Local
Government
r^ollution "revention
TOOLKIT
CBP/TRS 202/98
EPA903-K-98-001
Tools and models
to help local governments
implement pollution prevention (P2)
and protect the
Chesapeake Bay, its rivers and streams.
The
Chesapeake Bay
Pollution Watershed
Prevention
EPA 903/
K-98-001
May 1998
J A^" EPA Report Collection
Regional Center for Environmental Information
U.S. EPA Region III
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
U.S. EPA Region II!
Regional Center for Environmental
Information
1650 Arch Street (3PM52)
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Local Government
Pollution Prevention
Toolkit
Tools and models to help local governments
implement pollution prevention (P2) and protect the
Chesapeake Bay, its rivers and streams
May 1998
Printed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
Pollution Prevention Toolkit
prepared on behalf of
the Chesapeake Bay Program's
Toxic Subcommittee
and
Local Government Advisory Committee
by
Redman/Johnston Associates, Ltd.
Printed on recycled paper
-------
Local Government Pollution Prevention
Toolkit
Table of Contents
Introduction l
What is Pollution Prevention? 2
What Can Local Governments Do to Promote P2? 2
Why is P2 Important? 3
Local Government Challenge 4
Developing a Local Government Pollution Prevention Program 5
Introduction 5
How Do You Measure the Economic Benefits of P2? 5
What are the Barriers to Developing a P2 Program? 7
Securing and Sustaining Support for a P2 Program 7
Developing a Local Government P2 Program 8
Office Maintenance 11
Composting 15
Fleet Maintenance 17
Managing the Land 19
Maintaining the Land 23
Case Studies 25
#1 CFC Equipment Replacement - Norfolk, VA 25
#2 Co-Composting Facility for Solid Waste - Adams County, PA 27
#3 German Branch Integrated Pest Management Project -
Queen Anne's County, MD 29
#4 An Integrated Waste Management Program - Lancaster County, PA 31
#5 Low-Impact Development - Prince George's County, MD 33
#6 Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park - Cape Charles, VA 37
Promoting P2 in the Small Business Community 39
Introduction 39
Why Promote P2 in the Small Business Community? 40
What are the Benefits of Promoting P2? 40
Developing a P2 Business Outreach Program 41
Getting Your Small Businesses Involved 42
Tools to Advance Small Business P2 Programs 43
Case Studies 45
#7 BMP Manual for Automotive Related Industries - Alexandria, VA 45
#8 Businesses for a Cleaner River, Elizabeth River Project - Tidewater, VA 47
#9 "Eco-Wise Program" - Montgomery County. MD 49
#10 Enviro-& Program - Allegheny County, PA 51
#11 Pollution Prevention Assessments - Hampton Roads, VA 53
#12 Waste Audits and Household Hazardous Waste Program -
Fauquier Count}', VA 55
-------
Promoting P2 to Citizens 59
Introduction 59
Why Encourage P2 to Citizens? 60
Promoting P2 to Citizens 60
Getting Citizens Involved 62
Tools to Promote P2 to Citizens 62
Case Studies 63
#13 Bayscapes - Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay 63
#14 "Let's Be Partners..." Program - Baltimore County, MD 65
#15 The Water-wise Gardener Program and Handbook -
Prince William County, VA 67
Assistance Programs 69
Bibliography 79
Appendices 81
A. Chesapeake Bay Program Recognition Programs 81
Businesses for the Bay
Chesapeake Bay Partner Communities
B. Developing a Local Government P2 Program 91
Economic Cost Accounting Technique
Purchasing Policies Checklist
P2 Model Ordinances and Policies
C. Promoting P2 Activities to Small Businesses 103
Steps to Establishing a P2 Program
Economic and Technical Evaluation Forms
P2 Checklists
Educational Brochures
D. Promoting P2 Activities to Citizens 117
Educational Brochures
-------
Introduction
LoCS
sal governments in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed, of which there are over 1,650, have repeat-
edly indicated a need for tools, tech-
niques and models to help them con-
tribute to the Chesapeake Bay restora-
tion and protection effort and simulta-
neously, achieve community goals.
With this in mind, the Chesapeake
Bay Program's Toxics Subcommittee,
in coordination with the Chesapeake
Bay Local Government Advisory
Committee, developed the Local Gov-
ernment Pollution Prevention Toolkit
to help local governments implement pollution pre-
vention programs. Local governments are vital to the
pollution prevention (P2) effort; however, a gap exists
in the practical and technical information available to
this audience. The Toolkit seeks to fill this gap.
The first goal of the Toolkit is to raise awareness of the
local government audience regarding pollution pre-
vention opportunities that exist at the local level. This
is achieved by explaining the role local governments
have in P2, describing the benefits P2 activities can
have on a community, and listing P2 activities local
The Toolkit Is organized into
three main topic areas:
Developing a Local Government
Pollution Prevention Program
Promoting Pollution Prevention
to the Small Business Community
Promoting Pollution Prevention
to Citizens
governments can implement. Beyond raising aware-
ness at the local level, the Toolkit seeks to help local
governments implement pollu-
tion prevention activities. Practi-
cal step-by-step information,
supported by case study exam-
ples, help to achieve this objec-
tive. Since everyone has a role
in pollution prevention, the
document examines strategies
local governments can take to
enlist their business community
and citizens in pollution preven-
tion activities. Again, case study examples under-
score how these strategies have been successfully ap-
plied in a locality.
These three topic areas are supported by an extensive
listing of technical and financial resources that are
available to local governments and appendices which
include examples of P2 ordinances, policies, educa-
tional brochures and other information that local gov-
ernments are currently utilizing. To further facilitate
the promotion of pollution prevention at the local
level, a brochure is available that highlights activities
Benefits of Implementing Pollution Prevention Activities
A k^y fact to remember is that preventing pollution is good for everyone involved. Beyond reducing health and
environmental risks for humans and living resources, pollution prevention makes sense for economic reasons.
Many of the following benefits can be realized by local governments in the Chesapeake Bay watershed:
Saving money for local governments through reduced purchasing and energy savings;
» Supporting current andJuture regulatory compliance;
» Increasing efficiency of operations and use of resources;
Establishing a positive environment for new business development;
* Creating a positive public reaction based on win-win environmental protection policy;
Protecting local natural resources and contributes to the protection of the Chesapeake Bay.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 1
-------
local governments can take in the P2 area. Combined,
the document's chapters, case studies, appendix and
brochure constitute the Local Government Pollution
Prevention Toolkit.
What is Pollution
Prevention?
^Dilution prevention (P2), the preferred ap-
proach to environmental protection, seeks to reduce or
eliminate the harmful effects of hazardous and non-
hazardous pollution at the source or prevent it from
entering the environment or a waste stream. By pre-
venting or minimizing pollution at the source, the
quantity and toxicity of harmful contaminants enter-
ing the environment through the air, soil, and water is
reduced. Pollution prevention reduces health and en-
vironmental risks because it aims to halt the occur-
rence of pollution in the first place.
Conversely, pollution control seeks methods for
proper disposal, treatment, or clean-up after pollution
is released into the environment or waste stream. Pol-
lution control has been the traditional mechanism used
by communities in protecting the environment; how-
ever, this approach can be costly and lead to regulatory
compliance issues. Pollution prevention, on the other
hand, challenges communities, businesses, and others
to evaluate the processes that create pollution and seek
solutions that either minimize or eliminate the produc-
tion of pollution. Utilizing this approach, local gov-
ernments, businesses, and citizens can save money
and help achieve regulatory compliance.
Local governments can integrate pollution prevention
practices into their purchasing procedures, processing
activities, and regulatory policies. For instance, local
governments can seek to reduce the amount of chemi-
cal contaminants they purchase by substituting non-
hazardous products for these goods. Local govern-
ments can also reduce the overall amount of goods
purchased which reduces the amount of waste enter-
ing the wastestream. Additionally, processing activi-
ties, such as fleet maintenance and office mainte-
nance, can become more efficient. Efficiency leads to
higher productivity and reduced costs. Finally, by in-
tegrating pollution prevention principles into their
regulatory policies, local governments can conserve
community resources (i.e., land, goods, and services).
By taking steps to eliminate or minimize pollution, lo-
cal governments protect their valuable local natural re-
sources, create sustainable solutions to waste manage-
ment challenges, and help protect and restore the
Chesapeake Bay.
What Can Local
Governments Do to
Promote P2?
community leaders, local governments
play a critical role in supporting new and innovative
initiatives that help achieve community goals and ob-
jectives. Since implementing new approaches can
face opposition, it takes a strong commitment by local
government officials to make pollution prevention ac-
tivities work in a community.
To help local governments make that commitment, the
Toolkit identifies three fundamental roles local gov-
ernments have in integrating pollution prevention
practices at the local level. First, local governments
should lead by example by implementing P2 programs
in their own facilities and in their operations. Local
governments can serve as the model to the rest of the
community and demonstrate how pollution prevention
can result in economic and environmental benefits.
Implementing P2 in local government
facilities and operations
Increase employee awareness of the importance
of pollution prevention and provide incentives
for more efficient practices;
Direct growth and development to appropriate
locations and target land for preservation;
Utilize integrated pest management on public
lands to minimize the environmental impacts of
pest control.
The second role of local governments in preventing
pollution is to promote P2 practices to the business
community. Raising the business community's
awareness to the benefits of implementing pollution
prevention activities can result in improved relations
between local government and the business sector and
contribute to the achievement of community goals.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Promoting P2 activities to businesses
Sponsor small business educational workshops
and recognition programs to promote aware-
ness and encourage involvement in pollution
prevention activities;
Promote the use of water-efficient fixtures to re-
duce consumption;
Encourage the purchase and use of non-toxic
cleaning products.
The third role local governments have in promoting
pollution prevention is to encourage their citizens to
implement pollution prevention techniques at home.
Citizens can take many steps to incorporate pollution
prevention principles into their daily habits and rou-
tines. Local governments promote those steps and in
the process, improve the community's quality of life
and protect the environment.
Promoting P2 activities to citizens
Promote the use of plants and tree species na-
tive to the Chesapeake Bay watershed;
Encourage the use of low flow faucets and
shower heads;
Advocate the purchasing of recycled and non-
hazardous products;
Recommend composting of kitchen waste and
yard trimmings.
The Toolkit is organized to help local governments
take successful steps in integrating pollution preven-
tion activities at the local level in each of these three
areas.
Why is P2 Important?
l^rotecting the environment, managing
waste, and ensuring a good quality of life are chal-
lenges most directly dealt with at the local level. Pol-
lution prevention is a practice that assists local govern-
ments in addressing each of these local challenges in
an efficient and often cost-effective manner. Pollution
prevention activities are important because they have
the ability to address these challenges simultaneously.
Pollution prevention activities have demonstrated
their ability to protect vital and sensitive natural re-
sources. In utilizing pollution prevention techniques,
local governments and others have reduced overall
consumption of goods and services and reduced the
amount of chemical contaminants discharged into the
air, water and soil. In addition, local governments,
businesses and others have found that pollution pre-
vention supports both current and future regulatory
compliance.
Local Government Highlight
City of Cincinnati, Ohio
Substituting lead-free, waterborne paint
for leaded, solvent-based paints for painting
road markings prevented 33,000 pounds of
lead and 36,000 pounds of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from entering the
environment in Cincinnati. The Department
of Public Works avoided costs with media and
chemical specific regulations by making the
switch.
Pollution prevention activities also help protect and
restore the Chesapeake Bay. The Chesapeake Bay
Program has identified source reduction as the pre-
ferred option to preventing chemical contaminants
from harming our environment. In 1994, the Bay Pro-
gram adopted a Chesapeake Bay Basinwide Toxics
Reduction and Prevention Strategy to work towards a
Bay "Free of Toxics". The Strategy set the goal of
achieving 100 percent voluntary participation by
states and local governments within the Chesapeake
Bay basin in the implementation of pollution preven-
tion programs aimed at further reducing the use and
generation of potentially toxic chemicals at their fa-
cilities. Furthermore, the Chesapeake Bay Program's
Strategy seeks the voluntary participation of 75 per-
cent of industrial facilities and commercial estab-
lishments, with an emphasis on small businesses, in
the implementation of pollution prevention programs.
The Strategy seeks to achieve both these goals by the
year 2000.
By implementing pollution prevention activities and
thereby reducing the use and generation of chemical
contaminants, the water quality of the Bay will im-
prove, and the living resources that inhabit the Bay,
including fish, oysters and waterfowl, will be health-
ier.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 3
-------
Pollution prevention also helps communities establish
more sustainable strategies to reduce and manage
waste. Recent national trends indicate that Americans
continue to produce excessive amounts of waste. In
fact, a recent study projected that Americans will pro-
duce over 250 million tons of municipal solid waste in
the year 2000 (Characterization of Municipal Solid
Waste in the united States, 1996). This projection is
an increase of over 50 million tons from 1995 figures
and an increase of more than 100 million tons from
1980 statistics. The following chart indicates the
amount of solid waste generated in the Chesapeake
Bay watershed.
Solid Waste
Generated in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
(thousands of pounds per day)
65
6891
1990 1995
Sot*ce Chesapeake Bay Local Government Advisory Committee
2000 2010
(projected) (projected)
Finally, pollution prevention is a mechanism that can
contribute to a positive quality of life in communities.
Issues that affect quality of life, such as pollution,
crime, and economics can be addressed, to a certain
degree, through the implementation of pollution pre-
vention programs. For example, several local govern-
ments and state agencies in the Chesapeake Bay wa-
tershed are providing voluntary, non-regulatory pollu-
tion prevention audits to the small business commu-
nity. The voluntary audit helps businesses identify op-
portunities to reduce the amount and toxicity of their
waste. Businesses can implement the recommenda-
tions made during the audit and, as a result, save
money and support current and future compliance of
regulations. This pollution prevention activity builds a
stronger level of trust between government and the
private sector, helps protect the environment, and pro-
motes a healthy local economy.
Local Government
Challenge
I o some degree, pollution prevention has a
role to play in each of the over 1650 local governments
in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The Governors in
Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia and the Mayor
of B.C. have signed a directive that asks for 100 per-
cent voluntary participation of local governments in
the Chesapeake Bay watershed in the implementation
of pollution prevention activities. We hope that you
will use the information in this Toolkit to achieve that
goal.
If your community is doing good things in this area,
we'd like to hear about it. Your input ensures that we
continue to provide the information and services that
help you help yourself protect local natural resources
and the Chesapeake Bay. Please call the Chesapeake
Bay Local Government Advisory Committee at (800)
446-LGAC to share your initiatives.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Developing a Local Government
Pollution Prevention Program
1
Introduction
that P2 activities can be successfully implemented and
result in economic and environmental benefits.
seal governments are in a unique position
to fundamentally change the way in which we protect
local and regional environments, improve economies,
and create quality communities. By focusing the at-
tention and resources of environmental protection at
the pollution source - not at the end of the pipe - local
governments can reduce the amount of pollution gen-
erated and the costs it entails. An approach that makes
both environmental and economic sense, P2 focuses
on making processes more efficient, less toxic, and
less costly and, as a result, environmentally sound and
economically feasible.
Supporting Case Studies
CFC Equipment Replacement
Norfolk, Virginia
Co-Composting Facility
Adams County, Pennsylvania
IPM Project
Queen Anne's County, Maryland
Integrated Waste Management Program
Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Low-Impact Development
Prince George's County, Maryland
Sustainable Technologies Industrial
Park
Cape Charles, Virginia
In addition to improving their own procedures and ac-
tivities, local governments can serve as the commu-
nity's living laboratory, demonstrating the innovative
techniques and cost savings of taking such actions as
conserving water and energy, reducing the generation
of waste, and substituting toxic materials for non-toxic
materials. As such, local governments have the op-
portunity to demonstrate to businesses and citizens
Collectively, local governments in the Chesapeake
Bay watershed are one of the leading producers of
waste and pollution. But local governments can, and
in some cases are, reversing this trend by implement-
ing P2 and, in the process, influencing others to follow
their lead. Local government procedures and policies,
such as procurement activities, office maintenance,
ground maintenance, and land use management poli-
cies can integrate P2 practices that reduce waste, pro-
tect environmentally sensitive lands, and conserve
public funds.
The following chapter describes the economic bene-
fits of P2, the barriers of implementing P2, mecha-
nisms to secure and maintain support for P2 activities,
and a step-by-step process for local governments to
consider in developing a pollution prevention pro-
gram. Local government case studies, included at the
end of each chapter, underscore the benefits of imple-
menting pollution prevention programs.
How Do You Measure the
Economic Benefits of P2?
D
"etermining the economic benefits of im-
plementing pollution prevention can be a difficult
task. Local governments often consider only the pur-
chasing cost of a product or cost of an activity to de-
termine what products to purchase and what activities
to undertake. Unfortunately, such budgeting and op-
erating procedures do not account for the true costs of
those products and activities. For instance, many lo-
cal governments will purchase office equipment based
solely on the purchase price of that equipment. How-
ever, in certain cases, purchasing higher-priced, more
efficient equipment can save local governments in en-
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 5
-------
ergy and maintenance costs, as well as reduce the per-
centage of hazardous and non-hazardous waste gener-
ated. Since many local governments often do not fac-
tor in energy costs and waste handling in their pur-
chasing procedures, such long term cost savings are
never realized.
