C.I
vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
February 1979
OPA 1 14/8
1978 Report
Better Health &
Regulatory Reform
-------
-------
Message From the Administrator and
Deputy Administrator
In his message to the Congress in the spring of last year
President Carter said that the primary need in the environ-
ment today is not for new statutes but for sensitive ad-
ministration and energetic enforcement of the ones we
have. "Environmental protection," the President said, "is
no longer just a legislative job, but one that requires and
will now receive firm and unsparing support from the
Executive Branch."
Nowhere is this declaration of policy by the President
more clearly reflected than in the selected activities de-
scribed in this report. And the twin themes that underscore
every one of them are the protection of human health and
the reform of the regulatory process.
All of us are concerned that prices are rising again. That
we are again having to pay more for the essentials food,
shelter and clothing. EPA's particular concern is to what
extent environmental protection contributes to the inflation
rate.
By some measures, at least, there is no question that it
does. A study prepared for us by Chase Econometric con-
cluded that EPA programs add an average of 0.3 to 0.4
percent annually to the Consumer Price Index. And those
figures do not reflect recent changes to environmental
laws.
However, this estimated increase in the CPI does not
necessarily mean that environmental regulations are infla-
tionary. The CPI ignores improvements to human health,
reduced property damage, increased crop yields and other
benefits that result from pollution control spending. The
valuation of these benefits is still a developing area of
economic analysis and we cannot yet estimate them in
precise dollar terms. From the work that has been done,
however, it is clear that the cost of our regulations are war-
ranted by the benefits derived.
Nowhere is this thesis more abundantly supported than
in the area of human health.
The World Health Organization estimates that from 60 to
90 percent of all cancer is brought on by "environmental
factors". The rate of cancer in this country is greater than
at any time since World War II.
We have accumulating evidence that mercury, lead and
cadmium in the environment can attack the central nervous
-------
system. We know that the pesticide DBCP causes sterility
and we know that kepone causes nerve damage. We know
that fluorocarbons weaken the protective shield of the
ozone layer, greatly increasing the risk of skin cancer.
Asbestos and chloroform have been found in our drink-
ing water. We are now aware that chloroform appears in
our drinking water as a result of the way we have been
disinfecting that water to make it safe for drinking.
Increasingly in our industrialized society it is becoming
plain that most of the serious diseases and disabilities we
suffer are related to our exposure to environmental
hazards. Health care in this country now runs $140 billion a
year. Most is for treatment and cure. There is a growing
body of evidence that we could get more for our dollars if
we spent more of them on prevention, especially preven-
tion of environmental health hazards, rather than on cure
of disease and chronic conditions.
Reducing health risks and costs is the major benefit we
realize from pollution control programs. Reducing property
damage of many varieties is also an important benefit.
Other benefits harder to quantify are also important.
What dollar value would we place on the serenity the
fieldworker derives from knowing that the pesticides he or
she is exposed to over a long period of time are safe? What
is it worth to the urban dweller to see a clear sky? What
would a child pay to be able to swim in the streams that
once ran clear? What is the psychological value of knowing
that the water flowing from your tap is safe to drink?
We cannot put a dollar and cents figure on these
benefits. Although we know they are real.
We cannot, either, find quick-fix solutions to the prob-
lems Congress has addressed in the legislation we imple-
ment. The problems are too deeply rooted in our society.
EPA must, then, make judgments. In makintj judgments
we require that both the costs and the benefits be assessed
as far as is possible. Under our regulatory reform program
we strive always to find the most efficient and least costly
ways of protecting the environment. Whenever possible we
regulate only when we are confident the benefits exceed
the costs.
In the space of this report we have not attempted to
describe the many activities underway at EPA. The Agency
-------
is responsible for carrying out eight separate laws all of
which were designed to protect the public health and
welfare and all of which have their origins in the response
by Congress to different problems that became acute at
different times in our recent history. The Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, for example, which has been
amended five times, was originally enacted in 1948. The
Toxic Substances Control Act, on the other hand, was
passed as recently as 1976.
This report represents a selection from the diversity of
programs underway at EPA. Its purpose is to highlight ac-
tions we have taken under these programs during the past
year.
-------
-------
Safeguarding the Water We Drink
American service personnel and their families and those of
us who go abroad on vacation or business sometimes run
into the problem of unsafe drinking water. At home we
scarcely give it a thought. We are confident that the purity
of our water can be depended on and for the most part we
are right. The once dreaded threat to public health from
widespread waterborne communicable diseases has faded
into our history books.
However, our sources of water are being endangered by
a number of new chemicals and pollutants every year. And
some of our treatment facilities have not kept pace with
the technology required to remove them.
At the same time our ability to detect contaminants has
been improving. Modern science is now equipped to iden-
tify specific chemicals in terms of billionths of parts of the
water being tested. In some cases scientists can measure
them in trillionths.
With information so detailed, a new question arises.
