
filters in any sewage treatment plant in PA. The City is to have the Academy
of Natural Science perform a study of the Schuylkill River to determine the
effects on fish and to determine the fate of mercury released. The City will
replace the mercury seal filters with mechanical seal filters.
January 1999
E-2
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
City of Rock Springs, WY (1993)
The City was cited on failure to properly implement and enforce federal
pretreatment regulations. An order was issued to correct deficiencies of its
pretreatment program and comply with the NPDES permit. A civil penalty of
$45,000 is required. The development of a household hazardous waste
program, on-site assistance program for small communities, and workshop on
pollution prevention assessment and waste minimization for WY pretreatment
coordinators is required. The cost is estimated at $41,000.
City of Starke, FL(1993)
The City had numerous violations of permit limits for BOD, TSS, TN, TRC, pH
and fecal coliform, and schedule and reporting violations. The City must pay a
penalty of $10,300. A land application/reuse project to reduce discharge to
Alligator Creek by 40% at an estimated cost of $1.6 million is required.
Easton, PA
(1993)
The Easton Area Joint Sewer Authority is to pay a civil penalty of $389,000
for past violations of the NPDES permit. The Authority is also required to
maintain compliance and to implement a pretreatment program. The
Authority will pay $120,000 to the Coalition of Religious and Civic
Organizations, Inc. The City is required to pay a $45,000 penalty for permit
effluent and pretreatment violations.
New Albany, IN
(1993)
The City violated effluent limits of the NPDES permit, bypassed wastewater,
failed to implement and enforce a pretreatment program, failed to provide an
adequate alternative power source and violated an administrative order
issued by EPA. The city will pay a penalty of $140,000 to the U.S. Treasury
and $35,000 to Indiana, and will conduct extensive work on the publicly
owned treatment works and sewer system at a cost of $17 million.
Port of Portland, OR
(1993)
The Port of Portland had unpermitted toxic discharges posing a potential
hazard to human health and the marine environment. A penalty of $92,000
is required. Port of Portland must also conduct analysis and removal of
contaminated sediments by studying priority pollutants in sediments near
storm water drains. Costs are estimated at $58,000.
Town of Fort Gay, WV
(1993)
Violations included: numerous effluent limitation violations, failure to submit
timely discharge monitoring reports, failure to report bypasses and CSO
discharges, and operation and maintenance problems. The town is required
to pay a $10,000 fine.
Town of Taos, NM
(1993)
The town failed to adequately treat land-applied sludge with a process to
significantly reduce pathogens. The town must pay a civil penalty of
$125,000 and is required to immediately install a temporary means of treating
sludge.
Wells County Water Resources
District, ND
(1993)
The Wells County Water Resources District drained 2,400 acres of prairie
pothole wetlands without the necessary authorizations. The County will
restore drained wetlands on an acre-for-acre basis.
City and County of Honolulu, HI
(1994)
The City and County had poor maintenance of the sewer system, which
resulted in over 300 spills of raw or partially-treated sewage, and failed to
implement an adequate pretreatment program to regulate the discharge of
toxics from industries into the sewer system. Under a consent agreement,
the City and County will pay $1.2 million and improve the operation and
maintenance of its sewer system. The City and County agreed to spend $30
million on SEPs for treating and reusing wastewater and sludge.
City of Bossier, LA and State of
Louisiana (LA) (1994)
The City agreed to pay $200,000 and to conduct a SEP. The City violated the
CWA by failing to properly operate and maintain its POTW, failing to comply
with its NPDES permit, and failing to implement an industrial pretreatment
program. The project cost of the SEP was $375,000.
January 1999
E-3
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
City of Hoboken, NJ
(1994)
City of Kenner, LA and State of
Louisiana (LA) (1994)
City of Middletown, OH (1994)
City of Ocean Shores, WA
(1994)
City of Philadelphia, PA (1994)
City of Port St. Joe, FL
(1994)
City of Sioux Falls, SD(1994)
City of Tacoma, WA (1994)
County Sanitation Districts of
Los Angeles County (CSDLAC),
CA(1994)
Delaware County Regional
Water Quality Authority
(DELCORA), PA (1994)
Jacksonville Beach, FL (1994)
Manatee County, FL (1994)
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
The Hoboken, Union City, Weehawken Sewerage Authority (HUCWSA)
agreed to pay stipulated penalties in the amount of $2.8 million for its
violations of a January 1991 consent decree. This $2.8 million includes a
payment of $1,152,000 that will be made to EPA, $850,000 to the New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, and the remainder to the
Interstate Sanitation Commission.
The City violated its NPDES permit, including failure to adequately implement
an approved pretreatment program, which caused an unpermitted discharge
of pollutants. The City agreed to pay a civil penalty of $215,000.
The City failed to adequately carry out an approved pretreatment program,
had past NPDES effluent limit violations, and filled in the river channel of the
Great Miami River. A civil penalty of $288,000 was assessed by the consent
decree.
The City placed fill in interdunal wetlands adjacent to the Pacific Ocean. After
negotiations, the City removed the unauthorized fill, replanted the site, and
restored the adjacent site. The compliance action resulted in a net gain of
wetlands functions and values.