Local Government Highlight
City and County of San Francisco, California
The experiences of the City and County
of San Francisco demonstrate the
challenges in applying "green " purchasing
procedures. Recently, the City and County
developed an Energy Management Action
Plan to improve energy conservation in
local government facilities. In developing
the Plan, they examined local government
procedural barriers to energy conservation.
One such procedural barrier uncovered was
the government's standard budgeting
procedures which discouraged the
purchasing of supplies that conserved
energy.
They found that by installing a compact
fluorescent in place of an incandescent light
bulb saves the City $25 in energy costs and
$40 in labor changing lamps. However, it
does cost the government $10 more to
purchase. Since the purchasing procedures
require the government to purchase the
lower cost product, in this case the
incandescents, and because the energy
savings are not returned to the department
realizing the savings, and since the
maintenance savings are not immediately
available as budget dollars, departments do
not have the resources or the incentive to
make the most cost-effective decisions. By
not purchasing a compact fluorescent, the
City loses $55 per light bulb over the long
term (ICMA, Preventing Pollution).
cedure, environmental costs and benefits are evalu-
ated, quantified, and added to the market price of pur-
chasing, installing, using, maintaining, and finally,
disposing of the product. Although complicated, this
technique encourages local governments to make pur-
chasing decisions based on long-term economic and
environmental considerations (ICMA, Preventing
Pollution).
A similar example that can help a local government
realize the economic benefits of pollution prevention
is Total-Cost Assessment (TCA). Total-Cost Assess-
ment is a comprehensive financial analysis of the life
cycle costs and savings of a pollution prevention pro-
ject. A TCA approach includes the following:
internal allocation of environmental costs to
product lines or processes through full-cost ac-
counting;
inclusion in a project financial analysis of di-
rect and indirect costs and short-and long-term
costs, liability costs, and less tangible benefits
of an investment;
evaluation of project costs and savings over a
long time period (for example, 10 to 15 years);
and
use measures of profitability that capture the
long-term profitability of a project (for exam-
ple, net present value and internal rate of re-
turn) (ASTM).
In addition to the two approaches listed above, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is encourag-
ing a similar accounting approach called Environ-
mental Cost Accounting. This approach encourages
businesses and others to consider environmental cost
accounting as a tool for internal business. In doing so,
the U.S. EPA believes that businesses will clearly see
the financial advantages of implementing pollution
prevention practices (U.S. EPA, Introduction to Envi-
ronmental Accounting).
In order to realize the cost effectiveness of applying
pollution prevention techniques, local governments
should consider adopting new accounting procedures.
Several accounting procedures have been developed
in order to determine the true cost of purchasing a
product or paying for a service. One such accounting
procedure is called Life Cycle Cost Accounting which
not only takes into consideration the purchase cost of
a product, but determines how much the product will
cost throughout its lifetime. Using this accounting pro-
If done well, local governments can demonstrate the
financial benefits to implementing pollution preven-
tion practices which, in turn, will help secure and sus-
tain support for a pollution prevention program. A
cost accounting technique is located in Appendix B of
the document. Local governments are encouraged to
review the technique and consider using it as a means
of determining what pollution prevention activities
would be most appropriate to implement.
6 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
What are the Barriers to
Developing a P2 Program?
I here are inherent barriers to developing
any new programs in local government, particularly
non-mandated programs. These barriers can be over-
come by a persistent staff, top level support, dedicated
funding sources, community support, and ultimately
measurable program results. Some of the most pro-
hibitive barriers to starting a local government P2 pro-
gram are:
Lack of Program Understanding - Local gov-
ernment officials and staff are involved in such
diverse activities that new programs often take
a backseat to day-to-day activities. Therefore,
there is often a lack of understanding regarding
new programs, techniques, etc.
Limited Resources - Local governments often
lack the financial and/or the technical means to
implement pollution prevention programs.
Even if financial resources are available and a
willingness to implement a pollution preven-
tion program is there, staff to implement the
program may not exist. Conversely, if staffing
resources are available and initial start-up fund-
ing is available, maintaining those financial re-
sources beyond the start-up is very difficult.
Increasing Demands - The complexity and
sheer number of environmental laws and regu-
lations often place managers in a reactive
mode, unable to expend resources for develop-
ment "non-mandated" programs.
Justifying a Need - Evaluating the effective-
ness of pollution prevention programs can be a
frustrating experience because the results are
typically long-term and do not fall neatly into
the typical quantitative measurement mode.
(Wigglesworth, A Practical Guide for State
and Local Governments)
Lack of Coordination - Departments and agen-
cies within a local government can further com-
plicate the development of new environmental
protection programs such as P2. Often caught
up in day-to-day activities unique to a certain
department and agency, coordination becomes
a difficult task. However, coordination be-
tween these departments and agencies is criti-
cal for both making a pollution prevention pro-
gram successful in terms of overall reductions
in waste, as well as sustaining support for the
program.
> Regulatory Impediments - Current regulatory
barriers can impede the progress of a P2 pro-
gram. Such regulatory barriers include empha-
sis on recycling programs which draws atten-
tion away from source reduction; regulatory fo-
cus on "end-of-the-pipe" solutions; and a lack
of policies that provide incentives to promote
pollution prevention.
Securing and Sustaining
Support for a P2 Program
i local government has several funding op-
tions to consider in creating a pollution prevention
program. The options available to a local government
will depend on the program's focus. A list of grant
programs that a local government can take advantage
of are listed at the end of this publication. Beyond
these outside sources of funding, a local government
may consider using a portion of a dedicated fund for a
pollution prevention program. For instance, in
Montgomery County, Maryland, the EcoWise pro-
gram (see case study #9) is funded by a "system bene-
fit charge" that all commercial properties in the
County pay. Similarly, in Fauquier County, Virginia
(see case study #12), an Enterprise Fund supports its
recycling, P2 business outreach programs and house-
hold hazardous waste management program. Tapping
these dedicated sources of funding to support a pollu-
tion prevention program is another mechanism local
governments can use to secure financial support.
Unfortunately, the hardest task for a local government
pollution prevention effort is often sustaining support
after receiving initial funding. Marketing a program
and reporting regularly to higher management and
elected officials will ensure a level of awareness re-
garding the progress of the program. In addition, cre-
ating partnerships in implementing the program will
ensure broader public-private recognition of the pro-
gram which will also help support the program.
Clearly, the more community stakeholders involved in
the program, the stronger its support base.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 7
-------
Three specific strategies to preserving program fund-
ing for household hazardous waste programs are rec-
ommended. These strategies can be applied to main-
tain support for pollution prevention programs in gen-
eral. They are:
regularly bring the program to the attention of
budget decision-makers;
supplement information about environmental
benefits with information about public safety
benefits; and
cultivate program advocates.
Pollution prevention programs are unlike any other
traditional local government function Since pollution
prevention programs are successful when less is cre-
ated, it is difficult to remind people of their value.
Therefore, local government staff must consider new
ways to both market P2 programs and demonstrate
their measurable successes.
Developing a Local
Government P2 Program
I he following step-by-step guide can be
used in developing a local government pollution pre-
vention program. The steps are designed to help a lo-
cal government build support for the program, com-
plete waste evaluations, identify appropriate depart-
ments or facilities to start a program, establish goals
and objectives and measure and report on program
progress. The steps can be tailored to suit the individ-
ual needs of a specific local government pollution pre-
vention program.
D Educate and Seek Support of Elected
Officials and Staff
Pollution prevention is a relatively new and emerging
practice which protects the environment and can save
considerable budget dollars. Clearly, many local gov-
ernment staff and elected officials need to understand
what pollution prevention techniques can be imple-
mented by local governments and how that benefits a
local government and its community. Today, many lo-
cal governments may equate pollution prevention with
recycling, and although recycling may lead to source
reduction activities, it isn't considered pollution pre-
vention in its conventional sense.
The first step is to encourage local government staff
and elected officials to become familiar with local
government pollution prevention techniques and their
benefits. After some educational efforts have been
made, local government officials should be encour-
aged to support staff in undertaking a pollution pre-
vention program. This initial support by managers
and elected officials is key to starting a pollution pre-
vention program.
n Establish a Policy Statement
A local government should begin its pollution preven-
tion effort by development a policy statement on pol-
lution prevention. The policy statement should define
the reasons that P2 is being implemented, how it will
be accomplished, and who will be involved. The pol-
icy statement can be very formal and specific or gen-
eral in nature. For example, a policy statement might
state the following: It is the local government's policy
for all employees to reduce or eliminate the use of
toxic materials, to reduce the volume and toxicity of
all waste generated, and to recycle, reuse, or reclaim
materials whenever possible. On the other hand, a
policy statement may cover specific procedures or
components of a pollution prevention program.
CJ Start Small
Select a specific facility, department or process to tar-
get pollution prevention activities. The International
City County Association suggests that, "above all, it is
important to start small and build on success so that
initial efforts at pollution prevention are not hindered
by bureaucratic decision making and paperwork."
Therefore, its is critical to select a department or facil-
ity that is ready for such P2 activities to target a pilot
project for the local government.
n Identify Barriers to Success
After a specific department and facility is selected, an
effort to identify any institutional barriers should be
initiated. Such institutional barriers may include tra-
ditional purchasing procedures and operating proce-
dures that may limit a local government's ability to
implement pollution prevention techniques.
Specific barriers include budgeting procedures that re-
quire lowest cost product purchasing regardless of the
product's environmental impact (i.e., energy con-
sumption, waste generation), and long term solid
waste disposal contracts that are predicated on a cer-
8 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
tain amount of waste collected and disposed. This
only promotes increases in the waste generated and
handled to meet contractual obligations.
O Create a P2 Team
Create a local government staff team which includes
department managers. In addition, specific local
elected officials that are interested in these types of
projects should be informed of the activity that is be-
ing undertaken. By creating a local government team,
you are essentially generating a commitment by the
local government department to carry out the P2 activ-
ity. By informing local elected
officials that may be interested
in such projects, a local govern-
ment is establishing a budgeting
ally for future activities.
that will reduce waste. Options that may arise include
substitution of raw materials; process and procedure
modifications, process elimination; fleet and grounds
maintenance enhancements; inventory control; and re-
cycling and composting (ICMA, Preventing Pollu-
tion). The options should then be evaluated to deter-
mine what options are best suited for the department
or facility. To determine which options are best for a
department or facility, team members should ask a se-
ries of questions. Questions will help the department
prioritize the options. To start, it is recommended that
the low-cost, low-tech waste reduction option be im-
plemented first. (Wigglesworth).
A continued level of communi-
cation with the team, local gov-
ernment department heads and
elected officials about the pro-
gress of the project is critical to
its long term success. A news-
letter or fact sheet that can be distributed to these
groups describing short term success and future goals
is one such to keep the lines of communication open
with these key stakeholders.
n Conduct a Waste Reduction
Evaluation
After a department or facility is selected and support
for the project is established, a waste reduction evalu-
ation should be conducted. The range of waste reduc-
tion opportunities that can be conducted vary greatly.
A local government may agree to complete a simple
survey of the local government department to identify
opportunities for waste reduction. A local govern-
ment may also select to complete a very detailed and
technical evaluation which involves waste stream
sampling and extensive engineering analysis. The
goal, no matter what route a local government may
take, should be to analyze and select methods to re-
duce waste at its source.
a Evaluate Your P2 Options
After the waste reduction evaluation is completed, a
local government department or facility should have a
clear idea of the potential pollution prevention options
Prioritizing P2 Options
Is this a P2 option with a proven success re-
cord?
Are other local governments using this op-
tion?
Will this option require additional staff
and/or training?
Does this option reduce waste at its source?
Does this option reduce raw material
costs/utility costs/waste disposal costs?
Once options are priori-
tized, the local govern-
ment should determine if
the necessary budgetary
resources are available to
support up-front invest-
ments. Local govern-
ments have utilized a vari-
ety of programs to fund
their pollution prevention
activities including re-
sources from a general fund, a designated income
stream, disposal and tipping fees or garbage disposal
rates (Source Reduction Forum, Making Source Re-
duction and Reuse Work).
H Set Program Goals and Objectives
Once a facility or department is selected and opportu-
nities to implement pollution prevention practices are
identified as a result of the waste evaluation, a local
government should establish clear goals and objec-
tives. Establishing goals and objectives is an essential
element to setting a program up for success.
Goals of a program should incorporate existing envi-
ronmental protection goals of a local government. A
local government pollution prevention goal should, at
a minimum, incorporate the goal of reducing the gen-
eration of all wastes and the release of pollutants.
Other goals may include reducing costs of waste man-
agement, improving worker safety, reducing risk to
human health and the environment, and enhancing re-
liability of service and improving productivity.
Objectives should include specific actions a local gov-
ernment will take in order to achieve its pollution pre-
vention goals. Objectives may include obtaining a
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 9
-------
significant percent reduction in hazardous waste gen-
erated over a specific period of time, and/or save suf-
ficient resources through pollution prevention pro-
grams to offset half the costs of environmental man-
agement. Objectives should be quantitative in order
to measure the progress in achieving the objectives
over-time (ASTM).
Local Government Highlight
Dunn County, Wisconsin
Dunn County has set a specific
objective to reduce the total municipal solid
waste stream by 15 percent by weight. This
quantifiable objective enables the County to
measure the progress of its pollution
prevention program.
After establishing goals and objectives
a local government should determine a date
by which the goal will be achieved, the
baseline year to which it will be compared,
and establish a way to measure progress
toward the goal. In establishing a measure-
ment method, a local government should
decide if it will measure a reduction from
current total waste generation levels, a
reduction mper capita waste generation, or
a reduction from a projected increase
(Source Reduction Forum, Making Source
Reduction and Reuse Work).
n Implement the Program
After pollution prevention priorities have been estab-
lished, goals and objectives for the program are set.
and a method for measuring the program's progress is
agreed upon, it is appropriate to begin to implement
the local government pollution prevention program.
Informing key management and elected officials of
the program's implementation by preparing a report
on the program's focus, as well as its short and long-
term goals and objectives should make them aware of
the program and help them follow program implemen-
tation.
Again, implementing low-cost and low-tech pollution
prevention practices early is a good way to create early
successes and demonstrate a need to address larger P2
challenges.
G Evaluate Results, Report on Progress
and Encourage Replication
Evaluating the results of a program is another difficult
undertaking. If quantifiable objectives were estab-
lished with a coinciding method of measurement, then
a evaluating progress will not be extremely difficult.
However, measuring progress requires sound method
to collect data monthly to better understand the local
government's wastestream. Collection of data must
be kept overtime to demonstrate the long-term bene-
fits of implementing pollution prevention programs.
The P2 team should be responsible for preparing pro-
gress reports on the program's implementation. In ad-
dition, the team should, during implementation, track
real barriers that are identified by management and
staff during implementation. Reporting on the pro-
gress of implementation is critical to sustaining sup-
port for the program and expanding the program to
other local government offices and facilities.
Finally, local governments should seek additional
pollution prevention commitments from its local offi-
cials. Certain local governments have adopted resolu-
tions and/or ordinances that require that some level of
P2 activity be carried-out in all its offices and facili-
ties. This step ensures that pollution prevention will
continue to be an important element of local govern-
ment's planning, policies and procedures (ICMA, Pre-
venting Pollution)
10 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Office Maintenance
ivedi
iucing waste and saving money are both
possible when local governments choose to imple-
ment pollution prevention activities at their offices
and facilities. Some of these choices may be the easi-
est a local government has to make, but nevertheless,
are vital elements of source reduction Activities range
from educating employees about energy-consumption
reduction techniques to modifying purchasing habits
to include more environmentally friendly products.
Local governments can provide training to employees
about various in-house pollution pre-
vention activities. The concept of
pollution prevention should be ex-
plained in detail since employees who
understand the effects of their actions
will be more active in improving of-
fice maintenance techniques. The
training sessions will also provide an
opportunity to involve staff in the planning process of
the P2 program. Assigning one person as the pollution
prevention coordinator or creating a pollution preven-
tion team is an effective means of furthering the pro-
gram.
Besides the environmental benefits of practicing pol-
lution prevention at the office place, there are also eco-
nomic benefits to conserving resources. Money that is
saved through more efficient lighting, purchasing
policies, or cooling and heating systems can be chan-
neled into other local government programs or activi-
ties. Reducing the amount of water used can also
amount to substantial savings.
The following section highlights pollution prevention
strategies in the office for purchasing policies, energy
efficiency, water conservation, paper use, and green
design.
Purchasing Policies
Office Maintenance Includes:
Purchasing Policies
Energy Efficiency
Water Conservation
Paper Use
Green Design
linimizing the quantity and toxicity of
products that are purchased can have a significant im-
pact on the waste stream. The starting point is simply
managing inventory. Evaluating inventory avoids ex-
cess buying and the purchase of unneeded raw materi-
als. It also avoids unnecessary waste generation result-
ing from retaining materials past their expiration
dates. Careful monitoring of purchases means less
money spent by the local government.