What is the effect of consuming these contaminants in
such small amounts over long periods of time? Doctors can
say that an acute or immediate illness comes from this or
that virus or poison. But chronic problems that develop
over many years are not so quickly diagnosed. There is
genuine concern in the scientific community that prolonged
exposure to certain elements, even at very low levels, may
be increasing the incidence of cancer and heart disease.
This new situation calls for a great deal of research. Mean-
while, we must reduce the risks to health.
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 EPA is re-
quired to set limits on the amounts of various substances
sometimes found in drinking water. Every community water
supply in the country serving 15 or more connections or 25
or more people must ensure that its water meets these
minimum standards of purity. Even noncommunity sup-
plies, such as trailer parks, camping sites and roadside
motels with their own water supplies are covered.
As part of national drinking water regulations that
became effective in June, 1977, EPA set maximum limits
for a variety of contaminants commonly found in water
supplies. These included bacteria, several metals and
minerals, certain pesticides, radioactivity and turbidity the
minute particles suspended in water that cause cloudiness
-------
and can also interfere with disinfection.
Most of these substances are also found elsewhere in the
environment and in the foods we eat. The standards set
nationally for the first time by EPA reflect the level we can
safely consume in our water, taking into account the
amounts we are also exposed to from other sources.
Most public drinking water systems, particularly the
larger ones, already meet these standards. For those other
systems that cannot always deliver high quality drinking
water some changes must be made.
In February of 1978, EPA proposed standards to limit
organic chemical contaminants in drinking water which are
suspected to be cancer causing.
The first part of EPA's proposal would regulate a family
of chemicals called trihalomethanes that are created as a
by-product of conventional disinfection. Chlorine used to
control bacteria interacts with natural humic matter in
water to produce chloroform and other members of the tri-
halomethane family. These chemicals are known to cause
cancer in animals.
EPA's proposed standard sets a maximum limit on the
amount of chloroform and other trihalomethanes 1hat
would be allowed in drinking water. The Agency leaves it
up to the waterworks to decide how it will meet the stan-
dard.
Besides the trihalomethanes there are hundreds of other
synthetic organic chemicals discharged into many of our
water supplies from factories and there are others that
drain from farms and cities. Rather than set a maximum
limit at this time for each one of these contaminants the
second part of EPA's proposal would require that activated
carbon filters be installed at the waterworks in those cities
where the water supply is seriously contaminated. Approxi-
mately 50 to 75 cities are affected.
-------
EPA Regulates Factories That
Discharge Into City Sewers
In the United States today approximately 40,000 factories
° discharge toxic chemicals into city sewers without control.
Some of these chemicals disrupt the operation of the
sewage treatment plants on which taxpayers have spent
billions of dollars. Others pass through the plants into rivers
and streams without being adequately treated. Once in the
waterway they may poison aquatic life. Some are long
lasting and may accumulate as they move up in the food
chain eventually finding their way into the foods we eat.
Some are known or suspected carcinogens.
Toxic chemicals passing through a treatment plant also
mean that the wastewater and the sludge from the plant
may be contaminated. The volume of sludge produced by
sewage treatment plants increases with every year and the
need to be able to reuse sludge is becoming critical.
Similarly, our need to be able to reclaim wastewater is in-
creasingly important, especially in water short areas.
In June of this year EPA announced a national strategy
that will require 21 different categories of industry to "pre-
treat" their wastes for toxic chemicals before discharging
them into public sewer systems. Chemical plants, electro-
platers and petroleum refiners are typical examples of the
industries affected. EPA named 65 chemicals that must be
controlled. Industries that discharge directly into rivers and
Q streams are already controlled by other regulations issued
by the Agency.
The discharge limits for toxic chemicals that EPA will
issue for each industry under the new strategy will be
based on the best clean-up technology that is now
available and that can be economically achieved. The limits
will be issued starting this fall and ending December, 1979.
Once they are issued industries will have three years to
meet them.
At the same time the national strategy was announced
EPA issued new regulations which require local authorities
to set up their own enforcement programs for the dis-
charge limits. Local authorities may set their own pretreat-
ment limits for factories under their jurisdiction as long as
they are no less strict than EPA's. They may also modify
Q EPA's limits to allow for some removal of toxic chemicals
at the sewage treatment plant. EPA will provide funds to
-------
local governments to help them set up enforcement pro-
grams.
There are approximately 600 sewage treatment plants
around the country that will be affected by EPA's new
regulations. For the larger plants local enforcement pro-
grams should be in operation no later than 1983.
O
-. V
^tfv
vfc«
-------
o
/ 'T '
-------
EPA is Model for Reform in
Writing Regulations
On March 23 of this year President Carter issued an Ex-
ecutive Order on improving government regulations. The
President explained that the American people are sick and
tired of excessive Federal regulation, that the Federal
government has become like a foreign country complete
with its interests and its own language. "This Executive
Order," the President said, "is an instrument for reversing
this trend. It promises to make Federal regulations clearer,
less burdensome, and more cost-effective."
EPA is especially proud that many of the reforms in
regulation writing required by the President's Order were
pioneered by the Agency.