The City intentionally pumped raw sewage into the Pennpack Creek. A
consent decree required payment of $225,000 in civil penalties (evenly
divided between the United States and Pennsylvania) and injunctive relief
necessary to prevent future violations.
St. Joe Forest Products Company violated pretreatment prohibitions by
contributing pollutants in excessive quantities that caused interference and
pass through of the City facility which caused the City to violate its NPDES
permit. A consent decree provided a civil penalty of $25,000 by the City and
a $325,000 civil penalty by the Company.
The City agreed to pay $26,250 as a civil penalty and to undertake a SEP.
The City violated the CWA, its NPDES permit and General Pretreatment
regulations. The SEP involves a household hazardous waste recycling
program between $150,000 to $200,000.
Secondary treatment violations were cited. The City agreed to pay a
$525,000 penalty. In addition, a SEP valued at $100,000 for the sewage
treatment plant hookup of low income housing that discharges untreated
wastewater directly to Commencement Bay is required.
CSDLAC is required to pay a civil penalty of $300,000 to the U.S. and
$200,000 to the state, to complete a program to promote the beneficial reuse
of its wastewater, and to implement a household hazardous waste collection
program at an estimated cost of $1.2 million.
A consent decree required the construction of an additional secondary
clarifier at its wastewater treatment plant which will cost $3.5 million and a
civil penalty of $350,000.
The City agreed to pay a Class I administrative penalty of $3,500 for failure to
submit a timely and complete storm water permit application for the City's
municipal storm water system.
The County agreed to pay a Class II administrative penalty of $60,000 for
discharging from its wastewater treatment plant into the receiving stream.
January 1999
E-4
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
Metropolitan Dade County, et.
al., FL(1994)
The County entered a consent decree to address an emergency claim,
contingency plans and short term measures due to concern of the structural
integrity of sewage pipelines under the Biscayne Bay. A grand jury
investigation concluded that the aged and corroded sewer system presented
the greatest threat to the health of the river. Claims also addressed system-
wide unpermitted discharges, improper operation and maintenance, and
reporting violations.
Municipality of Penn Hills, PA
(1994)
The municipality was sentenced to 5 years probation and a $150,000 fine for
illegally disposing sewage sludge and other pollutants from three of five
sewage treatment plants.
Polk County, FL(1994)
Discharges occurred from the Wilson Acres wastewater treatment plant
without an NPDES permit. The County agreed to pay a $100,000 penalty
under the consent agreement and order. $15,000 will be credited to the
County if the Wilson Acres WWTP connected to the City of Auburndale
collection system.
Wayne County-Wyandotte, Ml
(1993 and 1994)
Wayne County and 13 tributary communities that illegally discharged
untreated wastewater into Detroit River and Lake Erie will pay a civil penalty
of $413,000. The injunctive relief involves rehabilitation of the sewer system,
plant improvements, and the construction of a tunnel storage system to hold
rain water during storms at an estimated $230 million. The implemented
project plan will expand carrying capacity of the sewer collection system and
increase capacity of the Wyandotte POTW.
City of Akron, OH (1995)
The City must pay a civil penalty of $290,000 for violations of the CWA
related to the discharge of inadequately treated wastewater to Cuyahoga
River, and the discharge of raw sewage from the City's separate sanitary
sewer during storm events. The City must improve its wastewater treatment
facility to meet NPDES permit limits. The City will perform a $1.5 million SEP
to eliminate septic tank systems by providing connections to sanitary sewers.
Clay County, FL(1995)
Several violations of NPDES permit conditions and the discharge of 2 million
gallons of wastewater from a break in an onsite pond berm were found.
Settlement included a $12,000 penalty and completion of a SEP. The SEP
was to construct a force main from the Ridaught Landing WWTP to a nearby
re-use facility to eliminate discharge to the Little Black Creek. Aftertax net,
the present value of the project is $1.879 million with a capital outlay of
$2.149 million.
Metropolitan Dade County, et.
al., FL(1995)
The deteriorated condition of a large sewage pipeline running under the
Biscayne Bay, as well as chronic and widespread overflows of raw sewage
into homes, streets, businesses and public waterways, including the Biscayne
Bay and the Miami River were cited. Short-term preventative measures are
required in addition to a cash penalty of $2 million. The County is expected to
pay more than $800 million rehabilitating its system to prevent chronic
overflows of sewage. A water reuse and conservation SEP totaling at least
$5 million is required.
City of Fort Morgan, CO (1995)
There was a failure to implement a pretreatment program to the degree that
one of its industrial users caused the City to violate its own discharge permit.
The penalty includes payment of $268,000 in civil penalties in addition to
taking significant steps to achieve compliance with federal pretreatment
regulations under the CWA. A payment of $110,000 to the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment is also required.
January 1999
E-5
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
City of Lynn, MA (1995)
Combined sewer overflows occurred near a shellfish bed and onto a public
beach. An agreement was reached to add a schedule for the construction of
combined sewer overflow controls, at a cost of approximately $50 million, to
an existing consent decree.