Switching to recycled products protects resources and
stimulates the market for these products. It is impor-
tant for those responsible for purchasing to understand
the principles behind recycled products. Post-con-
sumer recycled content is the pre-
ferred type of product. Products
made with post-consumer recycled
content are using materials that
have completed their life cycle as a
consumer product. Therefore,
waste is prevented from entering a
landfill. Paper is an obvious prod-
uct to buy recycled, but others to consider are toner
cartridges, envelopes, and paints. Not only should re-
cycled paper products within the office be purchased,
but outside print jobs should be ordered on recycled
paper and double-sided. The City of Cincinnati has an
ordinance requiring city offices to specify preference
for environmentally preferable supplies, services or
construction materials when making purchasing deci-
sions.
Cleaning supplies should be selected not only based
on the toxicity of their contacts, but also based on the
types of pollution created in their manufacturing and
the amount of extraneous packaging. Many non-toxic
cleaning products exist that can be substituted for
products that create environmental hazards.
Energy Efficiency
Local governments use approximately two
percent of the nation's energy (ICMA, Preventing Pol-
lution). Although there are up-front costs associated
with changing to more energy efficient systems, a lo-
cal government that makes the switch benefits eco-
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 11
-------
nomically in the long run while reducing pollution and
conserving resources.
Lighting accounts for 20-25 percent of the electricity
used in the United States and is the largest contributor
of carbon monoxide emissions. Some of the more ef-
ficient lighting options that are available are: elec-
tronic ballasts; compact fluorescents; lighting reflec-
tors; daylighting controls; and motion sensors. For ex-
ample, compact fluorescent bulbs use 75 percent less
energy than standard incandescent bulbs. A fluores-
cent bulb lasts nine times longer than standard bulbs
which means it will last for approximately 3.4 years if
it is used for 8 hours per day during which time the
standard bulb would need to be replaced ten times.
While initial cost of the fluorescent bulb is relatively
high (S10-S28), the cost is recovered in only one year
of operation.
In addition, by using more efficient light bulbs and de-
signing to take advantage of natural light, a local gov-
ernment reduces electricity use which decreases waste
heat that is created by electricity. This reduces the
amount of money spent on cooling a facility.
Cooling and heating buildings is a big energy expen-
diture. Better systems can save a local government
substantial amounts of money while conserving en-
ergy. A building's system can be improved upon by
installing double pane windows and/or windows with
a low-emission coating. Windows should open to al-
low for natural cooling of a room. Gas powered heat-
ing and cooling systems could replace electrical.
Local governments should seek office equipment that
is designed to be more energy efficient. EPA's Energy
Star logo on computers, printers, and monitors is an
indication of a more environmentally friendly product.
These pieces of equipment power down when not in
use which reduces energy consumption by 50 to 75
percent.
Water Conservation
capita use of public water supplies in
the United States in 1990 averaged 183 gallons per
day, according to U.S. EPA. Developing water-use ef-
ficiency programs can help local communities achieve
cleaner water through conservation. Steps taken in the
office can help to reduce the quantity of water diverted
from streams and rivers for water supplies. This re-
duces the need to construct new reservoirs for water
supply which protects wetland and riparian habitats,
as well as their functions in non-point source pollution
abatement.
The high demand for and overuse of water contributes
to nonpoint source pollution in various forms, includ-
ing:
Altered instream flows due to surface with-
drawals;
Saltwater intrusion due to excessive withdraw-
als;
Polluted runoff resulting from the excess of
water applied for irrigation and landscape
maintenance that carries with it sediments, nu-
trients, salts, and other pollutants.
Water use at the office can be modified by the installa-
tion of various water conservation mechanisms. Low
flush toilets use less than half the water as standard
toilets. Local governments can install these toilets at
their facilities and also encourage developers to do the
same in new houses. Similarly, low flow faucets and
shower heads use significantly less water per minute
and should be installed where possible. While install-
ing these water-efficient toilets and faucets may seem
like additional cost burden, retrofits have been shown
to be cost-effective. Energy costs are lowered, the
need for water treatment is reduced, and the necessity
of importing water is avoided.
Leaks should be repaired immediately both at the local
government facility and at the municipal water sys-
tem. An impetus for detecting and repairing leaks in
systems is revenue loss when water leaks before it
reaches the consumer, the local government does not
collect usage fees.
Decreasing the amount of water used for landscape
maintenance and implementing pesticide management
plans can reduce the entry of pollutants into surface
and ground waters. On public grounds, water can be
conserved by choosing proper times and amounts to
water. Early morning or early evening watering re-
duces evaporation. If grass is allowed to grow longer,
it will retain water better. Simple techniques such as
keeping the sprinklers and hoses directed at the grassy
areas and not the pavement when watering decrease
the amount of water wasted.
12 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Paper Use
I,
ICMA notes that office paper waste in-
creased 400 percent between 1960 and 1988. In to-
day's world of computers and e-mail systems, offices
have many options to reduce paper usage. Computers
allow editing to take place on the screen, rather than
on printed drafts. Margins and spacing can be modi-
fied to allow more printing per page. Memos, mes-
sages, and letters can be sent electronically to commu-
nicate within or outside of the office.
Printing should be done on both sides of a sheet. Sin-
gle-sided drafts can be used to make note pads. Paper
products should contain post-consumer recycled con-
tent. Chlorine-bleached papers and petroleum based
inks and dyes should be avoided.
Green Design
hen planning new facilities, green design
principles can create more environmentally friendly
offices. Green design promotes alternative building
techniques that result in places that are healthier to live
and work in, use energy more efficiently, and use ma-
terials that are less harmful on the environment. Local
governments can create facilities that minimize their
impact on the environment and increase source reduc-
tion by employing green design techniques. Green de-
sign conserves water and energy resources and utilizes
natural materials to create structures that are more en-
vironmentally sustainable and healthier to inhabitants.
Green design not only creates a more efficient facility,
it also encourages more reuse and recycling during the
construction process.
Green design principles include:
site-sensitive orientation to take advantage of
shading and light;
high performance windows to minimize effects
of solar heat;
high efficiency lighting with occupancy sen-
sors;
detention ponds for irrigation;
HVAC systems using environmentally-
friendly refrigerants.
Local Government Highlight
The City of Austin, Texas
The City of Austin created the Green
Builder Program to encourage residential
and commercial construction that does not
adversely affect the environment. The goal of
the program is to influence building practices
to become more sustainable which in turn
will:
Conserve energy, water and other natural re-
sources.
Preserve the health of the environment.
Strengthen the local economy.
Promote a high quality of life.
There are five basic areas of an environmentally ori-
ented design:
G Building ecology
Many products used in building may be toxic and will
emit unhealthy gases and substances for years after
construction. Adjustments and substitutions made
during the design process can prevent this. Addition-
ally, HVAC systems can be designed to provide more
fresh air and less mildew and mold build up.
CJ Energy efficiency
Solar technologies and thermal massing and insulation
systems can have a dramatic effect on energy con-
sumption. Lighting and electrical fixture selection is
important to consider during the design process.
D Materials
Materials used for construction that require extensive
processing and produce toxic waste should be avoided
as opposed to those made from renewable sources that
are safe to produce.
d Building form
Incorporated into a design can be recycling facilities,
reduced flow water fixtures, and indoor planting.
n Good design
Buildings with ease of use and reuse will require less
energy, less repair, and more value in the future.
These types of buildings will be more sustainable over
the long term. (Fisher, Green Building)
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit "13
-------
Composting
\-»omposting is a simple biological process
in which organic matter is broken down by microor-
ganisms into humus, which serves as a natural soil
conditioner.
Composting in one of many management strategies lo-
cal governments are using to stem the amount of waste
entering into local landfills and incinerators. Faced
with an increasing number of landfills that are at or
near capacity, and with strong public opposition to the
siting of new landfills and incinerators, local govern-
ments in the Chesapeake Bay watershed are estab-
lishing composting programs that can and have led to
significant reductions in waste entering disposal fa-
cilities. In 1995, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) estimated that yard trimmings alone
contribute nearly 30 million tons of the total municipal
solid waste generated in the country. That equals 14
percent of total municipal solid waste. EPA also esti-
mates that organic materials make up 67 percent of the
total municipal solid waste (Characterization of Mu-
nicipal Solid Waste, 1996). Although not all of this
organic material can be used in compost, some ana-
lysts estimate that, on average, 50 percent of the mu-
nicipal solid waste is compostable (ASTM, Compost-
ing).
The EPA defines composting that takes place at the
point of generation (i.e., a home or business) as a
source reduction activity. EPA further defines com-
posting that takes place after organic materials have
been taken to a central composting facility as recy-
cling. In both cases, composting is a pollution preven-
tion activity that local governments are implementing
to help achieve solid waste management objectives
and protect natural resources and water quality.
Compost provides a wide-range of benefits including
improving moisture retention in sandy soils, contribut-
ing to soil fertility, and stimulating plant root develop-
ment. To local governments, these benefits create a
market in which landscapes, gardeners, farmers and
nurseries can purchase compost made available at lo-
cal government solid waste composting facilities. By
creating a market for compost, local governments can
defer the cost of a composting program.
In response to growing concern about the lack of suit-
able landfill and incinerator sites, states throughout the
country are setting regulations discouraging landfill-
ing or other disposal of yard trimmings. It is estimated
that nearly 50 percent of the nation's population is af-
fected by yard trimming disposal legislation (Charac-
terization of Municipal Solid Waste, 1996). These
regulations have accelerated composting activities at
the local level.
Implementation
)cal governments can take several ap-
proaches to implementing a composting program.
Perhaps the most basic approach is to develop an edu-
cational program that promotes and encourages back-
yard composting by residents, A public awareness
program in Takoma Park, Maryland has led to 11 per-
cent of residents engaging in backyard composting
(ASTM, Composting). Clearly, simple backyard com-
posting is a source reduction activity that can have a
significant impact. The citizen educational approach is
elaborated on in more detail in the Citizens chapter of
the Toolkit.
Municipal solid waste composting facilities can ac-
cept and treat waste in a variety of ways. A relatively
easy approach is to implement composting programs
for yard trimmings. As part of their regular curb side
recycling programs, local governments can collect
yard trimmings and other yard debris for composting.
Local governments can also provide drop-off center
service for disposal of yard trimmings. One technique
to broaden the participation of residents in these pro-
grams is to provide yard trimming separating bags or
bins.
Another approach local governments can engage in is
called wet-stream composting. To implement this
program, citizens must separate compostable materi-
als for collection or disposal at drop-off sites. This
technique captures more of the organic materials that,
if not composted, would find their way into the land-
fill. To enhance the participation of the wet-stream
approach, local governments should consider linking
the program with an existing recycling program. Al-
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 15
-------
though this program may be more difficult to imple- separation of organic materials is not required; how-
ment, it does provide the greatest benefit in terms of ever, it does result in a lower grade of compost. This
total amount of waste collected for composting. compost may include small pieces of glass, metals,
and plastics that lower the value of the compost as a
The final approach that could be considered is called marketable commodity.
mixed waste composting. With this approach, the
16 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Fleet Maintanence
I leet maintanence encompasses many ac-
tivities that, done correctly, can help to prevent pollu-
tion and eliminate toxic chemicals entering several en-
vironmental media - air, water, land. Local gov-
ememnts can better manage their existing fleet of ve-
hicles and select alternative vehicles that reduce the
amount of pollution generated, as well as offering al-
ternative transportation options.
Vehicle Maintenance
acal government vehicle maintenance de-
partments can complete simple or complex programs
to prevent pollution in the workplace. These activi-
ties, which include utilizing biodegradable cleaning
systems, providing drip pans to capture automotive
fluids, and reusing and recycling batteries and oil/oil
filters, will protect the environment, ensure environ-
mental compliance, and potentially save local govern-
ment resources. The general maintenance of vehicles
involves many hazardous and potentially hazardous
processes. Therefore, it is important for local govern-
ments to responsibly maintain their vehicles and set an
example to private vehicle maintenance businesses in
the community that pollution prevention is environ-
mentally responsible and cost effective maintenance
approach.
Local government vehicle maintenance facilities
should make a commitment to pollution prevention.
This should start with getting the managers of the fa-
cility to endorse pollution prevention as a facility pol-
icy. After a commitment has been made, local govern-
ment facility managers should encourage full em-
ployee participation in pollution prevention activities.
Educating employees of the benefits and techniques
that can be used is of upmost importance. After edu-
cating employees, it is necessary to keep them in-
volved by seeking their suggestions on additional op-
portunities to reduce waste. Once a facility has both
manager and employee buy-in, an evaluation of the fa-
cilities waste should be conducted. The evaluation
should include a simple review of the waste that is
generated and an identification of opportunities to re-
duce waste.
Since many pollution prevention techniques are low-
cost and low-risk, local government facilities will
truly benefit from any level of pollution prevention
activity. Keeping facilities clean is a small step in im-
plementing pollution prevention. By keeping the fa-
cilities and storage areas clean, floors dry, and contain-
ers covered to prevent evaporation and spillage, local
governments are taking some of the initial pollution
prevention steps. In addition, facilities should also
keep accurate and up-to-date records of the materials
purchased. This will help to ensure that older materi-
als are used before new materials are opened.
Some simple tips to help facilities implement pollu-
tion prevention are listed below:
Limit the access to hazardous materials to al-
low the facility to to keep track of chemical us-
age and reduce unnecessary waste generation.
Avoid unnecessary maintenance on vehicles
by changing vehicle fluids on an as-needed ba-
sis rather than according to a fixed mainte-
nance schedule.
Help reduce the impact of spills and the use of
absorbent products by using drip pans, secon-
dary containment, and other collection devices.
Reduce the total number of solvents used at the
shop to simplify inventory procedures and re-
duce waste management issues.
Conduct vehicle washing in a centralized, en-
closed, and contained are to reduce potential
impacts to the surrounding environment.
Use solvent or antifreeze reclamation units as
a cost effective pollution prevention measure.
Store and recycle tires and automotive batter-
ies.
Collect scrap metals, such as used parts and
empty materials storage containers, for recy-
cling.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 17
-------
Alternative Fuel Vehicles
I ederal, state, and local governments are all
exploring options to decrease vehicle emissions that
are responsible for substantial contributions to air pol-
lution. Utilizing alternative fuel vehicles offers a
practical solution to this pollution problem. Options
include vehicles powered by natural gas, methanol.
electricity, and liquid petroleum gas.
Under the National Energy Policy Act of 1992, alter-
native fuel vehicles (AFVs) must be utilized by fed-
eral fleets of 20 or more vehicles and by state fleets of
50 or more (ICMA, Preventing Pollution). Require-
ments may extend to local governments in the future.
The Clean Cities program is helping government and
industry make the transition to alternative fuels vehi-
cles. The partnership, coordinated by the U.S. Depart-
ment of Energy, helps to create sustainable local plans
to establish a viable alternative fuels market.
Local Government Highlight
Washington, D.C.
Washington Gas Light Company, the
local natural gas utility, assisted the Clean
Air Cab Company by making four of its fuel
stations accessible to the cabs powered by
compressed natural gas (CNG). The Clean
Air Cab Company was formed in 1993 and
has been successfully running its company
of alternative cabs. As a network of CNG
cabs increased, Washington Gas continued
to support the company 's efforts. For
instance, credit cards are issued by the gas
company for drivers to use at CNG fueling
stations. Washington Gas also recom-
mended a company to convert the fleet of
taxicabs to CNG when the company was
starting out and there were no original
equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of larger
sedans suitable for taxi service. Since that
time, more companies are producing AFVs
and the Clean Air Cab Company chooses to
purchase from OEMs rather than con-
verting sedans.
Before selecting alternative fuel vehicles, a local gov-
ernment should evaluate cost, ease of vehicle conver-
sion, vehicle maintenance, and fuel availability. Each
type of AFV possesses both pros and cons and it is
important to determine which alternative has the most
advantages for a local government. The attributes of
the various alternative fuels options can be explored
by contacting utility companies, conversion kit suppli-
ers, and trade associations.
Funding for the production of AFVs or conversion of
vehicles is critical to a local government that supports
this P2 technique. The Guide to Alternative Fuel Ve-
hicle Incentives and Loans printed by the U.S. Depart-
ment of Energy is a good source of information.
Mass Transit
Anc
lother strategy local governments can
take to reduce air and water pollution, decrease high-
way congestion, and revitalize communities is mass
transit. Mass transit systems include busses, light rail,
and commuter train service. In more rural areas, local
governments may provide car pool locations conven-
ient to major highways and regional bus service to em-
ployment centers located in more urbanized areas.
Mass transit strategies provide commuters an alterna-
tive to the automobile for transportation. As a result,
local governments utilizing these strategies are work-
ing to reduce energy consumption and pollution.
In addition, certain mass transit strategies can encour-
age growth and development in targeted growth areas
and support the revitalization of existing neighbor-
hoods and central business districts. For instance, Ar-
lington County, Virginia has found that the presence of
a commuter rail line (Washington Metrorail System) is
a strong incentive for attracting residents to a desig-
nated growth and development area. The combination
of good planning and commuter rail service has
helped to revitalize a "new downtown". In fact, a sur-
vey of commuting habits in the County's Ballston
Corridor showed that 69 percent commuted to work
by rail (JHK and Associates).