Plain English. Regulations, the President said, must be
translated into language the small businessman who
must be his own expert can understand. At EPA man-
agers understand that plain English is a necessary part of
communication, and therefore a necessary prerequisite to
their success in carrying out the Agency's mission. How-
ever, the Agency is going the extra mile by preparing a
style book for regulation writers, selecting regulations from
each program office for preparation as models of good
writing, and assigning a professional editor full time to the
review of regulations before they are published.
Public Participation. The President's Order requires
Federal agencies to open up the regulatory process to
broad public involvement and calls for regular "early warn-
ing" announcements of any significant new regulatory ac-
tion that is being considered. EPA's practice provided a
model for the Order.
Twice a year (April 6 was the latest) the Agency
publishes in the Federal Register a Regulatory Agenda of al)
significant regulations it intends to issue. The Agenda cites
the legal authority for the regulation, states whether a
regulatory analysis must be provided, and lists the tele-
phone of a person who can be contacted for information.
The Agenda also lists those existing regulations whose
reporting requirements have been "sunsetted".
For each significant new regulation that is written by the
Agency, EPA:
1) First identifies those groups and individuals who will
be especially interested in the regulation and notifies them
10
-------
-------
of its intention to write the regulation.
2) Publishes in the Federal Register an Advance Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking.
3) Holds public meetings and public hearings on the pro-
posed regulation.
4) Keeps a mailing list of those who have written or
called the Agency about the regulation, and sends them
drafts of the regulation and other materials as they are
developed.
5) Publishes drafts of a regulatory analysis of the regula-
tion if such an analysis is required.
6) Provides at least 60 days for the public to comment
on the proposed regulation. EPA summarizes these com-
ments and indicated its response to major points made.
7) Consults with individual state and local governments
on the regulation and with associations of state and local
governments.
8) Consults with other Federal agencies that may be af-
fected by the proposed regulation.
Regulatory Analysis. EPA routinely analyzes all proposed
regulations for their economic impact. If it is thought that a
proposed regulation may have a major economic conse-
quence for the country, then as called for by the Presi-
dent's Order EPA specially analyzes the proposal to
measure its effects on a series of economic factors, in-
cluding prices and employment, and to consider a number
of alternatives, including that of taking no regulatory action
at all relying on the forces o1 the marketplace to achieve
the desired result.
Any one of the following criteria will trigger a regulatory
analysis of a proposed regulation.
1) Compliance with the regulation will cost $100 million
per year.
2) For any major industry product or service compliance
will result in a 5 percent increase in the cost of the product
or service.
3) National energy consumption will increase by the
equivalent of 25,000 barrels of oil per day.
4) The demand for certain scarce materials will go up to
3 percent per year, or the supply will go down by 3 percent.
-------
Continuing Review. The President's Order requires every
Federal agency to undertake a systematic review of existing
regulations. Agencies are to eliminate unnecessary regula-
tions, and are to reform those that are still necessary to
reduce to a minimum the burden they impose.
Many of EPA's most important regulations are already
scheduled for review because of statutory requirements; for
example, air quality standards, and the regulations that
govern water pollution discharges from industry.
All other existing regulations will be screened for review
according to a set of criteria laid down by the Agency.
These include such factors as the cost to the public of the
regulation as measured against its benefit, whether or not
the regulation is enforceable and is in fact being enforced,
whether it overlaps other regulations including those issued
by other agencies, and so on.
"Sunsetting" Paperwork. It is in the nature of EPA's
business that it must gather information from the public,
from business and industry and from state and local
government. The Agency needs data on health effects,
economic costs, pollutant discharge rates, and much more
if it is to carry out its work.
In keeping with the President's Executive Order EPA is
reducing paperwork burdens wherever possible. First, the
Agency has set a "sunset" policy on reporting require-
ments for all new regulations. Under this policy any report
automatically terminates after a set period, usually five
years, unless a thorough review of the costs and benefits
of the report argues for its retention Second, as part of its
review of existing regulations EPA will look especially hard
at requirements for reports in those regulations that must
be retained.
13
-------
-------
Taking Steps to Close Dumps and to
Control Hazardous Wastes
Scattered across the United States today are nearly 20,000
sites where cities dispose of solid waste, more than 20,000
where they dispose of sewage sludge, and more than
100,000 sites where industries dispose of their waste. One
of the major purposes of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) is to make sure that these
facilities are operated in such a way as to prevent any
threat to human health and the environment. Another is to
bring under control the disposal of hazardous wastes the
10 to 15 percent of industrial waste that poses acute en-
vironmental and health problems.
Under RCRA EPA spells out what practices are accept-
able in getting rid of waste matter on land, and the States
determine whether existing sites meet the EPA criteria. If
they do not the states close or upgrade them. No new sites
can be opened unless they meet the criteria. The goal is to
bring all sites into compliance by 1983.
In February, 1978, EPA proposed criteria covering all
forms of disposal of wastes on land landfilling, land-
spreading, and impoundment or lagooning.