City of New Bedford, MA (1995)
The City refused to construct the secondary treatment plant that was required
in an earlier consent decree. The City must construct the secondary
treatment plant, pay a $51,000 penalty to the United States, and pay $51,000
to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The payment to the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts could be waived if New Bedford complies with certain terms
of the modified consent decree.
City of Pensacola, FL (1995)
City failed to submit a complete NPDES Part I
The settlement was for $35,000.
storm water permit application.
City of Watertown, SD (1995)
As the result of a consent agree, the City agreed to come into full compliance
with the terms of its permit by December 31, 1997. Costs in excess of $17.3
million were estimated for a new POTW. The City agreed to properly staff,
operate and maintain the facility; adopt legal authority to enforce
requirements of Sections 307 and 402 of CWA; implement its industrial
pretreatment program as approved by EPA; issue permits to all SILJs
providing for the payment of not less than $500 per day per violation for any
noncomplying SIU; and conduct and document inspections and independent
compliance monitoring of all its SILJs.
Kiski Valley Water Pollution
Control Authority, PA (1995)
The Authority failed to conduct sampling visits to its significant industrial
users (SILJs) during 1992 and failed to adequately enforce violations of one of
its categorical SILJs. The POTW also violated its NPDES permit effluent
limitations for suspended solids, BOD5, and flow.
Town of Brookline, MA (1995)
Illicit connections of sewer lines to storm drains resulted in discharges of
sewage into the Muddy River in violation of the CWA. A consent agreement
was to locate and remove all such connections by 1997, and undertake a
variety of storm water management practices. The town will pay a $25,000
penalty if it does not comply with the schedule.
City of Blackhawk, CO (1996)
The City allowed the illegal construction of a water supply pump station on
Clear Creek (without an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act
permit), including excavation and backfilling of about 1,800 square feet of
river bed on the north fork of Clear Creek. The result was a temporary loss of
wetlands and destruction of aquatic life. The penalty payment is $61,515.
Cobb County Department of
Community Development, GA
(1996)
Failure to adequately implement and/or maintain erosion and sedimentation
control devices for a road widening project resulted in erosion of road fill into
tributaries of Willeo Creek, degrading stream water quality and resulting in
sediment deposition in downstream lakes. Payment of $10,000 and training
for its employees and road contractors for land disturbing activities is
required.
Jefferson County Commission,
AL(1996)
The Commission had effluent violations of NPDES permits, intentional bypass
of treatment works resulting in discharges of untreated sanitary sewage into
the Cahaba and Black Warrior Rivers, and discharge without a NPDES
permit. A penalty of $750,000 is required. The Commission will also
undertake a $30,000,000 Greenway project to acquire and maintain protected
areas along designated rivers and streams. A three-phase approach to
improve and correct infiltration/inflow problems will be used. A sewer system
evaluation will also be initiated.
January 1999
E-6
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
New Orleans Sewerage & Water
Board, LO(1996)
Unpermitted discharges of contaminated water to surface waters due to the
poor condition of sanitary sewer and collection system of New Orleans was
found. An alternative dispute resolution for technical dispute was used. Non-
binding mediation was unsuccessful. The case was settled in FY 1998.
Town of Essex, MA (1996)
Septic system problems (i.e., failing systems and illegal connections to town
storm drains) resulted in bacterial contamination of the Essex Bay estuary
and local clam flats. The town must initiate a comprehensive program to
inspect and correct septic system and illegal connection problems and
institute a town-wide oversight and management program.
Borough of Naugatuck, CT
(1997)
An administrative complaint was for violations of effluent limits contained in
an NPDES permit for a publicly owned treatment plant. The penalty was for
$70,000.
City of Erie and Erie Coke Corp.
PA (1997)
Erie Coke, a significant industrial user of a sewer system, violated national
pretreatment categorical standards for iron and steel and the city of Erie local
pretreatment limits. A consent decree requires a $450,000 cash penalty and
the installation of pretreatment technology that meets discharge limits. This
technology will cost over $2 million.
City of San Diego, CA (1997)
A stipulated final order settled an enforcement action that addressed
deficiencies with San Diego's sewage treatment facilities. The order calls for
the City to continue work on infrastructure projects, replace 200 miles of
decaying concrete sewers, audit pump stations and force mains, increase
efforts to reduce grease loadings to the system and upgrade its data
collection and modeling capabilities. The order also requires $60-$200
million for projects.
CityofSedalia, MO (1997)
Administrative orders for compliance and complaint were issued due to the
City's failure to develop and implement an enforcement response plan; failure
to implement procedures to ensure that industrial users are in compliance
with pretreatment standards and requirements; failure to issue permits or
other mechanisms containing correct discharge limits for two industrial users;
and failure to perform local limit analyses for two pretreatment plants. The
City must correct the violations and pay a penalty of $50,000.
City of Watertown, SD (1997)
The discharge of pollutants from the City's wastewater treatment plant
exceeded acceptable levels. A consent decree required the City to pay a
penalty of $550,000.