Local governments can encourage the use of mass
transit by providing public transportation opportuni-
ties that are appealing, safe and cost effective to com-
muters. For instance, local governments can provide
discount public transportation passes that reduce the
daily cost of using mass transit. Providing a conven-
ient, safe, and aesthetically pleasing passenger waiting
area will also promote usage of mass transit systems.
Finally, local governments should market the avail-
ability, benefits, and cost savings of using public trans-
portation to promote its use.
18 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Managing the Land
^Dilution prevention can take many differ-
ent forms. Effectively managing the land contributes
significantly to the reduction of pollutants entering the
Chesapeake Bay, its rivers and streams. Local gov-
ernments in each of the Bay's jurisdictions have the
authority to manage land use and therefore, have the
ability to protect or harm the Chesapeake's ecosystem.
In order to protect the environment, local
governments can undertake several land
use management pollution prevention
techniques. These techniques can take
the form of regulatory measures, site
planning recommendations or require-
ments, land use planning activities, envi-
ronmentally sound public land mainte-
nance, and public education. Each of
these techniques can integrate pollution prevention
practices to eliminate or reduce pollution at its source
which can save governments from costly environ-
mental compliance remediation activities and infra-
structure costs.
The following section will describe some of the land
use management pollution prevention techniques that
local governments can implement including: land use
planning activities, implementing land use controls
(i.e., zoning and subdivision regulations); providing
incentive-based land use management programs; and
encouraging or requiring integrating site planning
practices.
ning strategies and providing guidance to assist in
planning and regulating the land. Virginia's authority
to manage land use rests primarily with the counties
and cities. Once again, towns also play a crucial role
in planning and managing land use.
Land Use Management
Includes:
Planning
Controls
Incentives
Site Planning
Planning
Althc
lough at varying levels, each local gov-
ernment in the Chesapeake Bay watershed has the
statutory authority to plan and regulate local land use.
In Maryland, the primary authority to manage and
regulate land uses rests with the counties. However,
comprehensive planning is implemented by counties,
cities and incorporated towns. In Pennsylvania, mu-
nicipal governments - townships, boroughs, and cities
- are primarily responsible for land use planning and
land use regulations. However, counties are required
to develop comprehensive plans and are playing an in-
creasing role in coordinating municipal land use plan-
Land use planning is primarily completed in the con-
text of an overall comprehensive
plan. Each local government in
the Chesapeake Bay watershed
has the authority to develop a
comprehensive plan. Although
these plans are nonregulatory,
they are implemented by local
zoning and subdivision regula-
tions, and capital improvement
budgets. A comprehensive plan helps a community
determine the location and conditions for future
growth and development while providing for the gen-
eral health, safety and welfare of the community.
Comprehensive plans serve as a community's road
map in guiding new development, providing commu-
nity services, protecting local natural resources, and
targeting revitalization areas to achieve specified com-
munity goals and objectives.
Through comprehensive land use planning processes,
corresponding land use regulations, and other incen-
tives, local governments can effectively prevent pollu-
tion by guiding growth and development to appropri-
ate locations and targeting land areas for preservation.
Controls
Jthough the authority to regulate land use
may vary from state to state, similar land management
controls can apply if adapted appropriately. Land use
regulatory controls, coupled with good planning and
land management incentives, can create an effective
local government land use policy that directs growth
and development in appropriate areas and, as a result,
prevents pollution through the reduction of non-point
sources of pollution entering local waterways and
through the conservation of land resources.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 19
-------
n Cluster Development
Cluster development encourages land owners and de-
velopers to set aside a portion of their property to per-
manent open space while concentrating development
on the remainder of the parcel. This concentration of
lots preserves open space on the parcel of land, includ-
ing environmentally sensitive land. In some in-
stances, higher densities are awarded if the remaining
land in the parcel is preserved. Studies indicate that if
the land that is preserved is adjacent to other protected
lands, the preserved area helps to protect the biologi-
cal and hydrological functions of the watershed, as
well as to raise property values.
Local Government Highlight
Loudoun County, Virginia
In 1991, Loudoun County adopted its
rural village policies and zoning ordinance
district which called for clustered
development. The village policies and
zoning ordinance were developed to pre-
serve the natural environment, the rural
road network, public services and facilities.
The policy is intended to permit the compact
grouping of homes located so as to blend
with the existing landscape
n Urban Growth Boundaries
An urban growth boundary (UGB) is a tool that a local
government can implement using its zoning authori-
ties. An urban growth boundary provides guidance
for future growth by establishing a dividing line be-
tween areas appropriate for urban and suburban devel-
opment and areas appropriate for agricultural, rural
and resource uses. Communities seeking a means to
more efficiently provide government services, while
protecting valuable resource land can utilize urban
growth boundaries to direct growth and development.
Urban growth boundaries prevent pollution by target-
ing growth in areas served by infrastructure or tar-
geted to receive infrastructure. In addition, urban
growth boundaries can be established to direct growth
and development away from environmentally sensi-
tive and agricultural lands.
H Riparian Forest Buffer Restoration
and Protection
Riparian forest buffer restoration and protection is a
technique that can be implemented by local govern-
ments to prevent pollution from entering local streams
and storm systems. Riparian forest buffers are forests
found along streams and rivers which help filter sedi-
ment and nutrients from runoff and shallow ground-
water before they enter stream systems. Additionally,
forested buffers enhance streamside habitat and can
increase the value of property.
Local governments can play a fundamental role in the
protection of forested buffers by purchasing property
and/or instituting land use controls that require the
protection of forested buffers. In turn, local govern-
ments utilizing riparian forest protection land use con-
trols are preventing pollution from entering our stream
systems.
Local Government Highlight
Baltimore County, Maryland
Baltimore County established a
retention and restoration policy for forested
buffers that requires riparian areas in new
developments to be left undisturbed or
established where they do not exist along
perennial and intermittent streams. The
regulations are designed to protect three
Baltimore City drinking water reservoirs,
which serve over 1.6 million people, and to
protect the health of tidal creeks that feed
the Chesapeake Bay.
Incentives
Land use management incentives are instituted to en-
courage property owners, developers and others to
manage the land to support the achievement of overall
community goals and objectives. This non-mandatory
approach provides an incentive to prevent pollution.
For instance, in areas where nonpoint source pollution
is a particular problem to a stream system, a local gov-
ernment may allow a developer to exceed height limi-
tations or construct homes at a higher density in return
for the protection of a portion of the land or for a re-
duction of impervious surface. This land use manage-
ment incentive will reduce the amount of pollution at
20 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
the source, minimizing the impact of non-point
sources on the stream system.
n Purchasing Land
General state or local government funds have been es-
tablished by most states to acquire land for conserva-
tion. Each of the Bay states has established programs
that will allow local governments to purchase land to
protect natural resources, recreational areas, or his-
toric sites. Local governments providing matching
funds can influence the use of these funds for conser-
vation or acquisition (Chesapeake Bay Program, Pro-
tecting Wetlands). By purchasing sensitive lands, lo-
cal governments can prevent development that could
create excessive pollution and destroy valuable habi-
tat.
O Density Bonuses
Density bonuses may encourage developers to imple-
ment the clustering approach, which in turn preserves
a greater percentage of open space. If more open
space is provided, the developer is given the right to
subdivide his land into more houselots than would
have been permitted by the base zoning. Density bo-
nuses provide similar benefits as cluster development.
Similarly, density penalties also serve as an incentive
to protect open space. Developers are permitted to
build projects at higher densities only if they cluster
utilizing penalties. If clustering is not part of the pro-
posal, the developer is allowed fewer units.
Site Planning
planning requirements for new devel-
opments can encourage further pollution prevention
practices. These site planning practices can eliminate
or reduce the amount of pollution at its source by de-
creasing the percentage of impervious surface, pro-
tecting vegetated areas, and practicing more sustain-
able clearing and grading practices. By considering
the watershed in which the development will be cre-
ated, an appropriate site plan can be designed that util-
izes natural systems to achieve pollution prevention
objectives. By integrating natural and engineered
stormwater management approaches into site plan de-
sign, developers and local governments have the op-
portunity to mimic a site's predevelopment hydrology.
During the site development process, many techniques
can be used to protect water quality and preserve the
integrity of a watershed's ecosystem. Since develop-
ment in the Chesapeake Bay watershed is increasing at
an alarming rate - Maryland predicts that there will be
a 100 percent increase in land consumed by develop-
ment by the year 2020 - those responsible for site de-
sign should be particularly cognizant of its impact on
the health of local streams and their watersheds.
Local governments should encourage site planning
that prevents pollution from entering stream systems
and other waterways. These site designs should in-
clude reducing the amount of impervious surface, pre-
serving existing vegetation and utilizing environmen-
tally sound clearing and grading practices.
Impervious surfaces can be reduced by using basic de-
sign techniques that can also save a developer and lo-
cal government money. Some ways impervious sur-
faces can be reduced in a new development include
reducing the size of a building footprint, reducing the
building setback requirements, minimizing driveway
size and number, and reducing street widths.
Additionally, site plan design can preserve much of
the site's original vegetative cover. Preserving this
land cover can help to naturally filter pollutants before
they enter stream systems. Conserving vegetative
cover, including trees, along streams and other natural
waterways can support stormwater management ac-
tivities and add value to housing lots.
Clearing and grading activities that result from new
development challenge communities that are trying to
balance economic and environmental public policy
objectives. Unsustainable clearing and grading prac-
tices increase sediment loads and credibility, and
negatively impact water quality, habitat, and aquatic
life. Sediment load is the most widely recognized and
quantified impact of land development on water re-
sources (Washington Council of Governments). Ero-
sion from construction sites is typically 10 to 20 times
that from agricultural areas (Goldman, 1986). Many
local governments are now using multiple regulations
to prevent the erosion and sediment by implementing
natural resource preservation ordinances that protect
existing vegetation, forests and steep slopes.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 21
-------
22 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Maintaining the Land
1^ Maintaining public lands to protect the en-
vironment and encouraging commercial and private
land owners to follow suit are key actions that local
governments can take to prevent pollution. There are
many specific actions a local government can take to
maintain its public lands in an environmentally sensi-
tive manner. These techniques are less toxic, conserve
water, provide habitat, and can help in managing
stormwater. The following section highlights conser-
vation landscaping and integrated pest management as
two examples of actions local governments can take
on public lands to prevent pollution.
Conservation Landscaping
Dnservation landscaping is a land mainte-
nance technique designed to work with natural sys-
tems to reduce pollution, conserve water, and create
and enhance living resource habitat. The conservation
landscaping approach encourages less fertilizer and
pesticide use, coupled with less lawn area and the use
of beneficial plants. Combined, this approach can pro-
tect vital soil and water resources.
Local governments interested in utilizing this ap-
proach to maintain their public lands should first be-
come familiar with conservation landscaping tech-
niques. Local governments should target areas in
which to pilot the conservation landscaping technique.
After areas are targeted, an analysis of the site envi-
ronment should be completed, including a soil analy-
sis which determines the sites pH and fertility. Fertil-
ity describes the presence of nutrients and minerals in
the soil and pH measures the acidity/akalinity. This
analysis will determine the appropriate vegetative
cover that should be applied to a site. Vegetative cov-
ering, including grasses, vines, shrubs orgroundcover,
and trees will solidify the soil, making it less suscepti-
ble to erosion and runoff. In addition to maintaining
proper pH and fertility levels and a vegetative cover,
beneficial insects should also be used to protect
healthy soils.
Once a site has been located, analysis completed and
appropriate landscaping techniques applied, a local
government should consider establishing a demon-
stration site to promote the use of conservation land-
scaping to citizens and commercial land owners. In
addition, the landscaping activities applied to the site,
including application of fertilizers and pesticides,
should be tracked to demonstrate the effectiveness of
conservation landscaping. For additional information
on conservation landscaping techniques, please see
case study #13 - Bayscaping and case study #15 -
Water-wise Gardener.
Local Government Highlight
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
The Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, in
coordination with the City of Harrisburg and
the Redevelopment Housing Authority,
established a demonstration site to promote
Bayscaping, a conservation landscaping
technique. In April 1997, a city lot was
"Bayscaped" to protect local natural
resources, beautify the urban community, and
help restore the Chesapeake Bay. This type of
public- private initiative promotes civic pride
and prevents pollution in the Bay region.
Integrated Pest
Management
i,
In maintaining public lands, local govern-
ments can utilize a pollution prevention technique
called Integrated Pest Management (IPM). Integrated
pest management is an ecological approach to pest
management that takes advantage of all appropriate
pest control options. These options can include bio-
logical controls, development of pest-resistant spe-
cies, and changes in cultural practices, as well as use
of chemical pesticides when required (ICMA, Pesti-
cide Management).
In implementing IPM,the first step is to locate a site to
apply its techniques. After a site is chosen, local gov-
ernments should monitor the environment and pest
populations. This analysis may determine that a pest
problem does not exist. However, if a problem is
identified several IPM techniques that modify the pest
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 23
-------
habitat should be considered. These techniques in- IPM is an effective pest control program that mini-
elude: physical treatment, such as trapping, swatting, mizes environmental impacts, while cost effectively
hand removal, or use of window screens; biological maintaining an attractive landscape. This pollution
treatment, such as introducing pest parasites and/or prevention technique helps local governments protect
pathogenic microorganisms; and cultural treatment, local streams and rivers and contributes to the restora-
including modification of land and/or water use, plant- tion and protection of the Chesapeake Bay.
ing of resistant species, mulching, strategic timing of
planting and harvest dates.
After the appropriate action has been taken, local gov-
ernments should evaluate the approach and keep writ-
ten records of the results.
24 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
CrC Equipment Replacement Strategy
What is the Cf C Equipment
Replacement Strategy? _
I he City of Norfolk has taken the lead in
removing harmful chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) by de-
veloping and implementing an equipment replacement
strategy. The strategy, entitled the Chiller Master
Plan, was completed in 1992 and amended in 1993 in
response to issues of global warming and ozone deple-
tion and the proper management of refrigerants used
in air conditioning equipment, Centrifugal chillers are
the mechanical components for air conditioning the
City's large commercial buildings and schools. The
working fluid inside the centrifugal chiller is com-
monly called the refrigerant that, when released to the
atmosphere, will eventually deplete the ozone layer
and can contribute to global warming. Therefore, the
City determined that it was extremely important to
better manage the use of refrigerants.
In response to this growing global issue and to ensure
further compliance with environmental regulations, as
well as to reduce owning and operating costs of CFC
based refrigerants, the City, in cooperation with Nor-
folk Public Schools, created a program to properly
manage refrigerants used in air conditioning equip-
ment. The strategy, which is currently 80 percent im-
plemented, sets out to replace older chiller equipment
and to convert newer equipment to alternative refrig-
erants which are less harmful to the environment.
What are the Program's Successes?
it was completed and circulated in
1992, over 80 percent of the Plan has been imple-
mented. The successful implementation of the Plan
Case Study ffl
Norfolk, Virginia
Jim Meuller
City of Norfolk Department of Public Works
City Hall Building, Room 700
810 Union Street
Norfolk, VA
(757) 664-4635
has positioned the City for environmental compliance.
In addition, the City and the Norfolk City School Sys-
tem is benefiting from new, more energy efficient air
conditioning cooling plants, reduced annual mainte-
nance costs, reduced annual energy costs, and im-
proved equipment operating reliability.
Additionally, the York International Corporation rec-
ognized the City of Norfolk with its Environmental
Leadership Award. The Award recognized the City's
effort to eliminate equipment containing CFC's from
its buildings and displaying leadership in the Hampton
Roads area as an "environmentally green" municipal-
ity.
ilow Much Does the Program Cost?
I he plan was estimated to cost the City and
Norfolk Public Schools a total of $7.1 million from
fiscal year 1993 through 2000.
How Can The Program Work for my
Local Government?
, local government must make a consider-
able commitment in order to develop and implement a
similar CFC equipment replacement strategy. Con-
verting newer equipment to environmentally safe re-
frigerants and replacing older air conditioning chillers
comes with significant capital costs. However, these
costs can be offset through reduced annual mainte-
nance and repair costs, reduced annual energy costs,
and improved operating reliability. Demonstrating the
need, value, and benefits by first developing a master
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 25
-------
or strategic plan will help establish political support
for such an undertaking. In addition, compliance with
environmental regulations in the future could be im-
proved considerably which offers another incentive to
develop and implement such apian.
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
les, the Southeastern Public Service
Authority (SPSA) is the regional entity charged with
waste disposal, household hazardous waste manage-
ment, and recycling for the City of Norfolk and other
Hampton Roads communities. Although SPSA exe-
cutes the programs, Norfolk develops, coordinates and
promotes the programs The City has recently initi-
ated the new Environmental Award for Recycling in
Norfolk's Neighborhood (E.A.R.N.N.) program.
With monetary awards as an incentive, the awards
program seeks to involve civic leagues in an effort to
increase household curbside recycling. In addition,
the City of Norfolk has adopted a "Buy Recycled" or-
dinance to promote a preference for purchasing goods
and materials that contain a minimum percentage of
recycled content.