The criteria are comprehensive. They apply to residential
wastes, commercial and industrial wastes, waste matter
from institutions and to the sludges that come from
sewage treatment plants. They set out special precautions
to protect such environmentally sensitive areas as wetlands,
floodplains, permafrost, the critical habitats of endangered
species and the recharge zones for underground drinking
water supplies. They protect ground water and surface
water. They prohibit most open burning, and they set
special requirements on the disposal of wastes on land
where food is grown. These are needed to prevent against
our intake of harmful chemicals and of microorganisms.
The criteria require that rats, flies and mosquitos be con-
trolled and that disposal sites be operated safely.
EPA has spent considerable effort in gathering public
comment on the criteria. They were published in the
Federal Register in February and a period of 90 days was
set aside for public review. Fifteen public meetings with
various public interest, professional, engineering and en-
vironmental groups were held. Public hearings were held in
San Diego, California; Washington, D.C.; Kansas City,
Missouri; and Portland, Oregon. Thousands of copies have
15
-------
been mailed to those wishing to make written comment.
When the comments are in and reviewed EPA will
publish final criteria. Then, on the basis of information
developed by the states in using the criteria EPA will
publish a national inventory of all disposal sites that do not
measure up. Once the inventory is published the states will
have a maximum of five years in which to upgrade or close
a facility.
Unlike other wastes under RCRA, hazardous wastes will
be controlled from the point of production through the
point of disposal. RCRA requires that all those who pro-
duce waste will determine whether their waste is hazardous
as defined by EPA. If it is, they must obtain a permit to
manage it on their property, or 1hey must ship it to a treat-
ment, storage or disposal facility that has such a permit. In
the latter case a manifest containing basic information
about the waste must accompany the shipment. In either
case, all treatment, storage and disposal operations must
meet minimum standards to protect public health and the
environment.
The regulations and guidelines for the hazardous waste
program are now under development by EPA. Three is-
suances have reached the stage of formal proposal in the
Federal Register: guidelines for State hazardous waste pro-
grams, standards applicable to transporters of hazardous
wastes, and regulations governing a one-time notification
to EPA or authorized States by persons involved in hazard-
ous waste management. Also under preparation are regula-
tions on identification and listing of hazardous wastes,
standards for hazardous waste generators, standards for
hazardous waste management facilities, and permit re-
quirements for facilities.
Over 100 pubic meetings and hearings have already been
held to obtain public views on draft and proposed versions
of these regulations. All the regulations will be out in final
form in 1979 and will become effective 6 momhs after pro-
mulgation.
1(3
-------
Leading the Cities Out of
an Environmental Wilderness
The inner-city poor white, yellow, brown, and black
suffer to an alarming degree from what are euphemistically
known as "diseases of adaption". These are not healthy
adaptations, but diseases and chronic conditions resulting
in part from living with bad air, polluted water, excessive
noise, and continual stress. Hypertension, heart disease,
chronic bronchitis, emphysema, sight and hearing impair-
ment, cancer, and congenital anomalies among poor inner-
city residents are all half again the levels found in the
suburban population. Moreover, the incidence of behav-
ioral, neurological and mental disorders in inner-city areas is
roughly double that of the suburbs. Clearly, coming to
grips with urban environmental problems is central to
EPA's mission.
President Carter underlined the urgency of the cities en-
vironmental problems on March 27 of this year in his pro-
posals for a comprehensive national urban policy. "This
policy," said the President, "wild build a New Partnership
involving all levels of government, the private sector, and
neighborhood and voluntary organizations in a major effort
to make America's cities better places in which to live and
to work."
In developing the New Partnership, President Carter did
not want to repeat the mistakes of the past. Special pro-
cedures were established to coordinate the activities of
Federal agencies with diverse missions. The entire Federal
Government undertook a year-long inventory of the Federal
policies that influenced American cities and found a
substantial number of programs which inadvertently in-
hibited urban revitalization. The process of redirecting
those programs and of developing innovative new urban
proposals has begun.
EPA has been prominent in the degree of self-
examination and flexibility it has exhibited in response to
the New Partnership. A number of urban initiatives
developed by the Agency have become a part of the urban
policy and should, when implemented, go far towards
recreating a healthy environment for urban dwellers.
In April of this year EPA proposed a number of regulatory
guidelines to reduce urban sprawl by preventing the crea-
tion of unneeded excess wastewater treatment capacity.
The guidelines will require that state population projections
17
-------
I if
T I3j£
not exceed the projections of the Bureau of Economic
Analysis of the Department of Commerce for that state by
more than 5 percent. This regulation will help to eliminate
wasteful and costly overdesign of wastewater facilities
while meeting reasonable growth needs of local com-
munities. For the same reason, another of EPA's proposed
regulations requires that, barring special circumstances, the
design period for interceptor sewers be limited to twenty
years.
In most cities, solid waste is the second or third largest
item in urban budgets and yearly becomes an ever greater
problem as sites for disposal become scarcer. Technology
is now available for recovery of energy and materials from
waste. President Carter has requested $15 million from the
Congress to help communities make the transition from
land disposal to resource recovery.