Crook Creek Farms, Inc., City of
Destin, and the Niceville,
Valparaiso, Okaloosa County
Regional Sewer Board, Inc., FL
(1997)
APOs were issued to a land application site operating company and two
municipalities that transport their biosolids to the land application site for
disposal. Violations of vector/pathogen attraction, operational standards and
recordkeeping were found. Penalties ranged from $6,000-$16,466.
Onondaga County, NY (1997)
A consent agree requires a 15-year plan for the POTW upgrade, combined
sewer overflow elimination and other measures in the range of $300-$400
million to ensure that water quality standards are met for Lake Onondaga.
The County must pay a penalty of $50,000 and SEPs worth at least $387,500
to control non-point source pollution to the lake.
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority, PR (1997)
CACOs issued require a $200,000 SEP to install telemetry equipment at 20
pump stations in the San Juan Region that will allow for the monitoring of
equipment at the pump stations and will detect malfunctions. Equipment will
help to reduce the instances of bypasses and discharges of inadequately
treated sewage. The Authority must pay a penalty of $35,000.
January 1999
E-7
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority, PR (1997)
ACACO required a penalty of $10,000 and the completion of $30,000 SEP.
Under the SEP, the Authority will conduct workshops to inform industrial
users of pretreatment requirements and methods to comply.
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority, PR (1997)
The Authority violated its permit by discharging 10 million gallons per day of
primary level treated sewage from the Mayaguez Regional Wastewater
Treatment Plant. A consent decree was for $150,000 in civil penalties and
$400,000 to the Mayaguez Watershed Initiative. The Authority must
construct facilities to bring the plant into compliance.
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority, PR (1997)
A payment of $375,000 represents a settlement of uncontested and
contested dollar amounts requested as penalties as identified in 27 quarterly
motions to enforce 1985 and 1988 orders. The Authority must pay $83,800 in
stipulated penalties for violations of a 1985 court order and $251,400 for
violations of the pump station stipulation entered in 1995.
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority, PR (1997)
An administrative penalty complaint was issued for the Arecibo sewage
treatment plant. Violation of effluent limits in the NPDES permit and
instances of improper operation and maintenance of the plant were found.
The complaint seeks a penalty of $100,000.
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority, PR (1997)
An administrative penalty complaint was issued for the Lares sewage
treatment plant. Violation of effluent limits in the NPDES permit and
instances of improper operation and maintenance of the plant were found.
The complaint seeks a penalty of $125,000.
Virgin Islands Department of
Public Works, VI (1997)
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
City of North Adams, MA (1992)
An amended 1996 consent decree set a compliance schedule for the DPWto
construct improvements at eleven existing POTWs, construct two new
POTWs, and pay $675,000 in stipulated penalties for violations of a prior
court order. The estimated cost of the injunctive relief is expected to cost
between $35 and $40 million.
The City violated maximum contaminant levels for turbidity and coliform and
for violating monitoring requirements. The City must pay a civil penalty of
$67,200. An order requires the City to construct a water filtration plant and
achieve compliance with SDWA and implement significant interim measures
to ensure delivery of safe water until the treatment plant is operational.
Bethlehem Village District, NH
(1993)
The district voted not to provide necessary funding to comply with the Surface
Water Treatment Rule, but now has voted to comply with state and federal
regulators. Approximately $2.5 million will be spent on a filtration plant and
other system improvements to comply. The district agreed to pay a civil
penalty.
Selleck Water System, WA
(1993)
An injunctive relief against Selleck Water System was to remedy an imminent
and substantial endangerment to public health caused by the fecal
contamination of drinking water provided to 150 people, including a day-care
facility. An emergency administrative order directed Selleck to properly
operate and maintain a treatment system, advise users to boil water, and
submit a corrective action plan. Selleck refused to comply and court action
followed.
Virgin Islands Housing Authority
(VIHA)(1993)
Under an amended decree, VIHA was to undertake capital and O&M
improvements at six of its housing projects encompassing over 60 public
water supplies and imposed a monitoring program for various contaminants
subject to MCLs. VIHA is to pay a $12,000 penalty from original decree.
January 1999
E-S
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
Town of Meeteetse, WY (1994)
An administrative order was issued to the town when tests indicated a
presence of Giardia in finished drinking water. The test, after the order was
issued, detected Cryptosporidium in finished water. An emergency order
required the town to: provide an alternate source of potable water; provide
public notice; issue a boil water notice; perform an evaluation of the system;
and submit quarterly reports on progress.
Cities of Abilene, Axtell, Attica,
Beverly, Kirwin, Osborne, Portis,
Preston, and Raymond, KS
(1995)
Exceedances of nitrate maximum contaminant level of 10 mg/L were found in
the public water supply. Within a 24-month period, the cities must undertake
tasks to achieve compliance such as provision of alternate water supply to
pregnant woman and children aged six months or less and public notification
for each prior violation of the Act.
City of Marianna, FL (1995)
The City failed to comply with the monitoring and reporting requirements of
the lead and copper rule. A payment of $50,000 in civil penalties is required.
Fort Thompson Water System,
Fort Thompson, SD and Lower
Brule Water System, Lower, SD
(1995)
Filtration systems at both sites are ineffective. EPA Region 8 issued
emergency administrative orders under Section 1431 of the SDWA.