26 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Co-Composting facility for Solid Waste
Management
Case Study ff 2
Adams County, Pennsylvania
What is the Co-Composting Project?
County is one of the fastest growing
counties in Pennsylvania. It produced over 45,000
tons of garbage and over 8 million gallons of sludge
and septage in 1995, an amount that will only increase
as population grows. In 1990, the last waste disposal
facility in the County was closed and thereafter, it be-
came necessary to transport garbage, sludge, and sep-
tage to out-of-county facilities at a direct cost to
county residents and businesses.
Recognizing the financial and environmental liabili-
ties of the situation, the Adams County commissioners
established the Solid Waste Advisory Committee
(SWAC) in mid- 1992. The SWAC, composed of resi-
dents, business people, and municipal and county offi-
cials, was charged with:
investigating suitable waste processing tech-
nologies;
finding a long-term solution for sludge and sep-
tage;
increasing recycling capabilities;
reducing dependence on landfills;
finding ways to reduce transportation costs;
increasing the County's control over cost and
availability of disposal options; and
creating a long-term, low cost, waste manage-
ment system.
The SWAC conducted its study and determined that
municipal waste composting would be a common
Bicky Redman
Coordinator of Solid Waste and Recycling
Adams County Court House
111 Baltimore Street
Gettysburg, PA 17325
(888) 337-9827 ext. 206
sense solution that could keep costs low with little en-
vironmental risk.
What is Municipal Solid Waste
Composting?
lunicipal co-composting is the compost-
ing of two wastestreams: municipal solid waste
(MSW) consisting of residential and commercial gar-
bage and sludge and septage. MSW provides the carb-
on source while sludge/septage provides the nitrogen
source.
Municipal composting, just like backyard composting,
speeds up the normal decomposition of organic mate-
rial. As Adams County includes a great many agricul-
tural, food processing, and food services industries,
much of its waste is organic and easily degradable.
There are four basic steps to municipal composting.
O Pre-processing
Recyclable items and items that won't compost are
sorted out, primarily by mechanical means. A mixture
suitable for composting is prepared and adjusted for
moisture, nutrients, and particle size.
G Decomposition
Temperature, oxygen, and moisture content are moni-
tored to ensure that naturally occurring bacteria and
microorganisms break down organic waste. The corn-
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 27
-------
post is tumbled and aerated to speed up the process
and enclosed in a vessel to prevent odor.
G Curing
Since some things decompose more slowly than oth-
ers, a one to two month curing phase allows time for
all materials to decompose.
O Finishing
The compost is screened, packaged, and marketed.
The County hopes to reuse or recycle 70 to 80 percent
of the solid waste, sludge, and septage that will be
processed at the facility. The remaining inert waste
materials will be landfilled or incinerated.
In addition to municipal wastes, the composting facil-
ity will also be able to handle excess manures from
concentrated animal operations, thus helping to curb
pollution from runoff into the Chesapeake Bay.
What are the Project's Successes?
I he SWAC solicited input from other local
governments that have implemented composting in
their jurisdictions and received very positive feed-
back. This information was shared with County resi-
dents and local government officials to increase their
understanding of the process. In 1993, the County re-
vised its Municipal Solid Waste Management Plan to
advocate the development of an in-county co-com-
posting facility. The Plan was ratified by the 34 mu-
nicipalities in the County and received approval from
the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Pro-
tection.
Between 1994 and 1996, more than 100 sites were
evaluated for suitability for a composting facility. The
site could not be located on a 100 year fioodplain,
within 300 feet of wetlands or dwellings, within 100
feet of a perennial stream or sinkhole, or within 1/4
mile uphill or 300 feet downhill of a public or private
water source. A 182-acre site that met the land use and
environmental requirements for a facility was identi-
fied. Approximately 10 to 15 acres of the site will be
used for buildings or access, with the remainder serv-
ing as buffers and setbacks from wells, streams, flood-
plains, and dwellings.
The County released an RFP in March 1996 for the
design, permitting, construction, and operation of the
co-composing facility. Construction is expected to be
completed by the year 2000.
now Much Does the Project Cost?
The
ie investigation process, purchase of the
site, and construction of the facility will the cost the
County approximately $10-14 million (still in negotia-
tions). Operational costs of the facility are estimated
at $2 million per year. However, the composting facil-
ity will likely save residents money in the future by
reducing costs for garbage removal to adjacent coun-
ties. In addition, the facility will create jobs for County
residents.
Adams County was able to offset some of these costs
by utilizing grant funding under Pennsylvania's Mu-
nicipal Waste Planning, Recycling and Waste Reduc-
tion Act (Act 101). Approximately 80 percent of the
planning costs were funded through the grant. Addi-
tional funding includes a $400,000 zero-interest loan
through the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the
Adams Electric Cooperative to assist in the develop-
ment of the co-composting facility.
Flow Can the Project Work for My
Local Government?
jmposting facilities are well-suited to
small, agricultural counties, as well as more suburban
areas; thus, facilities can be adapted to counties of dif-
ferent sizes and as a county grows. The decision to
utilize composting as a waste management tool should
be based on an extensive and inclusive planning proc-
ess. Local municipal support is critical. In Adams
County, the municipalities have entered into contracts
with solid waste hauling companies that specify deliv-
ery to the co-composting facility.
Allocating necessary planning time will help ensure
the facility is a success. Decision-makers should visit
operating facilities to better understand the process.
Time must be dedicated to researching a suitable loca-
tion for the facility.
28 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
German Branch Integrated Pest
Management Project
Case Study if 3
Queen Anne's County, Maryland
Francis Breeding
University of Maryland Cooperative Extension Service
Queen Anne's County
505 Railroad Avenue, Suite 4
Centreville,MD21617
(410)758-0166
What is the German Branch Project? What are the Project's Successes?
f\tn unprecedented 96 percent of the farm
operators participated in the project. IPM is being used
on over 6,500 acres of corn, soybeans, and wheat.
Farmers who participated in the project reported a re-
turn on their investment of $4.00 to $8.00 for every
dollar invested in IPM.
A weekly newsletter was sent to all farm operators,
landowners, and agribusinesses detailing what the
scouts were reporting and forecasting any potential
problems. Sharing the information with agribusi-
nesses eliminated duplication of efforts and gave the
applicators an indication of possible outbreaks so that
they could prepare in advance.
Fish counts in the German Branch have increased sig-
nificantly since IPM has been applied to fields in the
area. Macroinvertebrates have also increased, accord-
ing to annual stream surveys. This is being attributed
to the installation of best management practices in the
watershed.
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a pre-
scription approach to controlling weeds, insects, and
diseases in fieldcrops, gardens, or lawns. The pre-
scription approach assures that all recommendations
are based on several factors specific to the site being
diagnosed. These factors include: the site, the type of
crop, the pests, and the most economically feasible so-
lution.
The German Branch Project is a hydrologic water
quality demonstration project located in Queen
Anne's County. It consists of approximately 8,000
acres of cropland and pasture. It was started in 1990
to demonstrate that best management practices could
help to reduce chemical and fertilizer inputs. Reduc-
ing these inputs improves the water quality of rivers
and streams flowing into the Chesapeake Bay.
The University of Maryland Cooperative Extension
Service recruited individuals from diverse sectors of
the County to become crop scouts. After undergoing
intensive training, the scouts were assigned to cooper-
ating farmers to scout fields on a regular basis. After
each scouting trip, the farmer received a report de-
scribing pests in the fields, the severity of the infesta-
tion, and a recommendation to treat the problem. The
scouting began in the spring before the crop was
planted and continued until the crop was mature. Rec-
ommendations ranged from simply changing some
management practices to more severe cases when it
was necessary to replace the desired species.
How Much Does the Project Cost?
I he project was initiated with a federal
grant of $585,000. The money was divided among
several agencies. The Farm Service Agency was re-
sponsible for administering the cost-share program.
Cooperative Extension Service was charged with co-
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 29
-------
ordinating the scouting program and nutrient manage-
ment. The water control structures came under the
Natural Resources and Conservation Service. The
original grant was for a period of five years. A three-
year extension with an additional $150,000 was re-
ceived in 1995.
The project is supported by a cost-share program
whereby participating farmers are paid a percentage of
their bills for scouting and other best management
practices used on their farms. There is a limit as to how
much per acres and how much each farmer can re-
ceive. These limits are 75 percent of their out-of-
pocket expenses up to $7.00 per acre Each farmer is
also limited to $3,500 total over a three year period.
How Can the Project Work for my
Local Government?
acal governments can institute an IPM
program in schools, parks, government buildings, etc.
Integrated Pest Management can lower government
maintenance costs through its preventive approach.
This sets an example for the public that shows how we
can all do our part to reduce pesticides in the environ-
ment.
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
I he County is supplying 75 homeowners
with a quarterly newsletter discussing water quality is-
sues such as fertilizer application, pesticide uses, win-
ter deicing, etc. Homeowners are urged to get their
soil tested before conducting any applications to their
lawn or garden. Fact sheets are distributed at public
events, as well as through mailings. The local paper
carries an education news article each week to aid
homeowners in making decisions.
30 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
An Integrated Waste Management
Program
Why was the Waste Management
Progra m Developed?
I,
In Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, a com-
plex integrated waste management system that em-
ploys the most environmentally reliable technologies
has been implemented. The goal of the waste man-
agement program is to provide safe and responsible
recycling and disposal options to protect and preserve
environmentally sensitive lands and vital agricultural
lands. With growth and development increasing the
amount of waste produced in the County and landfill
space becoming more difficult to obtain, Lancaster
County adopted a plan in 1986 charging the Lancaster
County Solid Waste Management Authority
(LCSWMA) with the responsibility of implementing a
system which includes a resource recovery facility, re-
cycling, and waste reduction programs and a new
landfill. This integrated waste management handling
and disposal approach has produced perhaps the best
recycling and household hazardous waste manage-
ment program in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
In addition, LCSWMA established a state-of-the-art
resource recovery facility which, by itself, is an inno-
vative pollution prevention system.
What is the Resource Recovery
racility?
I he Lancaster County Resource Recovery
Facility (RRF) plays a significant role in the
LCSWMA's integrated solid waste management sys-
Case Study ff4
Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Timothy J. Breneisen
Recycling Program Manager
Lancaster County Solid Waste Management Authority
1299 Harrisburg Pike, PO Box 4425
Lancaster, PA
(717)397-9968
tern. The RRF burns solid waste to generate electric-
ity and, most importantly, reduce the volume of trash
by up to 90 percent. In this facility, waste is placed
into one of three independent boilers. In the boiler,
waste passes through drying, burning and cooling
stages before being discharged into the ash quench and
conveyance system. As a result of this process, elec-
tricity is produced as the boiler water is converted into
steam. The steam is piped to a turbine-generator
which produces approximately 36 megawatts of elec-
tricity. Four to five megawatts are used to power the
plant and the remainder is sold to Metropolitan Edison
for distribution to local homes and businesses.
The water source for this process is effluent from the
Elizabethtown Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Plant. The RRF treats the effluent and recycles it on-
site creating a zero-discharge facility. Extensive con-
trols are placed on the facility's emission discharge to
reduce air pollution. The ash that results from the
burning phase is processed further to remove all fer-
rous metals, which are then sold to steel producers.
What is the Household Hazardous
Waste Program?
»ecognizing the need to responsibly dis-
pose of its household hazardous waste (FWW), the
LCSWMA built a permanent FfflW facility that was
completed in January 1991. The facility, which cost
$200,000, represents the LCSWMA's commitment to
reduce the amount of toxic waste entering into the
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 31
-------
wastestream. The facility has convenient hours each
week to encourage responsible disposal of household
hazardous waste, which includes paints, pesticides,
automotive fluids, and other household chemicals.
LCSWMA also initiated a curbside battery collection
program for County households. LCSWMA provides
residents with orange battery bags for disposal of
household batteries used in toys, cameras, and flash-
lights. The orange bags are collected the same day as
garbage, further encouraging appropriate disposal
and/or recycling of this household hazardous material.
Finally, the LCSWMA promotes alternatives to using
toxic products and processes. For instance,
LCSWMA distributes a Household Hazardous Waste
Wheel that lists less toxic alternatives to household
cleaners, pesticides, and car maintenance products.
LCSWMA also promotes recycling, composting,
grass recycling, energy reduction and other source re-
duction alternatives to achieve its waste reduction
goals.
What are the Program's Successes?
I,
In addition to establishing a state-of-the-art
integrated waste management system with citizen sup-
port and funding, the County has been successful in
achieving its goal to protect environmentally sensitive
and agricultural lands. The Household Hazardous
Waste Management program has served over 19,000
residents and collected in excess of 450 tons of haz-
ardous waste materials.
Curbside recycling programs in the County reach
over 76 percent of its residents. The recycling rate
from all residential and commercial/industrial pro-
grams exceeds 30 percent. Overall, the County uses
only about 25 percent of landfill space needed if recy-
cling, source reduction, and resource recovery sys-
tems were not in place.
How Much Does the Program Cost?
;'user fee" system along with electric sale
revenues are the primary financial mechanisms used
to pay for LCSWMA's integrated waste management
system. Users pay tipping fees based on the amount of
wastes delivered to LCSWMA's facilities.
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
I es, LCSWMA provides a series of educa-
tional materials to the general public, including bro-
chures and fact sheets, and maintains a web site. The
educational information promotes proper disposal of
all waste and source reduction opportunities.
LCSWMA supplements its information with materials
on pollution prevention prepared by the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection.
32 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Low-Impact Development
Case Study If 5
Prince George's County, Maryland
What Is Low-Impact Development?
l^lon-point source pollution is affecting our
local water quality and harming the Chesapeake Bay.
Development, a leading cause of non-point sources of
pollution in the Chesapeake watershed, has demon-
strated its significant impact on water quality due to
new development grading and clearing practices. Al-
though zoning and site planning regulations reduce the
environmental impacts of new developments on natu-
ral resources such as wetlands, floodplains, and steep
slopes, the cumulative effect of grading and clearing
practices on local water quality is still extensive. Al-
though current traditional structural management
measures, such as engineered stormwater manage-
ment solutions, may control certain pollutants and
help to mitigate environmental impacts, they are of
limited value to maintaining the ecological integrity of
a development site. These traditional structural man-
agement measures seek to control the effects of urban
development after the fact, or at the end of the pipe,
which is both costly to implement and costly to main-
tain.
In response to a growing economic and ecological
need, Prince George's County Department of Envi-
ronmental Resources set out to explore how stormwa-
ter management objectives could be met by changing
the form and function of developed sites through intel-
ligent site planning and design of landscape features.
This land use pollution prevention technique, called
Low-Impact Development (LID), is designed to inte-
grate site ecological and environmental requirements
into all phases of urban planning and design, and it
Larry S. Coffman, Associate Director
Prince George's County
Department of Environmental Resources
9400 Peppercorn Place, Suite 610
Largo, MD 20774
(301)883-5839
considers the implications of development on a broad
scale, ranging from the watershed to the individual
residential lot. The goal of Low-Impact Development
is to eliminate, minimize, or mitigate the root causes
of development-generated impacts at the source. The
objectives of the Prince George's Low-Impact Devel-
opment approach include: restoring the sites hydro-
logic regime to mimic the natural or pre-development
condition; maintaining surface water and groundwater
quality and minimizing the generation and off-site
transport of pollutants; minimizing disturbances of ri-
parian habitat functions; and preserving terrestrial
habitat ecological functions and maximizing conser-
vation of woodland and vegetative cover.
What are the Programs Successes?
George's County introduced its
comprehensive Low-Impact Development design
manual in November of 1997. The manual describes
the basic LID philosophies, site design principles, ana-
lytical methodologies and management practices.
Much of the LID technology is based simply on exist-
ing, non-structural techniques such as minimal distur-
bance, site figure printing, hydraulically disconnected
surfaces, use of open swales, reducing impervious sur-
faces and pollution prevention.
A unique feature of LID is the use of hydrologically
functional landscape features using the principles of
bioretention. Sometimes referred to as rain gardens,
this best management practice, pioneered by the
County, is simply a shallow landscaped depression
used to store and treat runoff.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 33
-------
The first residential development using LID ap-
proaches was in the Somerset Community, an 85 acre,
200-lot, single-family residential development. In co-
operation with the developer, County agencies, and
significant contributions from the State of Maryland
and federal agencies, the developer was able to redes-
ign the residential community which was previously
planned using traditional development practices and
storm water controls. Stormwater is managed using
rain gardens on each lot, open swales, reforestation
and pollution prevention. The Somerset Community
reduces, eliminates or treats the impacts at the source
and attempts to restore the original hydrologic func-
tions by retaining and infiltrating runoff.
The use of LID practices for Somerset demonstrated
significant cost savings. The developer was able to
achieve a $4,000 cost savings per lot as a result of less
clearing, less grading, less pipe, fewer drainage con-
trol structures, elimination of roadside curb and gutter.
less impervious surface, and lower wetland, tree and
stream mitigation costs.