Businesses, as well as environmental and community
groups, have already demonstrated the economic feasibility
and energy efficiency of recycling, and a number of states
have already taken the lead on beverage container legisla-
tion.
One of the most pervasive threats to the urban environ-
ment is air pollution: every one of the major urban areas in
the continental United States is in violation of one or more
of the national ambient air quality standards established by
EPA. All states encompassing such a "nonattainment" area
must submit acceptable cleanup plans to EPA by January,
1979 under the requirements of the Clean Air Act. To aid
states in working out solutions to the complex problem of
achieving both clean air and econmic growth, EPA has
asked Congress to provide them $25 million in technical
assistance.
In addition, EPA has become more flexible in its review
of new source construction in nonattainment areas. Where
initially the Clean Air Act was interpreted as banning any
new source construction in such areas, a new policy of
"banking" of emissions reductions will permit new con-
struction where the area shows a net air quality benefit and
where emissions are curtailed from the new sources to the
greatest extent feasible. The policy reflects an agency sen-
sitivity to the complex interrelationships which characterize
the urban environment and which the New Partnership was
18
-------
designed to address. Urban residents need both jobs and
clean air.
To help cement the President's "New Partnership" EPA
has scheduled a major conference on the urban environ-
ment for April, 1979. The Department of Housing and Ur-
ban Development, the Department of Interior, the National
Urban-League, the Urban Environment Conference and the
Sierra Club are also prime sponsors of the conference. The
conference's purpose is to enlist the combined strength of
various groups interested in solving social, economic,
health, and environmental problems in the nation's cities.
The hope is to build a consensus on these vital issues and
to move towards a balance between national environmental
standards, urban employment, and revitalization.
In November, EPA and the Department of the Interior
signed an agreement which will insure that Interior's recrea-
tional planning expertise becomes part of all water clean-up
planning, particularly community planning for municipal
wastewater treatment plants. The EPA/Interior agreement
will not only help communities meet the requirement for
adequate consideration of recreation called for by the 1977
amendments, but also should enable the Department of the
Interior to fund recreational facilities in municipalities
building sewage treatment works funded by EPA. To
facilitate implementation at the regional level, EPA and In-
terior held a regional workshop in Chicago this November.
-------
-------
EPA Takes First Steps to Prevent
Release of Toxic Chemicals
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires EPA to
protect human health and the environment from any unrea-
sonable risks of chemical substances.
Other federal laws designed to protect against toxic
chemicals, including several implemented by other federal
agencies, were already in effect when TSCA was enacted.
But in October 1976, after five years of debate and with the
support of an extraordinarily broad based coalition of in-
dustry, labor, environmental, consumer and other groups,
the Congress concluded that TSCA was needed to fill a
number of gaps in the other laws.
The major concept underlying TSCA is that the govern-
ment needs the authority to act before a substance can
harm human health or the environment. The previous laws,
Congress found, authorize the government to act only after
widespread exposure and possibly serious harm have
occurred.
Under TSCA EPA gathers information on chemicals and
identifies those that are harmful. Then the Agency is
authorized to regulate those whose risk of harm outweigh
their benefits to society and the economy.
The reach of TSCA is extremely broad. It encompasses
the estimated 70,000 chemicals manufactured for commer-
cial purposes and the several million research and devel-
opment chemicals. The law places the entire chemical in-
dustry under comprehensive Federal regulation for the first
time. EPA's authority touches virtually every facet of the
industry product development, testing, manufacturing,
distribution, use and disposal.
And because the law treats importers of chemical sub-
stances as if they were domestic manufacturers, it extends
EPA's control to certain aspects of the multi-billion dollar
international chemical trade.
EPA's policy for regulating chemicals under TSCA in-
cludes the following major provisions:
Highest priority will be given to chemicals that pose the
greatest risk from the point of view of both toxicity and ex-
posure.
Chemicals that may produce chronic and irreversible
health effects such as cancer, birth defects, and gene
mutations will be given higher priority than those that pro-
duce acute effects such as eye and skin irritation.
-------
Substances that are widely dispersed in the environment
and that may significantly disrupt ecosystems will take
higher priority than those that threaten species other than
man.
EPA has set a number of priorities under TSCA, in-
cluding the following:
Information gathering and testing receive the highest
priority, along with setting up a premanufacture notification
program under which new chemicals will be systematically
reviewed for health and environmental effects before they
go on the market.
At the same time the Agency will focus on the risks o1
known high-toxicity, high-exposure chemicals and on tak-
ing early regulatory action where unreasonable risks out-
weigh benefits.
EPA will use TSCA to promote effective control of toxic
chemicals under other Federal toxics related laws.
May 1 of this year marked a milestone in the Agency's
information gathering efforts. That was the deadline for in-
dustry to submit data on all chemicals currently on the
market. When the Agency finishes processing this data by
early next year, it will publish an inventory that will con-
stitute the most complete picture ever of commercial
chemicals used by our society.