Kansas Bureau of Water
(1995)
The Kansas' Bureau of Water issued 25 wastewater treatment orders against
various municipalities and trailer courts in Kansas. The consent orders to
cities, including Lawrence, Topeka and Leavenworth, initiate projects to
eliminate the discharge of water treatment sludge to streams. The orders to
trailer courts in Pittsburg, KS, have resulted in ongoing efforts to form sewer
districts that will be connected to the Pittsburg wastewater treatment plant.
The sewer districts will help to eliminate sewage discharges into abandoned
mine shafts.
Town of Cushman, AR
(1995)
The town violated the state order to install a filtration treatment system to
treat unprotected spring water prior to consumer use. The penalty was for
$15,000 and agreement to install a filtration system and hire a state certified
operator.
City of New York, NY (1997)
In 1992, the City entered into an administrative stipulation that provided that
the City would construct and operate necessary filtration facilities for the
City's Croton Water Supply by 2000. Construction is not expected to be
finished by 2000. The government is seeking a schedule for the construction
of a filtration plant, interim watershed protection measures, and an
expeditious penalty.
Town of Hempstead, NY (1997)
The town had violations of unpermitted discharge into an underground
injection well and the endangerment of a Department of Highways facility in
Roosevelt. An AOC was issued that requires the town to implement a
compliance/closure plan, pay a $5,500 penalty, perform a facility audit, and
provide employee training. The town will inventory and address facilities
where there may be Class V injection wells, test for pesticides, and keep the
public informed of the status of closure implementation at the Roosevelt
facility.
January 1999
E-9
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey
(1993)
The Port Authority had a permit to dredge dioxin-contaminated material from
the New York Bay, ocean-dispose of it at a specific site, and cap it with clean
material. Authority contractors dredged material and disposed 5000 cubic
yards worth in the wrong location and capped it with 30,000 cubic yards of
clean fill. The Authority must pay a penalty of $35,000 and perform a SEP.
The SEP involves providing a $15,000 grant to a private, non-profit
organization for the purpose of purchasing and preserving wetlands in the
New York Harbor area.
Westchester County, NY (1995)
The County must achieve long-term compliance through implementation of a
beneficial use sludge management program. Payment of $200,000 in
penalties evenly divided between the United States and New York is required.
Bergen County Utilities
Authority, NJ (1993 and 1997)
Bergen County Utilities Authority was ordered to pay a penalty of $55,000 in
one order. A second order required a penalty of $500,000, and to deposit
$780,000 into an escrow account, to be returned if it complies with the
consent decree. A third action was brought for violations of a long term
schedule for alternative sludge disposal, which required New York City to pay
$1.5 million into an escrow account to be recovered if it commences
construction of Phase II facilities, pay $250,000 to the U.S., and $750,000 to
an escrow account to purchase wetlands or open space in New York City. A
stipulation and order required all sludge to be available for beneficial use by
composting. In 1997, a stipulated penalty of $75,000 was assessed for
violations of the earlier consent decree that required that sludge be available
for beneficial use.
Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey (1997)
Administrative penalties were for violations of a dredge material disposal
permit. The Authority disposed of material at unspecified locations and failed
to report improper disposal. Civil penalties totaled $125,000.
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
City of Columbus, OH, and Solid
Waste Authority of Central Ohio
(SWACO)(1994)
An administrative order was issued to the City and SWACO to conduct
measures to abate a potentially imminent threat to public health and the
environment posed by emissions of dioxin as a result of the burning of trash
in an incinerator.
Westchester County,
Sportsmen's Center, NY
(1994)
Under an administrative order, the County was required to assess the
contamination (predominantly lead) from shooting activities at the
Sportsmen's Center. The County was required to design and implement a
plan for the remediation of the contamination and to devise a plan to prevent
re-contamination.
City of New York Department of
Transportation, NY (1995 and
1997)
During bridge repainting operations, the City generated and transported
hazardous paint chips without a RCRA identification number and manifests,
and stored wastes without a permit or authorization. A joint penalty (with
contractor) of $25,000 was assessed. An administrative CACO was issued.
The City drafted a lead-based paint removal protocol, the implementation of
which will cost the City over $5 million. The City must pay a civil penalty of
$145,000.
Land Authority of Puerto Rico,
PR (1997)
The Authority failed to provide leak detection for underground storage tanks
and failed to permanently close a tank. An administrative complaint requires
penalty of $165,310.
January 1999
E-10
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
New Jersey Transit Corp., NJ
(1997)
The Transit Corp. failed to properly close underground storage tank systems
in accordance with applicable rules; failed to satisfy release detection
requirements for underground storage tanks and associated piping; and failed
to use spill and overfill equipment. An administrative CACO required a civil
penalty of $130,000 and completion of two SEPs at a cost of $190,000. The
SEPs will involve the removal and disposal of asbestos insulation at two
facilities.
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority, PR (1997)
An administrative complaint was for failure to comply with underground
storage tank requirements at 19 facilities. The complaint seeks a civil
penalty of $305,297.