By eliminating the use of stormwater management
ponds, the County hopes to realize significant costs
savings through reduced infrastructure and mainte-
nance costs. This cost savings could potentially be
passed along to property owners through a stormwater
tax reduction.
Because of the immense interest regarding the LID ap-
proach, County officials have made numerous presen-
tations during conferences and workshops in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed, as well as throughout the
country. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
has also awarded the County a grant to develop an LID
manual for national distribution and use.
llow Can the Program Work For My
Local Government?
3w-impact development is an alternative
approach for stormwater management - one that does
not represent a new mandate or regulation. This ap-
proach, instead, is an intelligent, comprehensive site
design technology which minimizes impacts and util-
izes the landscape to restore watershed functions. LID
demonstrates that environmentally sensitive develop-
ment results in reduced infrastructure construction and
maintenance costs providing strong economic and
market incentives to encourage its use.
Local governments interested in applying the ap-
proach should demonstrate to developers the reduced
costs for development as a result of utilizing LID as an
incentive for its use. Educational materials, including
pollution prevention and landscaping information,
should be produced to educate citizens on the benefits
of LID and how the approach can be successfully ap-
plied. In addition, flexible land development regula-
tions and coordination in regulatory reviews and en-
forcement are necessary for the LID approach to
work. The Somerset example demonstrated that infra-
structure, stormwater management, woodland conser-
vation, and zoning must be considered as an integrated
regulatory package. Although initially this is a time-
consuming exercise, streamlining opportunities can be
developed as a result of the initial regulatory experi-
ence.
now Much Does the Program Cost?
I or those jurisdictions with existing storm-
water programs, the major costs to implement the LID
program are associated with the time it takes to train
review and inspection staff in the new LID site design
principles/practices and the development and produc-
tion of any guidance or educational documents for de-
velopers, engineers and the public. The two areas
where careful attention must be paid for training is in
the design of the grading plan and the inspection of the
grading after construction.
The LID design manual was developed as a practical
guide for engineers and planners. The LID principles
are simple and the analytical methodology used is
commonly accepted by professional in the storm field.
In many respects, LID is a simpler approach to storm-
water management than conventional pipe and pond
technology.
Additional costs could be incurred if a jurisdiction de-
cides to conduct inspections and enforce actions to re-
quire maintenance of on lot BMP's such as rain gar-
dens. Prince George's County has decided that en-
forcement should be left up the community through
the variety of mechanisms available to homeowner as-
sociations.
34 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
The production costs for educational materials aimed
at the property can be paid for by the developer. In
fact, a developer using LID approaches will want to
use the educational material as one of the marketing
tools. Many developers are finding that there is a
growing market for green development where wooded
lots can command premiums.
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Materials?
es, the County recently published the Low-
Impact Development Design Manual to assist site
planners/engineers in utilizing this cost effective de-
velopment approach. The manual provides an over-
view of the wide array of Low-Impact Development
techniques that can be incorporated into site develop-
ment.
In addition, the County produced the following:
a brochure entitled Ram Gardens: The Natu-
ral Solution, and
reference guide entitled, How Does Your Gar-
den Growl to assist residents in enhancing
their rain gardens.
Rain gardens use the concept of bioretention, an LID
water quality practice in which plants and soils re-
move pollutants from stormwater.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 35
-------
36 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park
Case Study ff 6
Cape Charles, Virginia
What is the Sustainable Technologies
Industrial Park?
I he Port of Cape Charles Sustainable Tech-
nologies Industrial Park is a premier eco-industrial
park (EIP). The site is one of four model industrial
park designations nationally. The park is being devel-
oped to meet the high standards of businesses that
have made a commitment to profitability with envi-
ronmental and social integrity.
At its core, an EIP is very simple. It strives simultane-
ously to increase business success while reducing pol-
lution and waste. Rooted in the emerging discipline of
industrial ecology, an EIP mirrors natural systems. As
single organisms can be viewed alone or in a larger
ecology, single enterprises can organize themselves in
more complex business ecologies. This pays off for
the business and the environment.
Situated in Northampton County, one of Virginia's
poorest counties, the Port of Cape Charles Sustainable
Technologies Industrial Park is in an area plagued by
poverty and unemployment. The need to revitalize this
area prompted citizens to develop Northampton
County's Sustainable Development Action Strategy,
which was adopted by the County Board of Supervi-
sors. Part of the comprehensive strategy is the Sustain-
able Technologies Industrial Park. The 310-acre eco-
industrial park has been custom-zoned as a Sustain-
able Technologies Industrial Park Zone and will in-
clude a coastal dune habitat preserve and wetlands for
wastewater treatment.
Timothy Hayes
Director of Sustainable Development
Northampton County
23 Park Row
Suite 1
Cape Charles, VA 23310
(757)331-1998
The eco-industrial park received EPA's Brownfields
Economic Redevelopment Initiative award of
$200,000 for brownfields redevelopment pilot pro-
jects. "Brownfields", or abandoned, usually urban,
sites with actual or perceived contamination, are an
enormous problem for U.S. cities. These sites are
often not redeveloped because prospective buyers and
lenders are wary of the liability associated with own-
ership of contaminated property. This drives develop-
ers towards "greenfields" or previously undeveloped
areas, which encourages urban sprawl, diminishes
natural resources, and leaves the community with ob-
solete properties.
EIPs are an appealing redevelopment option for
brownfields because they offer the community sus-
tainability, economic growth, and lower environ-
mental impact than traditional industry. They often of-
fer industry proximity to existing industrial centers
and access to transportation.
The Port of Cape Charles Sustainable Technologies
Industrial Park has about 100 acres of brownfields out
of a total 310 acres. The center of this park will be a
redeveloped brownfield. The site includes a former
municipal dump, dockside, railyard, and the remains
of abandoned industrial operations. The site is not sus-
pected to contain hazardous substances which threaten
public health or the marine environment, but assess-
ments must be performed before the brownfields areas
of the eco-industrial park can be redeveloped.
Specifically, the project is assessing the extent of con-
tamination on the 25-acre former dump and designing
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 37
-------
a strategy to redevelop the site as an international tele-
conference center. Meanwhile, development of the
adjacent portions of the park has progressed and at-
tracted two international manufacturing companies.
Once the project is completed, the redeveloped
brownfields will include the eco-industrial park, re-
stored wetlands, a nature trail and environmental edu-
cation facility, and conversion of the existing munici-
pal sewage treatment plant to a zero-discharge water
recovery and reuse system.
What are the Project's Successes?
The project is:
Formulating a complete remediation strategy
for any contamination found on the site;
Developing a feasibility study to address appli-
cability, feasibility, and cost of applicable re-
mediation technologies; and
Designing an environmental management sys-
tem to measure levels of performance in ex-
cess of legislative standards.
38 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Promoting P2 in the Small
Business Community
Introduction
Be
Beyond implementing pollution prevention
techniques in government owned facilities and on
government owned lands, local governments have a
unique opportunity to promote pollution prevention in
the small business community. Many local govern-
ments posses both the resources and the understanding
of local environmental issues to provide businesses
with the informational and technical assistance neces-
sary to engage them in pollution prevention activities.
Often leading by example, local governments can en-
courage businesses to make simple improvements in
purchasing, materials handling and storage, regular
equipment maintenance, and other standard proce-
dures to reduce waste. Small businesses do not al-
ways have to make major capital expenditures to in-
corporate P2 into their processes (Wigglesworth). In
promoting such actions, local governments can also
demonstrate how, by utilizing source reduction and
reuse techniques, a business can improve its bottom
line.
Supporting Case Studies
BMP Manual for Automotive Industries
Alexandria, Virginia
Businesses for a Cleaner River
Tidewater, Virginia
Eco-Wise Program
Montgomery County, Maryland
Enviro^ Program
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
Pollution Prevention Assessments
Hampton Roads, Virginia
Waste Audits
Fauquier County, Virginia
Working with small business communities around the
country, local governments are playing a prominent
role in advancing pollution prevention practices.
These practices reduce government costs, save busi-
nesses money, protect the local environment, and, in
this region, help protect the Chesapeake Bay.
Local Government Highlight
King County, Washington
King County instituted a comprehensive
pollution prevention program which, among
other things, encourages businesses to
implement P2 practices by providing
informational and technical assistance, and
providing recognition awards to businesses
integrating P2 practices into their program-
ming. Many of the businesses participating
have saved in disposal costs, regulatory fees,
material, and utility costs, and have increased
customer approval. One such example is a
muffler shop in the County that is saving
$5,700 annually by eliminating chlorinated
aerosols (ICMA, Preventing Pollution in
Our Cities and Counties).
Local Government Highlight
Austin, Texas
The City of Austin established a Waste
Reduction Assistance Program (WRAP) that
provides local businesses with technical
assistance to achieve reductions in the
quantity and toxicity of waste generated. The
program uses on-site assessments, materials
exchanges, and a business information
clearinghouse to accomplish this goal. Since
1995, the WRAP program has helped prevent
and divert more than 1,350 tons of waste and
saved Austin small businesses more than
$472,000 (Source Reduction Forum, Making
Source Reduction and Reuse Work).
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 39
-------
Although many local government officials have cited
the stigma businesses have with working with local
governments, voluntary pollution prevention pro-
grams often bridge the gap between business and gov-
ernment by working together to achieve shared objec-
tives.
Supported by local government case studies, the fol-
lowing chapter includes information on why your lo-
cal government should promote small business pollu-
tion prevention practices, describes steps to create a
successful pollution prevention business outreach pro-
gram, and lists the benefits of doing so.
Why Promote P2 in the
Small Business
Community?
businesses are an essential compo-
nent to a healthy community. A strong small business
community not only provides valuable services and
products to a region, but it also provides jobs and helps
the overall economy. To sustain a strong small busi-
ness community, local governments often provide
public assistance tools and incentives, such as tax in-
crement financing, to maintain those businesses. An-
other tool local governments should consider provid-
ing to maintain a healthy small business community is
information and assistance on pollution prevention
techniques that can be incorporated into a small busi-
ness.
Pollution prevention, over the long term, will improve
the efficiency of businesses (i.e., energy conservation
savings and/or reduction is waste generated), thus sav-
ing them money and improving their bottom line.
Therefore, local governments should promote P2 in
their communities because they support the business
community and the local economy.
Businesses generate a large percentage of the waste
that enters the waste stream, including hazardous
waste. This waste will often find its way into landfills,
the stormwater system, and small streams and creeks,
contributing to degraded streams, polluted water sup-
plies, and the overuse of landfills.
In 1993, Montgomery County, Maryland estimated
that small quantity generators - businesses including
auto body shops, painters, plumbers, printers, photo-
graphic labs - annually dispose approximately 25,000
gallons of hazardous waste materials into sewerage
and stormwater systems or directly into rivers and
streams. This generation and disposal of waste poses
a local environmental threat to human and aquatic
health and eventually will harm the Chesapeake Bay.
Local governments should work with the small busi-
ness community to reduce the environmental impacts
of their processing activities which will help them
meet public environmental policy objectives.
Since both maintaining a strong local economy, of
which small businesses play a critical role, and im-
proving the environment are primary public policy ob-
jectives of all local governments, it makes sense to use
pollution prevention as one means of achieving these
objectives. Clearly, pollution prevention is a win-win
policy.
What are the Benefits of
Promoting P2?
seal governments truly benefit from pro-
moting pollution prevention in their small business
community. By understanding the potential benefits
of implementing a pollution prevention program, local
governments can seek the necessary support and en-
dorsement to get a program up and running. The fol-
lowing list consists of some of the general benefits a
local government can expect from promoting P2 in its
small business community.
Promotes efficiency in the small business com-
munity which helps businesses improve their
bottom line;
Creates an environment in which a positive re-
lationship between government and business
can be established;
Reduces the amount of harmful chemical con-
taminants that enter into the environment via il-
legal disposal into drains, stormwater systems
and streams;
Decreases the amount of waste entering land-
fills, thus reducing the dependency on valuable
landfill space;
Reduces disposal costs for the business;
Reduces potential damage to wastewater treat-
ment plants due to toxic chemical disposal;
40 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Creates opportunities for local governments to
be recognized by the Chesapeake Bay Program
as a Businesses for the Bay mentor (a volun-
tary P2 program for the watershed) and/or a
Chesapeake Bay Partner Community (a local
government recognition program). (See Appen-
dix A.)
Developing a P2 Business
Outreach Program
I he following steps are suggested for a lo-
cal government interested in initiating a business out-
reach pollution prevention program. The steps are not
exhaustive, however they do provide the general
framework for a local government interested in estab-
lishing a program. It is further suggested that local
governments contact community leaders that have
been successful an implementing similar programs.
Those local government officials listed in the case
studies section of this chapter are willing to assist you
in this endeavor.
O Inventory and Evaluate the Small
Business Community
An inventory and evaluation of the small business
community is the first step in establishing a small
business pollution prevention outreach program. This
could either be an extensive inventory and evaluation
or a very general inventory. An extensive inventory
may entail tasks such as inventorying the number and
types of businesses, researching the percentage and
types of waste produced from those businesses, and
getting a sense of their purchasing and processing hab-
its. A general inventory may include only inventory-
ing the number and types of businesses.
Obviously, an extensive inventory and evaluation of
the small business community is a resource intensive
process, possibly best lead by the business itself. The
general process may provide a local government with
adequate information to establish an effective pollu-
tion program since just understanding the types of
businesses will shed some light on their purchasing,
processing and waste disposal habits. After an inven-
tory is completed, the local government may analyze
that information to determine what businesses should
be targeted in a pollution prevention program.
Finally, a mailing list of businesses should be prepared
in order to provide a general communication link with
business. By utilizing the mailing list, a local govern-
ment can provide general P2 information and techni-
cal assistance to its small businesses.
G Seek Constituent Support
Many successful local governments have indicated the
importance of establishing workgroups or advisory
committees that represent broad interests, citizens,
businesses, government, etc., to help define a pro-
gram, create program objectives and provide valuable
insight to local government officials. Additionally, a
formal or informal group can persuade public officials
to support a program, as well as assist in its marketing.
Seeking constituent support by creating advisory
councils, workgroups, and committees is a critical step
in developing a P2 program.
G Establish Clear Goals and Objectives
Once the small business community has been identi-
fied and a support team established, a local govern-
ment should then create some clear pollution preven-
tion goals and objectives. These goals should be con-
sistent with the overall environmental policy objec-
tives of a local government, and if possible demon-
strate how pollution prevention practices can be an ef-
fective mechanism to achieving those objectives. In
addition, this exercise will help a local government
tailor a pollution prevention program best suited to
meet its individual needs. Finally, by setting clear
goals and objectives, a local government is essentially
establishing a yard stick on which to measure the suc-
cess of the program.
D Build On an Existing Program
Many local governments have built on established
pollution prevention programs to generate support for
their business outreach component. For instance, a lo-
cal government can build on existing and successful
recycling programs and/or household hazardous waste
programs to establish a hazardous waste collection
program for small businesses. This may lead to the
development of a source reduction/waste minimiza-
tion program for small businesses. Starting small,
educating the public, and building on existing success-
ful programs is an approach that has been successful.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 41
-------
D Develop Informational and Technical
Materials and Identify Financial
Assistance Opportunities
Preparing simple and effective technical assistance re-
sources is critical to encouraging small businesses to
implement pollution prevention techniques. Re-
sources, such as describing the potential economic
benefits of integrating P2 in business processes, can
help to initially persuade businesses to participate.
Local governments may also consider providing busi-
nesses with source reduction self-assessment work-
sheets, brochures, informational assistance networks,
disposal programs and on-site assessments. In addi-
tion, a local government should identify funding op-
portunities that both businesses and local governments
can take advantage of that advance small business pol-
lution prevention objectives. Finally, by providing in-
centives, such as developing small business recogni-
tion programs, local governments have been success-
ful in advancing source reduction goals. Additional
examples of some of the tools a local government can
provide businesses are provided in the appendix of the
Toolkit.
n Target Your Assistance to Interested
Businesses
After inventorying businesses, creating goals and ob-
jectives, and preparing information and technical as-
sistance tools, a local government should target inter-
ested small businesses to participate. Initially, it is
wise for local governments to target businesses that
have shown an interest in applying P2 techniques.
By targeting assistance, local governments will have
greater opportunities to demonstrate some measurable
results. This has a dual purpose: demonstrated suc-
cesses will encourage other businesses to give P2 a try
and they will help to sustain support for the P2 pro-
gram by highlighting some initial successes.
G Conduct Follow-Up Visits with
Interested Businesses
Establishing a relation with businesses willing to par-
ticipate in a P2 program is essential to the process. Af-
ter making initial contact with business owners and
managers regarding the P2 program, local government
officials should follow-up to keep those interested
groups involved. Businesses, like anything else, ap-
preciate the extra time you provide them. These calls,
visits or letters will shed some light on the effective-
ness of a program, determine what new tools or assis-
tance could be provided to advance the program, and
strengthen a relationship with a small business. Down
the road these follow-up efforts will help a local gov-
ernment measure the success of a program. Several
local government officials have expressed the impor-
tance of this step in getting businesses started, as well
as receiving insight to improve their programs.