Thirty days after the inventory is published TSCA's pre-
manufacture notification provisions take effect. This will re-
quire manufacturers or importers of "new" chemicals
those not on the inventory to notify the Agency at least
90 days in advance of manufacturing a chemical for com-
mercial distribution and use.
In its first action in regulating high-toxicity, high-
exposure chemicals EPA ordered that existing equipment
containing polychloroinated biphenyl (PCB) be specially
marked, and that when the equipment has completed its
useful life it be disposed of in accordance with procedures
that will prevent the chemical from entering the environ-
ment. Further, the Agency has proposed a regulation that
would ban the manufacture, processing, distribution, or
use of PCB unless the chemical is totally enclosed.
22
-------
Continuing the Battle Against Noise
For many of us noise is a nuisance to put up with if we are
to live in cities and enjoy the benefits of the machine. But
it is estimated that more than 20 million urban Americans
are exposed to noise levels everyday that are permanently
damaging to hearing. There is growing evidence that ex-
cessive noise contributes to the development of high blood
pressure and other heart and circulatory problems. For ex-
ample, a recent study found that grade school children liv-
ing and going to school under aircraft flight paths had
higher blood pressure than children in a quieter community.
Under the Noise Control Act of 1972 EPA is required to
issue regulations controlling newly manufactured products
that are major sources of noise. Early under the law EPA
issued regulations for portable air compressors and medium
and heavy trucks. In the past year the Agency proposed
regulations for garbage trucks, wheel and crawler tractors,
buses and motorcycles, and identified power lawn mowers
and pavement breakers for future control.
Except for big trucks motorcycles are the loudest
vehicles on the road. Nearly every survey of local com-
munities puts motorcycle noise at the top of the list as a
source of annoyance. EPA's regulation should result by
1985 in a five decibel reduction in noise from new motor-
cycles on city streets. Each three decibel reduction is a
perceptible lowering of noise volume. The regulation covers
new replacement mufflers for existing motorcycles, and
covers Mopeds.
23
-------
Holding the Line on Air Pollution
In June of this year EPA issued rules to limit increases of
air pollution in those areas of the country where the air is
still relatively clean. Under the rules new industries moving
into these areas will be required to install the best controls
for curbing pollution that are available. The rules apply
primarily to such major industries as power plants, steel
mills, refineries and chemical plants. They protect not only
parks and wilderness areas where the air is still pristine, but
any place in the country where the air is better than the
minimum standards set by EPA for the protection of
health.
The rules exemplify the Agency's efforts to streamline
new regulatory programs without sacrificing environmental
objectives. For example, the number of sources subject to
detailed preconstruction review was reduced from a poten-
tial 4,000 to about 1,600 per year with virtually no increase
in pollution. In addition, the regulations provide the oppor-
tunity for existing plant owners to remove modernization or
expansion projects from detailed preconstruction review by
reducing pollution from other sources at the plant site.
24
-------
Policing the Sources of Air and
Water Pollution
Putting aside automobiles for the moment there is a total
of approximately 200,000 stationary sources of air pollution
in the United States. Putting aside runoff from farms, city
streets and other such areas there are approximately 70,000
point sources of water pollution in the country.
Of these total sources of pollution 80 percent of the ma-
jor ones have invested in the engineering control needed to
bring their operations in compliance with the Clean Air Act
and the Water Pollution Control Act. Of those which are not
yet in compliance many have been given more time by EPA
or the States.
There are, however, several hundred major sources of
pollution which after 5 to 7 years of continuing government
efforts to bring them into compliance still violate State or
Federal standards. This small minority, less than 3 percent
of the total, includes some of the worst violators and some
of the most recalcitrant. For them compliance is long over-
due.
In the past year EPA has carried out a total of 700 en-
forcement actions against sources of air pollution.
In addition to State efforts EPA has initiated 76 enforce-
ment actions against power plants. The 10 coal-fired plants
of the Tennessee Valley Authority have been a particular
target and EPA has taken the unprecedented step of inter-
vening against TVA in a citizen's suit to force compliance
with Federal and State standards.
Also in air pollution' EPA has initiated 43 enforcement
actions against firms involved in integrated steel processes.
In water pollution the major enforcement drive has
focused on those factories which failed to meet the July,
1977 deadline of EPA's National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System and on those cities and towns which
failed to complete adequate sewage treatment plants by
that same date.
To help make sure that new automobiles meet Federal
emission standards EPA last year began to test cars at the
factory as they came off the assembly line. If the cars were
found to exceed EPA's standards the Agency could stop
their being sold. As a result manufacturers themselves have
begun to test a substantial number of cars as they come
off the assembly line. Such voluntary testing can only im-
prove the performance of new cars as they are delivered to
-------
the dealer and hence to the customer.
EPA also regularly samples automobiles on the road and
tests them to determine whether pollution control equip-
ment is operating satisfactorily. During the past year ap-
proximately 3.5 million cars were recalled to correct
defects. Owners who brought their cars in for recall were
provided repairs by the dealer at no cost.