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT
City of Algoma, Algoma
Municipal Landfill, Wl (1992)
The consent decree requires the City of Algoma Municipal Landfill for the City
and eight PRPs to implement the remedy selected by ROD. Defendants will
reimburse EPA and the state for their future oversight costs and pay 90% of
EPA's past oversight costs. Settlement is for $1.3 million. Monitoring
detected an exceedance of MCLs for cadmium, iron, and manganese.
City of Jacksonville, FL et. al.,
Pickettville Road Landfill Site, FL
(1992)
Thirteen defendants, including the City of Jacksonville, agreed to undertake
implementation of a remedy valued at $9 million at the Pickettville Road
Landfill Site and to pay the U.S. 100% (roughly $400,000) of its remaining
unreimbursed costs.
Elkhart, Indiana (Main Street
Well Field Site) (1992)
UAO's were issued to 9 PRPs to conduct remedial activities including soil
vapor extraction, installation of interceptor wells, and continued operation and
maintenance of an air stripper. Costs were estimated at $1.5 million in
construction costs plus $130,000 in annual operation and maintenance costs.
Lexington County, SC (1992)
The County accepted hazardous wastes at the Lexington County Landfill.
The County will perform an RI/FS and pay all of EPA's past costs totaling
approximately $174,233, as well as future oversight costs.
Municipal Landfill, Dover, NH
(1992)
A RD/RA action consent decree for the Dover Municipal Landfill is for 24
PRPs to perform cleanup activities at the site and reimburse EPA response
costs.
Washington and Ramsey
Counties, MM (1992)
A UAO requires Washington and Ramsey counties to continue operating a
pump-and-treat system at Washington County Landfill to prevent
contamination from moving toward drinking water wells offsite.
Augusta/Hyde Park (Augusta,
GA)(1993)
EPA Region 4 expended $1 million to address groundwater contamination in
the area of the Park and the surrounding area that is a lower income and
predominantly African-American neighborhood. Over 1,000 samples of
surface soils, surface water, groundwater and sediments were taken in 18
industrial sites within the neighborhood that tested for up to 176 constituents.
AVX Corporation, et. al. (1993)
The City of Bedford owned and operated the dump for local industrial waste
and solid waste. The City agreed to perform a remedy along with 15 entities
with varying degrees of involvement. AVX agreed to perform all work
consisting of remedial action plus operations and maintenance. The City
agreed to perform specific portions of remedial action and secure access and
institutional controls. The settlement required PRPs to excavate an
ecologically sensitive marsh, where sediments are to be disposed of beneath
a cap to be constructed at the first operable unit.
January 1999
E-ll
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
City of Newport, et. al., KY
(1993)
Town of Bedford, MA
(1993)
City of Cedartown, Polk County,
GA(1994)
City of Clinton, IA(1994)
City of Jacksonville, AR (1994)
Town of North Hempstead, NY
(1994)
City and County of Denver, CO -
Lowry Landfill Site (1995)
City of Cedartown and Polk
County, GA(1995)
City of Wichita, KS(1995)
City of Wilmington and New
Hanover County, NC (1995)
Lexington County Landfill Site,
SC(1995)
Mason City, IA(1995)
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
Two civil consent decrees representing partial settlement of CERCLA cost
recovery litigation for the Newport Dump Superfund site, Wilder, Kentucky,
involved five of six PRPs named in the original complaint. Settlement
provides for recovery of $2.4 million, representing 50% of total past costs and
for performance of operation and maintenance activities.
Six defendants agreed to pay a penalty assessed by a consent decree of
$1.17 million in the settlement of past costs incurred at the Katonah Well
Superfund site, which settled an action filed in 1990. The town performed
remedial design pursuant to a 1988 EPA consent decree and completed
remedial action construction under the terms of an earlier consent decree.
Other defendants had previously declined to participate in clean up work at
the site.
A UAO issued to the City, County, and 12 companies required them to
maintain existing landfill cover, repair seeps, maintain institutional controls,
and monitor groundwater quality.
The City has held title to the Chemplex Superfund Site since 1967 as part of
an industrial development bond sale-leaseback arrangement. There was no
evidence the City had any involvement with the site other than nominal title
holder. The City is required to provide site access to EPA and other PRPs,
and comply with deed restrictions; in exchange, the City received a covenant
not to sue and contributions protection.
Two consent decrees were lodged for the Jacksonville and Rogers Road
Municipal Landfill Superfund Sites. Both sites have soils that are
contaminated with dioxin that was produced by a herbicide manufacturer. An
estimated 800 cubic yards of soil are contaminated. The City agreed to pay
$100,000 in past costs.
The town recovered $2.64 million in past EPA cleanup costs incurred at the
Port Washington Landfill. The town undertook the remedial work at the
landfill at an estimated cost of $45 million.
A UAO was issued for the landfill site based on the refusal of Denver and
other parties to implement a remedy selected in the ROD and pay more than
76% of the US's past response costs. Most of the 31 de maximus PRPs have
been sued by Denver and other parties in private cost recovery litigation and
have settled with those parties.
The City and County, with eight industrial generator PRPs, agreed to pay
$668,302 for past remedy costs at a municipal landfill site.