Getting Your Small
Businesses Involved
to getting businesses involved in pol-
lution prevention activities is providing them with the
information necessary to get them started. There are
many informational, technical and financial assistance
tools local governments can offer businesses to initiate
P2. We have included assistance programs for busi-
nesses at the end of the Toolkit in the Assistance Pro-
grams section.
One question that is bound to come up when talking
with businesses about integrating pollution prevention
into their programming is "Why?". Therefore, a criti-
cal piece of information a local government can pro-
vide to businesses is the benefits to implementing pol-
lution prevention with, if possible, some supporting
case studies that demonstrate the cost savings a busi-
ness can expect if P2 is implemented into their pro-
gramming. These benefits can be incorporated into an
informational brochure for businesses.
After providing a justification for the value in P2 pro-
grams, some information on how a business can get
started is also helpful to provide. Selected assistance
tools to help your local government reach out to the
business community such as a step-by-step process for
businesses to use to get started and check lists of P2
activities are included in the Appendix C. These
checklists will help a business understand what P2
means to them and help them identify opportunities to
implement P2 in their business.
42 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Tools to Advance Small
Business P2 Programs
Establish an information network: Local
governments can provide an opportunity for
small business operators, local government of-
ficials, and technical experts to discuss issues
pertaining to pollution prevention. These fo-
rums are opportunities to discuss similar is-
sues, relate effective programs, and raise is-
sues of concern.
Provide informational and technical assis-
tance: Local governments can provide fact
sheets, brochures, and references to the small
business community to encourage their partici-
pation in P2 activities. Brochures can include
information on the benefits to businesses that
implement P2 practices and sources of addi-
tional information on the subject. Local gov-
ernments can interpret regulatory measures,
and/or provide references for specific ques-
tions. Local governments with adequate finan-
cial support can also sponsor training sessions.
These sessions can be targeted towards public
works managers, public officials, or business
operators.
Provide on-site assessments: A local govern-
ment can create waste audit assessment teams
to assist area businesses in finding potential ar-
eas in which to reduce waste. These non-regu-
latory waste teams can build positive linkages
with small businesses that may not already ex-
ist because of lack of trust between the busi-
ness and government.
Sponsor disposal programs: Local govern-
ments can provide disposal services for busi-
nesses to efficiently dispose of hazardous
waste. Rather than having a hazardous waste
management firm mobilize costly labor and
equipment to each business location, a local
government can arrange for the monthly mobi-
lization of chemists and equipment to a single
site (i.e., a local government solid waste trans-
fer station).
Locate grant opportunities: By creating a vi-
sion for a community it will open up opportuni-
ties for a specific business to obtain funding.
An active local government will provide the
impetus and merit for small businesses to ob-
tain grants to implement pollution prevention
programs at their facilities.
Sponsor a small business recognition pro-
gram: Local governments can encourage
small businesses to participate in a pollution
prevention program by recognizing their ef-
forts. Recognition is a powerful motivator to
small businesses that are seeking to obtain free
publicity for doing the right thing. Recogniz-
ing and publicizing the actions of local busi-
nesses will boost their image among customers
and will provide guidance to other businesses
that wish to implement their own programs.
Successes can be promoted in local newspa-
pers, press releases, and newsletters, as well as
with recognition logos that can be proudly dis-
played in a businesses window. Environ-
mental protection is an important issues to con-
stituents who will appreciate businesses in
their communities that are taking steps to re-
duce pollutants and protect the environment.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 43
-------
44 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Best Management Practices Manual for
Automotive Related Industries
Case Study ff 7
City of Alexandria, Virginia
Larry Gavan
City of Alexandria
Transportation and Environmental Services Department
PO Box 178-City Hall
Alexandria, VA 22314
(703) 519-3400 ext. 188
What is the BMP Manual?
I he City of Alexandria has implemented
several programs to protect water quality in the region.
One focus has been its local automotive industries
which can substantially contribute to pollutants ending
up in storm and sewer systems if they do not dispose
of products properly. To help these businesses to un-
derstand the implications of their actions and to deter-
mine preventive measures, the City produced the Best
Management Practices Manual for Automotive Re-
lated Industries.
tices that should be implemented daily. Many of the
practices are straightforward and may already be in
place at the shop.
What are the Manual's Successes?
pproximately 35 manuals have been dis-
tributed to automotive businesses in the City. The re-
action of service station operators has ranged from en-
thusiastic acceptance to mild curiosity. As the publi-
cation is quite recent, there is no hard data available as
to the results.
The practices described in the manual help an automo-
tive shop to keep heavy metals, oil, grease, and other
pollutants out of local streams, the Potomac River and
the Chesapeake Bay. Best Management Practices
(BMPs) are outlined in order to assist in complying
with the environmental requirements of the City, as
well as state and federal agencies.
Fourteen recommended BMPs are keyed to specific
shop activities and four advanced management prac-
tices are suggested to control pollution from more se-
vere problems. The recommended BMPs are prac-
How Can the Manual Work for my
Local Government?
I,
Information and recommendations found in
the manual were adapted from the Santa Clara Valley
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. A local
government can tailor the recommendations to meet
its specific requirements. The BMPs are generic in
nature and make sense for any local government's
automotive industries.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 45
-------
Businesses for a Cleaner River -
Elizabeth River Project
What is the Businesses for a Cleaner
River Program?
lousinesses for a Cleaner River is an ele-
ment of the Elizabeth River Project's (ERP) effort to
include businesses in pollution prevention activities.
The ERP was established in 1992 to improve and pro-
tect the water quality of the Elizabeth River, a tidal
estuary of the Chesapeake Bay, which is one of three
regions of concern identified by the Chesapeake Bay
Program. The group formed a 120-member Water-
shed Action Team comprised of citizens, business rep-
resentatives, and government officials developed a
watershed action plan consisting of 18 items, each of
which either directly or indirectly affects water qual-
ity.
An Implementation Team has been charged with over-
seeing the achievement of the plan's goals. Businesses
have a significant role to play in many of the action
items and therefore, one element of the ERP is the
Businesses for a Cleaner River. ERP helps businesses
find solutions that save money and reduce pollution.
In particular, information is provided to businesses on
methods of reducing costs for energy, water, and raw
materials; reducing costs of waste disposal; improving
landscaping of property while reducing landscape
maintenance costs; and improving community image.
Businesses for a Cleaner River offers free, confiden-
tial research and training on cost-effective alternatives
to reduce pollution at the source and minimize costly
waste. Volunteer peers help find solutions to specific
industry questions. The program also provides assis-
Case Study ff8
Tidewater, Virginia
Marilee Hawkins
The Elizabeth River Project
109 E. Main Street, Suite 305
Norfolk, VA 23510
(757) 625-3648
tance to businesses that are interested in creating or
restoring wildlife habitat at their sites.
What are the Program's Successes?
I he Elizabeth River Project continues to
pursue the development of a resource service to assist
businesses and residents in pollution prevention and
habitat enhancement. ERP has held discussions with a
wide range of interests to develop a focused program
and a pool of expertise providing voluntary assistance
and recognition for businesses implementing pollution
prevention practices. ERP has requested the Wildlife
Habitat Council in Silver Spring, Maryland to bring
the habitat council's assistance to the area in advising
businesses on how to develop habitat on unused prop-
erty.
The program has been successful in large part due to
the confidential nature of the program. All partici-
pants are assured that information disclosed for the
purpose of receiving assistance will be held in confi-
dence.
The program has helped to locate financial opportuni-
ties for businesses by identifying grants that focus on
pollution prevention. A small business may wish to
improve its policies and update its technology, but
finding grant money to support these efforts is not al-
ways easy.
To recognize those businesses that are implementing
pollution prevention activities, the ERP instituted the
River Stars program. River Stars is voluntary certifi-
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 47
-------
cation and recognition for businesses that are commit-
ted to environmental protection. River Stars receive
decals, plaques, and news releases. To date, 33 busi-
nesses have been named River Stars.
How Much Does the Program Cost?
I unding for the Businesses for a Cleaner
River was made possible by U.S. EPA, the Virginia
Environmental Endowment, the National Fish and
Wildlife Service, the Fitz-Gibbon Charitable Trust,
and American Management Systems, Inc. These or-
ganizations provided approximately $85,000 in sup-
port of the program.
now Can the Program Work for my
Local Government?
gional pollution prevention program, a local govern-
ment could adapt elements of the program to its own
jurisdiction. Recognizing businesses for their activi-
ties is an excellent outreach activity to the business
community and the River Stars program is easy to rep-
licate. Supporting the recognition program with tech-
nical assistance in improving water quality and reduc-
ing costs is optimal if the local government has suffi-
cient financing and expertise.
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
I es, the Elizabeth River Project is also very
active in its citizen outreach campaign. It has success-
fully recruited volunteers to take part in clean-up days,
habitat restoration projects, and water monitoring pro-
grams.
hile the Elizabeth River Project and its
Businesses for a Cleaner River is a comprehensive, re-
48 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
"tcoWise Program" for Small Quantity
Generators of Hazardous Wastes
Case Study ff 9
Montgomery County, Maryland
What is the EcoWise Program?
businesses are critical players in pro-
tecting the local environment and that of the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. Small businesses gener-
ate hazardous waste as a by-product of their business
activities. Because these businesses are small, and
therefore have tight budgets, paying for the proper dis-
posal of hazardous waste is an expense that many can
not afford. Unfortunately, the result is that many
small businesses illegally dump their by-products
down the drain, in the storm system, or in a remote
stream. These actions likely violate environmental
regulations and certainly contribute to the degradation
of soils, ground and surface water, and ultimately the
Chesapeake Bay.
Montgomery County, in recognition of the growing
need to address this issue, developed the EcoWise pro-
gram. The Program addresses the hazardous waste
management needs of businesses known by the regu-
latory term of "small quantity generators". Small
quantity generators are businesses which produce haz-
ardous waste at a rate below certain regulatory levels,
such as body shops, painters, plumbers, home contrac-
tors, printers, photographic labs and woodworkers.
The program achieves cost efficiencies for hazardous
waste disposal not available to most small businesses.
Rather than having a costly hazardous waste manage-
ment firm mobilize labor and equipment to each busi-
ness location, the County has arranged for monthly
Aron Trombka
Montgomery County
Division of Solid Waste Services
101 Monroe Street
Sixth Floor
Rockville, MD 20850
(301)217-2376
mobilization of chemists and equipment to a single
site, the County's Solid Waste Transfer Station. By
having each small business self-haul its waste to this
central collection site, mobilization costs are allocated
over multiple users.
The EcoWise program provides businesses with an
economically viable opportunity to dispose of small
quantities of hazardous wastes in an environmentally
responsible manner. The Program features a series of
monthly collection events at which small businesses
may dispose of hazardous materials. In addition to
hazardous waste collection service, Montgomery
County provides free publicity to businesses which
participate in the EcoWise Program. Such publicity
includes a press release announcing a business' par-
ticipation, signs, posters and decals to alert customers
of the business' environmental concern.
Businesses are required to register to participate in the
EcoWise program.
What are the Program's Successes?
I he cost to an EcoWise participant is typi-
cally 80 to 90 percent lower than the cost of direct con-
tracting with a hazardous waste management firm.
The substantial cost savings makes environmental
compliance more affordable for many small busi-
nesses.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 49
-------
Only in its first foil year, the EcoWise program has
already demonstrated some measurable successes in-
cluding registering nearly 170 businesses in the pro-
gram. Over 8 tons or 2,300 gallons of hazardous
waste have been collected. Montgomery County esti-
mates that there are between 800 to 1.000 small quan-
tity generators in the County. Given this estimate, the
County has registered between 17 and 21 percent of
the small quantity generators and has received waste
from between 9 and 11 percent of the generators.
Recognized by the U.S. Small Business Administra-
tion and featured in articles in the Washington Post,
the EcoWise program is not only benefiting the
County, but also serving as a model program for local
governments throughout the country.
Mow Much Does the Program Cost?
I he program's annual operating budget is
$8,400 coupled with approximately $5,000 in pro-
gram overhead costs. These are paid for through a
"system benefit charge" assessed on all commercial
properties in the County. In addition to funding the
EcoWise program, the revenues from the "system
benefit charge" support the implementation of many
other solid waste programs in the County. The portion
of the "system benefit charge" used to fund the
EcoWise program averages about 70 cents annually
for each of the County's 19,000 businesses.
In addition, a small business participating in the pro-
gram directly pays a per unit cost for materials dis-
posal which again is typically 80 to 90 percent below
direct contracting costs.
Although the overall cost of the EcoWise program is
not excessive, the operational costs do reflect an econ-
omy building on an existing relationship with a
County contractor who supports the County's house-
hold hazardous waste collection program. Therefore,
local governments that do not have a contractor on
which to build the program may entail higher costs to
establish a small business program.
llow Can the Program Work for my
Local Government?
Jthough Montgomery County is a rather
large local government in the Chesapeake Bay water-
shed, the relatively low cost of the EcoWise program
makes it quite applicable to communities of all sizes
throughout the watershed. In Maryland, Montgomery
County has paved the way for other local governments
to have the authority from the State to collect hazard-
ous waste from small quantity generators. Thus, in
Maryland, other County governments have the ability
to replicate the Program without having to negotiate
with the State.
The EcoWise program did not require hiring of new
municipal staff. All hazardous waste handling,
screening, packing, transport and disposition is con-
ducted by contract labor. County staff time is limited
to only four hours a month for overall program man-
agement and promotion
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
es, the County also published Hazardous
Waste Management in Montgomery County A
Handbook for Businesses Generating Small Quanti-
ties of Hazardous Waste.
50 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Enviro v Program
Case Study If 1O
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
What is the Cnviro^ Program?
I he Enviro& program is designed to recog-
nize everyone who is practicing pollution prevention
in his or her business, office or school. The objectives
of the program are for businesses, with a focus on
small businesses, to educate the business community
of the environmental and economic savings associated
with P2 practices, to demonstrate the willingness of
the County Health department to serve businesses in a
voluntary non-regulatory climate, and to ultimately re-
duce the amount of pollution generated by businesses.
Although the program targets small businesses, it is
designed to be inclusive and therefore, provides large
businesses the opportunity to be recognized in the pro-
gram as well. Additionally, the program, now in its
second year, is seeking to expand its membership base
to include schools and local government facilities in
order to encourage larger numbers of participants to
apply.
The Enviro "^program asks businesses and others to
apply by completing a simple user-friendly applica-
tion form. The application requests general informa-
tion about a business, brief descriptions regarding the
pollution prevention activities that a business is imple-
menting, and a description of any cost savings or envi-
ronmental benefits that are a result of the pollution
prevention practices. Additionally, the program re-
quests that a business outlines its future plans to im-
prove and enhance its pollution prevention programs.
Jack K. Peterson, Ph. D.
County of Allegheny
Health Department and Air Quality Program
30139th Street, Bldg. # 7
Pittsburgh, PA 15201-1891
(412)578-8319
The County evaluates the initial applications and then
visits the applicant to determine what level of recogni-
tion a business has earned. The EnviroA program of-
fers three levels of recognition, depending on the ex-
tent of a businesses pollution prevention programs.
Simply meeting regulatory requirements does not earn
recognition. A business must go beyond the regula-
tions; the further a business goes, the higher the recog-
nition it receives. Criteria has been established for
each level of performance. The program also differ-
entiates between large businesses and small busi-
nesses in setting criteria that must be met to be recog-
nized.
The following is an example of the small business cri-
teria that must be achieved to reach one of the three
recognition levels.
First Level - Small business (under 100 em-
ployees) must implement one or more volun-
tary pollution prevention practices and plan to
expand pollution prevention activities in the
coming year.
Second Level - Small business must demon-
strate a progressively broader pollution preven-
tion program which can include participation
in EPA sponsored programs or in VIP2, and
has a pollution prevention plan for the coming
year.
Third Level - Small business must meet the cri-
teria in level 2 and document a successful and
continuing pollution prevention history, includ-
ing financial and environmental benefits.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 51
-------
Obviously, more activities are required of larger busi-
nesses in order to be recognized in the EnviroA pro-
gram.
If a business is recognized as an Enviro&, it receives
a distinctive window display, attesting to its pollution
prevention activities, a certificate suitable for framing,
and the right to use the Enviro& logo on correspon-
dence and in advertisements. Public recognition will
also be provided.
What are the Program's Successes?
Afte
ter only one year of existence, the Pro-
gram has recognized ten businesses. These small and
large businesses have achieved variable degrees of
recognition. The larger businesses were able to quan-
tify their economic and environmental benefits that re-
sulted from their pollution prevention practices. Ad-
ditionally, one smaller business was able to quantify
the benefits and there are indications that other small
businesses are becoming more sophisticated in their
accounting and will soon be able determine the cost
savings and environmental benefits that are associated
with the implementation of P2 practices.
The County, through its educational outreach efforts,
has informed businesses of the benefits associated
with applying pollution prevention techniques to their
businesses. In addition, the County has improved its
ability to work with businesses by gaining their trust
as they participate in this voluntary, non-regulatory
program.
ilow Much Does the Program Cost?
for the Enviro^ program are mini-
mal. County Health Department overhead charges
funded the in-house design of the program, as well as
supporting the preparation of brochures, newsletters
and recognition awards. A quarter of one staff per-
son's time was used in the design phases and approxi-
mately that same amount of time is being used to man-
age the program's implementation.