Most automobiles manufactured since 1975 are equipped
with catalytic converters which require the use of unleaded
gasoline. Leaded gasoline deactivates the catalyst and
causes an approximately tenfold increase in emissions.
Based on reports from gasoline retailers that some new car
owners were using leaded gasoline, EPA in the fall of 1977
initiated field surveys to determine the extent of such fuel
switching. The surveys show that 10 percent of the post
1974 vehicle population is improperly using leaded fuel.
Because of the severe air pollution impacts resulting from
such switching EPA is actively working to determine the
reasons for fuel switching so that appropriate remedies can
be carried out.
26
-------
Office Workers Recycle Paper
At its Washington headquarters office EPA has earned
$15,000 for the U.S. Treasury during the first two years of
the Agency's wastepaper recycling program. Under the
program office workers routinely separate high grade paper
from other trash. The paper is then collected at the end of
each day by a commercial recycling firm that pays the
Treasury $55 for every ton it collects.
The amount of money may seem small but following
EPA's leadership paper recycling is being increasingly prac-
ticed throughout the Federal government. Currently 90,000
Federal employees in eight cities recycle paper and both
President Carter and the Congress have backed the pro-
gram. When the program is in full operation an estimated
500,000 employees will be participating and the savings to
the government should reach between $500,000 and
$750,000.
-------
EPA Works Hand-in-Hand With Other
Health and Safety Agencies
The Environmental Protection Agency carries out eight dif-
ferent laws all of which are designed to protect the public
health and welfare. Similarly, the Food and Drug Adminis-
tration administers three laws, the Consumer Product Safe-
ty Commission five, and the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration one. These laws were drafted by the
Congress in response to problems that demanded urgent
attention at difference times in our recent history.
Although the mission of each of the agencies is different,
some of the laws they administer, especially those having
to do with toxic chemicals, overlap. Each agency regulates
chemicals and the industries that manufacture them to pro-
tect against different effects. This requires that each gather
large amounts of information on chemicals to evaluate their
potential threat to public health and the environment.
In August of 1977, in response to President Carter's pro-
mise to eliminate waste and duplication in government, the
four agencies set up an Interagency Regulatory Liaison
Group under which they share information and resources,
reduce the demands for reports from industry, and other-
wise streamline the machinery of regulating toxic
chemicals.
The first product of this cooperative venture was the
phase out of chlorofluorocarbons in aerosol products in
March of this year. The National Academy of Sciences had
confirmed that chlorofluorocarbons threaten the earth's
ozone layer in the upper atmosphere, thereby allowing an
increase in the ultraviolet rays reaching the earth. Such an
increase could produce more skin cancer, could damage
plants and animals, and change the earth's climate.
-------
EPA Will Register Pesticides
Genetically
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) assigns EPA the responsibility for protecting
human health and the environment from any commercially
available product used to kill germs, insects, rodents and
other animal pests as well as weeds and fungi. Under the
law pesticide products cannot be sold unless they are first
registered with the Agency.
Under the 1972 Amendments to FIFRA EPA is required
to reregister the 35,000 pesticides previously registered and
already on the market. If this scrutiny reveals that a par-
ticular product poses an unreasonable risk to human health
or the environment, when weighed against its benefits to
agriculture and society, then it must be removed from the
marketplace or subjected to restrictions on its use.
For a variety of reasons the registration of new pesticides
as well as the reregistration of existing products has pro-
ceeded slowly. The law itself has required EPA to in-
vestigate each product individually and to make a separate
regulatory decision on that product even though it may be
chemically the same as many others the Agency has
already examined. Further, the Agency' efforts have
sometimes been stymied by court suits over data compen-
sation and trade secret issues.
Last year President Carter asked Congress to amend
FIFRA so that EPA could take a "generic" approach to
registering pesticides. Under this approach the Agency will
be able to make one broad regulatory decision for an entire
group of pesticides that all contain the same active
chemical ingredients rather than having to look at products
separately. Under this approach the Agency will have to
consider fewer than 1,000 active ingredients. It will then set
standards for these ingredients and will register products
according to whether they measure up to the standards.
To go hand-in-hand with the generic system EPA also
asked the Congress for a conditional registration authority
under which a new product could be marketed until such
time as generic standards covering its ingredients were
developed. Before granting a conditional registration, how-
ever, the Agency must determine that no incremental
hazard would result from marketing the product.
In August of this year the Congress passed the new
amendments to FIFRA, and in September the President
-------
signed them into law.
Also under EPA's pesticide program more than a million
private applicators, most of them farmers, and 150,000
commercial applicators have been trained and certified in
the safe use of pesticides. Only certified applicators are
allowed to use pesticides that have been classified by the
Agency as being for "restricted use only". The program
trains applicators in the proper use, handling, storage and
disposal of pesticides.
-------
Where We Go From Here
During the next two years EPA will give highest priority to
four issues that cut across all the Agency's programs.