A state de-listing pilot project was based on the state and city agreeing to
address the contamination at the 29th and Mead Superfund Site. The city is
to take responsibility for clean-up activities at the site with the Kansas
Department of Health and Environment.
Reimbursement, by three responsible parties, of $545,723 plus interest of
$19,269 to EPA and Department of Justice is required.
A UAO was issued for the landfill site. Selected remedies include:
consolidation/containment/gas recovery/groundwater extraction and treatment
and disposal at the POTW/monitoring.
The City agreed, jointly with another non-performing respondent, to contribute
money towards the cost of the response action and payment of EPA's costs
to conduct a non-time critical removal action of buried coal tar.
January 1999
E-12
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Pike County Drum Site, MS
(1995)
Board of County Commissioners
for Cecil County, (1996)
City of Burbank, CA(1996)
City of Marianna, FL
(1996)
City of Memphis, TN
(1996)
City of Somersworth et. al., NH
(1996)
Montgomery County Solid
Waste District (MCSWD),
Moraine, OH (1996)
North Facility Soils/Wastewater
Treatment Plant, Magna, UT
(1996)
Davie Landfill Site, FL(1997)
North Hollywood Operable Unit,
CA(1997)
Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, PR (1997)
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
Cost recovery agreement for the reimbursement of $1 98,292 to Superfund by
responsible parties is required.
A consent order called for a $6 million cost recovery regarding the Woodlawn
Landfill. Payment of $4.75 million plus interest in installments over 5 years is
required.
A consent decree is for the City to co-construct and/or fund the capital
portions of Burbank Operable Unit interim remedy. This requires the
extraction of 12,000 gpm, blending to reduce nitrate concentrations, and
delivery of treated water to the City of Burbank water supply system for 20
years.
A consent decree is for the payment of $500,000 towards past response
costs for the incineration of pesticide-contaminated soil removed from one of
the City's municipal airport runways (S&S Flying Service site).
A consent decree is for cost recovery incurred at the City-operated North
Hollywood Dump for the dumping of toxic wastes. The ROD requires a
number of remedial measures, including the solidification and/or removal of
contaminated sediments in the surface impoundments and the installation of
a permanent cap on the landfill.
A consent decree is for the remedial design and action at a landfill Superfund
site.
Excess waste from an MCSWD-operated incinerator was sent to a municipal
landfill. Thirty-one municipalities are members of MCSWD. The landfilled
waste contained commercial or industrial waste containing hazardous
substances. The defendants will pay $60,000 for previous oversight costs
and 50% of remaining oversight costs.
An AO on consent to conduct a non-time critical response action at the
Kennecott North Facility Soils/Wastewater Treatment Plant was issued.
The site was used as a disposal site for sludge from a municipal wastewater
treatment plant and other wastes. A consent decree settled the case against
Broward County, FL. $66,368 was recovered in past response costs incurred
and $65,000 for 1995. In addition, $25,000 was recovered for 1996 and
subsequent years.
A consent decree recovered $4.8 million in site costs. The costs are
attributable to construction and operation of the North Hollywood Operable
Unit interim remedy groundwater extraction and treatment system. The unit is
operated through a cooperative agreement with the State of California and
the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.
An analysis of soil and sediment samples collected at the Palo Seco Ward
Plant Site revealed the presence of hazardous substances at elevated
concentrations. A UAO was issued requiring a remedial investigation and
feasibility study. The study is designed to determine: (1) nature and extent of
contamination and threat caused by release or threatened release and (2)
alternatives for remediation or control of release or threatened release.
January 1999
E-13
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT/ FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT/
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT
City of Garland, TX(1992)
The Housing Authority of New
Haven, Connecticut (1993)
City of Boston, Boston City
Hospital, MA (1994)
Town of Wallingford, CT (1994)
Memphis/Shelby County Airport
Authority, TN( 1995)
City of Hearne, TX (1996)
City of Providence, KY
(1996)
City of Wrangell, AL (1996)
New York City, NY Board of
Education (1995 and 1996)
Bill Anskis Company, Inc. and
the Panther Valley School
District, PA (1997)
A TSCA PCS administrative order was issued to the City of Garland. The
order required expenditures of $500,000 and a 10% case penalty of $14,200.
The City must implement a PCS identification program which identifies
through sampling and laboratory testing and label inspection all transformers
that contain PCBs at 2 ppm or greater.
The Authority was cited for failing to properly dispose of PCBs, failing to
maintain records concerning PCBs, and failing to properly mark and store
PCS transformers. The Authority is required to spend $1 12,000 on an
environmental compliance program to protect public housing residents from
future environmental risks.
Failure to comply with the marking and recordkeeping requirements
pertaining to PCS transformers was found. The City agreed to pay $1 17,300
in civil penalties from a consent decree and final order. The removal often
underground storage tanks located throughout the City is estimated to cost
over $80, 000.
The town agreed to pay $40,050, test all town-owned transformers for PCBs
at a cost of over $1 million, and remove all that were previously improperly
disposed.