Protecting Public Health. The public is concerned that it
is being involuntarily exposed to health risks which ought
to and can be controlled. The Congress has responded. It
has asked EPA to protect drinking water, to obtain infor-
mation on chemicals and control those that are unreason-
ably harmful, to control hazardous wastes and regulate
dangerous pollutants in both air and water. It has just
amended the pesticides law to greatly simplify the pro-
cedures for registering pesticides. It has also strengthened
the Agency's rulemaking and enforcement powers signifi-
cantly.
The newly expanded and energized Office of Toxic
Substances will try to screen new chemicals so that the
Agency can act on unreasonably harmful chemicals before,
not after, they have been released into the environment. It
will pull together all the Agency's and much of the rest
of the government's data base on toxic substances and
it will help prioritize and coordinate the government's infor-
mation gathering and control activities. In the process it
will help integrate Agency programs.
Research and Development is strengthening its health ef-
fects work, and EPA's 1979 budget increases its investment
in this area. Other commitments include: toxic effluent
guidelines and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System program, designation of hazardous pollutants under
the Clean Air Act, review and regulation of pesticides,
development of maximum contaminant levels in drinking
water, and implementation of hazardous waste regulations.
Enforcing the Law. EPA must enforce the law. It must do
so firmly and skillfully so that those who are regulated
know that voluntary compliance makes sense that every-
one else is also cleaning up and that, in any case, non-
compliance does not pay. Implementing an economic
penalties policy, built in part on new powers given to the
Agency by the Congress this year, is critical. The Agency
must also make sure that Federal facilities, very visible sym-
bols to others who are regulated comply with the law. At
the same time EPA must recognize that it serves several
publics. It is not a single constituency agency. It must pro-
ceed in a balanced, reasonable fashion.
31
-------
Integrating Environmental Regulation. EPA was created
to understand and control the impact people are having on
the planet's life support system. Although it has to break
this task down into manageable pieces, the Agency's
research, rule-making, and even its case-by-case applica-
tion of policy will not make sense if it loses sight of the
whole. Striking the right balance is one of EPA's central
management tasks. Over the next two years the Agency
can finish much of the integrating begun seven years ago.
It is addressing these issues on several fronts:
integrating EPA programs;
integrating Federal, State and local environmental pro-
grams;
integrating EPA programs with other Federal agencies.
Regulatory Reform. EPA now has more than 40
regulatory reforms underway. The Agency's model effort to
reform the writing of regulations is described earlier. Many
of the reforms substitute economic incentives for regula-
tions or establish economic incentives as complements to
regulations. For example, the technology waiver which is
endorsed by the Congress allows companies that develop
innovative technologies an extension of up to 5 years in
meeting pollution control requirements. The new tech-
nology must achieve control more cheaply or more effec-
tively than that already on the shelf.
For another example, alternative to the traditional
command-and-control form of regulation is the marketable
rights approach in which the right to discharge a given
pollutant is auctioned off in the marketplace. It is thought
that the marketplace bidding would in itself allocate the
right to discharge limited amounts of a given pollutant to
those sources which produce the most valuable products.
This would lead to a more efficient allocation of costs to
society than would the traditional approach of government
bans on products or processes.
Taken as a whole, the regulatory reforms now in place or
now being studied by EPA promise to give those affected
by our regulations considerably more flexibility in con-
trolling pollution than they have had in the past. The Agen-
cy's managers and staff have been encouraged to find ad-
ditional reforms.
AU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE- 1979O 624-50" 1079 REGION 3-1
32
-------
-------
EPA is charged by Congress to protect the Nation's, land, air and water
systems Under a mandate of national environmental laws focused on air
and water quality, solid waste management and the contiol of toxic
substances, pesticides, noise and radiation, the Agency strives to fdrmulate
and implement actions which lead to a compatible balance between human
activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life.
If you have suggestions, questions,
or requests for further information, they
may be directed to your nearest
EPA Regional public information olfice
EPA Region 1 JFK
Federal Bldg. Boston
MA 02203 Connec
ticut, Maine, Massachu-
setts, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, Vermont
617-2237210
EPA Region 2 26
Federal Plaza New
York NY 10007 New
Jersey, New Yotk, Puer-
to Rico, Virgin Islands
212-2642525
EPA Region 3 6th
t
EPA Region 4 345
Courtland Street NE
Atlanta GA 30308
Alabama, Georgia,
Florida, Mississippi,
North Carolina, South
Carolina, Tennessee,
Kentucky 404-881-4727
EPA Region 5 230 S
Dearborn Chicago IL
60604 Illinois, Indiana,
Ohio, Michigan, Wiscon-
sin, Minnesota
312-353-2000
f»n
EPA Region 7 324
East 11th Street
Kansas City MO 64106
Iowa, Kansas,
Missouri, Nebraska
816-374 5493
EPA Region 8 1860
Lincoln Street
Denver CO 802031 Col-
orado, Utah, Wyoming,
Montana, North Dakota,
South Dakota
303-837-3895
EPA Region 9 215
Fremont Street San
Francisco CA 94105
Arizona, California,
Nevada, Hawaii, Guam,
American Samoa, Trust
Territories of the Pacific
415-556-2320
------- |