Payment of $9,000 to resolve past violations of EPCRA Section 304 and
CERCLA Section 103 is required. Implementation of a $475,000 pollution
prevention SEP that involves the purchase of equipment that will assist in the
de-icing of runways is also required.
A violation of PCS regulations was found. The City must identify all existing
oil-filled electrical equipment within the City of Hearne electrical system. The
City must also remove and dispose of all PCBs and PCS equipment that
contain PCBs at 50 ppm or greater within 2 years. The estimated cost is
$99,000.
An AOC was issued for past removal costs at the Gray PCS site. Settlement,
based on Ability to Pay Determinations, of $25,000 in two payments of
$12,500 was required.
The City must pay a penalty of $1,359 and spend $2,258 to remove and
properly dispose of three large high voltage capacitors containing 257 pounds
of PCBs.
The case involved an allegation that the head of the Board's Asbestos Task
Force knowingly submitted false information on 375 AHERA management
plans. A CA/CO was issued under AHERA. It requires a payment of
$1,500,000, systematically reinspecting each of 1,069 schools for asbestos,
and preparing new management plans to ensure that all buildings are in
compliance.
Violations of Asbestos NESHAP and AHERA occurred while renovation work
was performed in the district. An administrative action assessed a penalty of
$77,000.
January 1999
E-14
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
New Jersey Sports and
Exposition Authority and Atlantic
City Convention Center
Authority, NJ (1996 and 1997)
The Authority failed to comply with TSCA regulations concerning the
management of PCBs and equipment containing PCBs. With respect to
certain PCS containing equipment, the Authority failed to take the following
actions: compile annual documents; conduct quarterly and annual
inspections; register with the fire department; mark PCS capacitors; and store
PCBs for disposal in an appropriate storage area. A CACO was issued in
settlement of TSCA administrative proceeding. PCBs are to be removed from
the Convention Center. The complaint seeks a civil penalty of $98,000.
Puerto Rico Department of
Education, PR (1997)
A CACO was issued for failure to affix PCS mark, register the PCBs with the
fire department, maintain records of quarterly inspections and maintenance
history, compile and maintain annual documents and dispose of PCBs in a
proper manner. The Department must pay a civil penalty of $15,000 and
perform a SEP costing more than $95,000. The SEP involved the removal of
PCS transformers at locations where violations occurred.
School District of Philadelphia,
PA (1997)
A complaint and consent decree was filed that seeks to demand the cleanup
and disposal of PCBs that are in 29 transformers located at 12 schools. The
school must also comply with the PCS Rule and implement a PCS
Management Plan. The Plan would provide for the repair, inspection,
cleanup, and proper disposal of PCS contaminated materials. The school
district must remove or upgrade all of the PCS transformers within three
years. Bi-monthly progress reports must be submitted to EPA which will
provide for the monitoring of the school districts cleanup efforts.
City of Gary, IN (1992 and 1993)
The Court issued an order entering a Second Modified Consent Decree in this
case, that involves both CWA and TSCA claims regarding the POTW. Gary
is to undertake and complete capital and operational improvements at its
wastewater treatment plant, adequately fund operations and maintenance,
and pay a civil penalty of $1.25 million. The City must (1) repair, rehabilitate,
and maintain the wastewater treatment plant and sewer system pursuant to a
schedule; (2) implement a pretreatment program to control industrial
discharges; and (3) remediate a PCB-containing sludge lagoon. Due to
previous violation of settlements, the County will appoint a Special
Administrator to oversee compliance with the Decree. A SEP, at an
estimated cost of $1.7 million, for the study and development and
implementation of remedial plan for sediments in Grand Calumet River,
covering area of submerged lands, must be completed.
City of Independence, MO
(1996)
CWA/RCRA violation of special terms of the City's NPDES permit, which
allowed the City to accept for treatment trucked-in hazardous and other
wastes at its POTW plant, was found. RCRA violations of permit-by-rule
provisions and storage of drums of hazardous wastes without a permit and
failure to have interim status for POTW were also found. A payment of a civil
penalty is required. In addition, the City must make available a household
hazardous waste program to City residents.
City of Haverhill, MA (1997)
Violations of RCRA included storing or disposing of hazardous waste without
a license and land disposal restrictions. Violations of CWA included failure to
have a SPCC plan in violation of Oil Pollution Prevention regulations. A
consent agreement and final order required a $17,000 penalty and a
minimum of $104,580 as a SEP. The SEP includes building a permanent
household hazardous waste collection facility and conducting quarterly
household hazardous waste collections.
January 1999
E-15
Appendix E
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Profile of Local Government Operations
Local Government
Summary of Violation/enforcement Action
Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, PR (1997)
Violations of CAA, CWA, UST requirements of RCRA, EPCRA, SPCC
requirements of CWA and notice of provisions of CERCLA were found at five
facilities throughout Puerto Rico. A consent decree issued requires a
payment of a $1.5 million civil penalty, Land Conservation Acquisition for $3.4
million and HazMat Training fora local fire department for $100,000. The
Authority is required to spend over$1 million on an environmental review
contractor to oversee compliance with the consent decree. The Authority
must conduct an overhaul of compliance programs where violations occurred.
January 1999
E-16
Appendix E
------- |