How Can the Program Work for my
Local Government?
I he Enviro^t program was designed in a
user-friendly way to promote extensive participation
of the local business community - making the applica-
tion easy is an incentive for businesses to apply. In
turn, the administration and maintenance of the pro-
gram is also relatively easy. Staff time to review the
basic applications is minimal and therefore less costly.
Although on average the County holds two outreach
workshops to promote the EnviroA program a month,
the costs of these events are relatively low because
they are held in conjunction with monthly trade group
and civic meetings over brown bag lunches. These
workshops present opportunities for business repre-
sentatives to learn more about P2 and the benefits of
applying P2 practices, as well as encourage them to
participate in the recognition program.
Because the program has little overhead costs and is
non-regulatory, it holds much promise as a valuable
transferable model. The voluntary nature of the pro-
gram also helps to build bridges between the County
Agency, perceived as a regulatory entity only, and the
business community.
Are there Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
I he County provides general information to
promote P2 practices in the home and in the office.
Well-formatted materials express the value of P2, as
well as the benefits of implementing P2. Additionally,
the County provides P2 outreach and educational
workshops bi-monthly to interested groups and or-
ganizations.
52 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Pollution Prevention Assessments
Case Study If 11
Hampton Roads, Virginia
What are the Pollution Prevention
Assessments?
I he Hampton Roads Sanitation District
(HRSD) and Old Dominion University (ODU) have
collaborated to assist local businesses in developing
and implementing successful pollution prevention
programs. With the assistance of an EPA grant, the
two organizations are providing free pollution preven-
tion assessments to small and medium-sized busi-
nesses.
A team of experts, including HRSD's technical review
staff and ODU environmental engineering students
and faculty, performs the assessments. The informa-
tion is analyzed and follow-up research is conducted
to determine additional pollution prevention resources
that could be utilized by the business. The end prod-
uct is a comprehensive report with specific pollution
prevention and recycling options to reduce waste. The
project also gives businesses access to on-site techni-
cal consultation on waste reduction and gives them ac-
cess to resources available from the Virginia Office of
Pollution Prevention, the Elizabeth River Project's
Pollution Prevention Program, and other manufactur-
ing and pollution prevention projects.
What are the Program's Successes?
I he program focused on marine mainte-
nance and repair facilities and commercial printers in
1995 and 1996. Participants were pleased with the re-
sults of their assessments and provided positive feed-
back to the program. The involvement of ODU stu-
dents and faculty created a more open process without
Kathleen Cosco
Public Information Manager
Hampton Roads Sanitation District
PO Box 5902
Virginia Beach, VA 23471-0902
(757) 460-7049
the onus of a regulatory feel to the assessment. Due to
the popularity of the first phase, other types of busi-
nesses asked to be considered for future phases of the
program.
The program has been able to demonstrate that pollu-
tion prevention is not only inexpensive, but can also
reduce costs for a business. Businesses are sometimes
surprised by this fact and become more active in pol-
lution prevention activities. Making businesses aware
of the existing technology to prevent pollution is a sig-
nificant accomplishment for the program.
How Much Does the Program Cost?
M
IRSD received funding from an EPA Pol-
lution Prevention Incentives for States (PPIS) grant.
The grant provided $50,000 from EPA and required a
$50,000 match. By establishing a cost-effective rela-
tionship with ODU, the money was leveraged to create
an affordable program.
How Can the Project Work for my
Local Government?
. local government willing to seek inno-
vate partnerships such as the one in the Hampton
Roads area will be able to tap technical resources in
the community to assist local businesses. Working
with a local university saves money for the program
through the acquisition of low-cost expertise and pro-
vides hands-on experience to students who are study-
ing pollution prevention technologies.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 53
-------
Are There Additional Pollution lication is designed to keep area industrial users up-
Prevention Resources? dated about P2 issues. It provides regulatory news,
highlights HRSD's pollution prevention activities and
Y projects, and features industries that are focusing on
es, the Hampton Roads Sanitation District pollution prevention.
publishes a quarterly newsletter, P2 News. The pub-
54 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Waste Audits and Household Hazardous
Waste Program
Case Study If 12
Tauquier County, Virginia
What is the Waste Audits Program?
I,
In January 1996, the Fauquier County Board
of Supervisors set the goal for the County to achieve a
30 percent recycling rate by July 1996. No small task
considering the County was recycling at a rate of
about 20 percent in 1995, much of which could be
contributed to a curb-side recycling program in the
Town of Warrenton. Nonetheless, the County sought
new and aggressive mechanisms in which to enlist
residents and others to recycle.
County officials quickly realized the recycling poten-
tial from a previously untapped source - the commer-
cial sector. Through an aggressive marketing cam-
paign. County recycling and litter prevention staff set
out to encourage businesses in the County to reduce,
reuse and recycle and, as a result, meet County recy-
cling goals, conserve landfill space, and save busi-
nesses money.
Providing County officials to conduct waste audits at
area businesses was the preferred approach to engag-
ing the commercial sector in recycling activities. The
Program Manager of the County's Recycling and Lit-
ter Prevention office aimed to conduct two inventories
at local businesses per week. During these visits,
County officials identified current recycling efforts,
evaluated business waste streams, and provided ad-
vice on how businesses can do more to prevent pollu-
tion. Since the outreach program began, County offi-
cials have conducted over 60 inventories which have
E.N. (Benji) Brackman
Program Manager
Recycling and Litter Control
235 W. Shirley Avenue
Warrenton, VA 20186
(540) 347-6823
resulted in additional reduce, reuse and recycling ef-
forts in the commercial sector.
During these waste audits, County officials uncovered
some significant pollution prevention activities that
are being implemented in area businesses. Take, for
example,Trinity Packaging Corporation near
Remington. The Corporation recycles about 50,000
pounds of plastic per day, reusing its own waste and
collecting used plastic from other companies. This
pollution prevention technique saves Trinity Corpora-
tion approximately $500,000 a year. It is these large
scale success stories, as well as many small success
stories, that have assisted the County in encouraging
other businesses to consider pollution prevention tech-
niques.
What is the Household Hazardous
Waste Program?
I,
In addition to the business outreach pro-
gram, the County is also engaged in a comprehensive
Household Hazardous Waste Program (HHW) for the
50,000 residents of Fauquier County. The program
objectives are: to provide a convenient and safe dis-
posal method of household hazardous waste materials;
to reduce the amount of potential hazardous materials
that might inadvertently end up in the landfill; to pre-
vent potential groundwater contamination from im-
proper disposal of these wastes, and to recycle as
much of these materials as physically possible.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 55
-------
On the third Saturday of each month, March through
November, materials are collected as follows: paints,
sealers, turpentine, finishing oils, gasoline, automo-
tive products, pesticides, insecticides, photographic
chemicals, drain cleaners, battery acid, household
cleaners, and dry cell batteries. Residents are not
charged a fee for bringing in these materials.
The Household Hazardous Waste Program was publi-
cized through a mass media campaign including news
stories, print advertising, newsletters, radio spots,
public service announcements, and numerous other
methods.
What are the Programs' Successes?
Oince the County instituted its business out-
reach program and its hazardous waste collection pro-
gram, it has achieved both state and County recycling
goals. In fact in 1997, Fauquier County recycled
nearly 43 percent or 15,637 tons of its waste. This far
exceeds state and County recycling goals and can be
directly attributed to the County's commitment to the
recycling program. In addition, while normally waste
entering the landfill increases by approximately 2.5
percent each year, the percentage of waste entering the
solid waste landfill in recent years has actually de-
creased.
The Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program
has also paid dividends for the management of County
solid waste. The amount of material collected be-
tween March 1995 and November 1995 was 41.35
tons and between March 1996 and June 1996 was 22.3
tons. The amount of hazardous waste materials recy-
cled was 36.68 tons which results in a recycling rate of
89 percent.
In part because of the successes the County has
achieved in its recycling program, the County Board
of Supervisors recently approved nearly $200,000 for
upgrades to the County's recycling center. The funds
will be used to purchase equipment to process and
handle recyclable materials. The equipment will fur-
ther tap the growing market for recycled goods, should
pay for itself in four years, and will conserve valuable
landfill space at the recently opened $20 million
County landfill.
The success of both these programs can be attributed
to a strong commitment by County officials and
County elected officials, an aggressive marketing
campaign, and a hands-on approach that encourages
pollution prevention practices in the home and in the
commercial sector.
How Much Do the Programs Cost?
I he County's business outreach effort is a
valuable, cost effective program to reduce waste en-
tering the waste stream. It cost the county $3,920 to
conduct 70 waste audits in area businesses. Each
waste audit took approximately four hours of County
employee time.
The Household Hazardous Waste Program is funded
through a dedicated Fauquier County Enterprise Fund.
This Fund supports the Household Hazardous Waste
Management Program's collection of waste, as well as
its marketing of the program. In FY97, the County
spent $75,833 to fund the HHW program - the vast
majority of the costs covered a hazardous material
handler contract.
Since May 1995, the County has invested $278,923 in
its recycling program, which includes the HHW and
the waste audits programs. Part of the County's in-
vestment is defrayed by funds generated by selling the
recycled materials.
However, County officials caution that the cost-effec-
tiveness of the recycling program is highly dependent
on the demand for recycled materials. When demand
is low, the market for such recycled materials shrinks
and so does the price the County receives for its recy-
cled materials.
In 1995, the price for paper was about $250 per ton,
but in 1996 the price of paper plummeted to about $50
a ton. This greatly reduced the market for recycled
paper and affected the County's ability to defray the
cost of its recycling program.
56 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Are There Additional Pollution The Fauquier County Guide To Every Day Re-
Prevention Resources? cycling
Once is Not Enough - Guide to Household Re-
Y cycling
es, the County and a non-profit organiza- . KFCleaNeWs Quarterly Newsletter - prepared
turn have prepared the following document, pamphlet ^ m£mbers of R p Q ^
and informational newsletter: jr-j-* +J i A
and friends interested in recycling and environ-
mental issues.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 57
-------
Promoting P2 to Citizens
Introduction
I,
In addition to local government's role of pro-
moting pollution prevention at its own facilities and
with the local small business community, another im-
portant function of local government involves encour-
aging its citizenry to adopt pollution prevention prac-
tices. Once a local government has established a suc-
cessful P2 program, it has the ability to transfer that
knowledge to local residents. Assisting individual
households in reducing their waste can have a substan-
tial impact on community waste streams.
| Supporting Case Studies
Bayscapes
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay
"Let's Be Partners..." Program
Baltimore County, Maryland
The Water-wise Gardener Program
Prince William County, Virginia
A local government educates residents about P2 tech-
niques and provides the resources to make pollution
prevention more accessible and practical. Local gov-
ernments can sponsor recycling pick-ups, conduct
household hazardous waste disposal programs, pro-
mote septic system best management practices, and
hold educational seminars to encourage their residents
to participate in pollution prevention efforts.
The general population has accepted the premise of
the importance of pollution prevention. Consumers
are purchasing more durable products, reusing prod-
ucts, and using less toxic products (Source Reduction
Forum, Creating Incentives). A local government
that promotes and explains P2 practices can increase
the amount of citizen involvement.
Local Government Highlight
Phoenix, Arizona
The City of Phoenix developed a
pollution prevention program which targets
both the business community and the public.
The public education effort aims to change
residents' chemical product usage.
Organizers of the P 2 program developed pro-
motional materials and games that target
water conservation, pesticides, and house-
hold hazardous waste. The materials are
distributed at various community events and
at information booths throughout the city,
through which it has been possible to reach
hundreds of residents. The City of Phoenix
was able to provide information to the
community that heightened awareness of
sources of pollution and generated changes in
behavior.
Local Government Highlight
Rowan County, Kentucky
The Gateway District Health Depart-
ment of Kentucky established a program to
prevent discharges from septic systems. The
program focuses on public education; repair
and upgrade; financial assistance; and
information dissemination. The project was
developed to combat the high bacteria levels
in local creeks and rivers. Once an old or
failing septic system is identified, staff works
with residents to determine what steps can be
taken to rectify the situation. Significant
interest in the program was generated
through television and print media coverage,
as well as awareness programs in the schools
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 59
-------
Why Encourage P2 to
Citizens?
Deal governments can take steps at their
own facilities and they can promote P2 to the business
community; however, to create a truly comprehensive
pollution prevention program, residents need to be in-
cluded in the process. Their support of local govern-
ment action will enhance pollution prevention pro-
grams and their activities at home will increase overall
waste reductions.
Individuals who wish to do their share to prevent pol-
lution sometimes require additional information. Be-
coming an educated consumer will more likely result
in modified buying habits. Citizens that buy in bulk,
shop with reusable bags, and try non-hazardous prod-
ucts are making a contribution to source reduction ef-
forts. Around the home, residents can identify hazard-
ous and non-hazardous waste and learn how to prevent
its harmful effects on the environment. Brochures
promoting alternative cleaning supplies, composting
techniques, and energy efficiency policies are all use-
ful means of expanding citizens' participation in pol-
lution prevention.
As individuals contributing to the pollution prevention
effort, measurable results may not be that apparent.
However, the combined effect of altering residents'
behavior will substantially contribute to the overall
improvement of the environment and human health.
Involving constituents in pollution prevention pro-
gram of a locality can only increase the "win-win" na-
ture of pollution prevention.
The benefits of including citizens in pollution preven-
tion policies are evident for both the local government
and the residents. Informing citizens of local programs
improves the image of the local government and cre-
ates a link for future cooperation. Saving money over
the long-term by implementing environmental meas-
ures that also result in improved energy efficiency, re-
duced cost for products, or improved human health ap-
peals to citizens.
Local Government Highlight
State of Texas
Texas government officials have
learned how involving citizens in water
conservation practices can save money
while helping the environment. Low-flow
toilets in use throughout Texas could reduce
the need to build new water and wastewater
treatment plants by 15 percent and result in
savings of as much as $68 million per year.
Residential water and sewer bills may also
be reduced by as much as $200 million over
the long term.
The Texas Water Development Board
estimates that the use of water-efficient
plumbing fixtures should save a typical
four-member household 55,800 gallons of
water and $627 in lower water and energy
(i.e., water heating and pumping) costs per
year. The Board also projects that the use of
low-flow fixtures might reduce water use
statewide by 805 million gallons per day by
the year 2040 (Jensen, 1991/
Promoting P2 to Citizens
Lach local government must decide how ex-
tensive of a citizen outreach program it will implement
in its jurisdiction. Contrary to the business commu-
nity, expressing the ideological arguments for pollu-
tion prevention in addition to the economic incentives
proves to be an effective mechanism with citizens.
The environmental costs of pollution hold much influ-
ence over the behavior of individuals.
n Set an Example
The actions of local governments at their own facili-
ties and their effects on economic efficiency and envi-
ronmental improvements of government functions can
be a means of influencing behavior. By demonstrating
their own commitment to the environment, under-
scored by improved efficiency and cost savings, local
governments set a standard for their constituents. Suc-
cesses can be communicated through press releases,
brochures, and open houses.
60 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
n Incorporate Pollution Prevention into
Legislation
In order to include pollution prevention in the entire
spectrum of local government activities, legislation af-
fecting various social issues can include pollution pre-
vention. For example, housing regulations can in-
clude energy and water conservation specifications.
Local governments can also adopt an ordinance that
demonstrates the commitment of the jurisdiction and
its businesses and residents to modifying behavior in a
more environmentally-sustainable manner. Gaining
support from citizens for pollution prevention legisla-
tion will make it more effective.
O Implement a "Pay-as-you-Throw"
Program
Local governments can change residents waste habits
by charging individuals for the amount of waste gen-
erated. Research has shown that residents are more
inclined to reduce waste and/or recycle if they are sub-
ject to a municipal unit-based pricing system. This
policy has been implemented at the commercial level
for years, but can also be effectively applied at the
residential level.
~) Sponsor a Public Education Campaign
Through topic specific public education campaigns,
residents are made aware of the results of their pollu-
tion and what impact changes in behavior can have.
Campaigns can focus on household and home mainte-
nance, lawn and garden techniques, and automotive
practices. Pamphlets, signs, workbooks, and handouts
are all effective tools for conveying messages.
Educational programs are less expensive than recy-
cling and disposal programs for a local government
and can have a substantial impact on residents' behav-
ior. Seminars and workshops can be offered that pro-
vide information on landscaping techniques that re-
duce run-off, septic system practices that protect water
quality, or water conservation techniques that also
save energy and money. Information presented to in-
terested residents can later be shared with participants'
neighbors.
n Produce Materials to Assist Citizens
in Implementing P2 Programs
Informational pieces serve two roles. One is to raise
awareness of activities and items that are causing pol-
lution and how they are impacting the environmental
quality of the area. The other role is to provide spe-
cific guidance as to how to correct these activities. It
is important to provide for the safe disposal of those
hazardous and non-hazardous products that are util-
ized by residents. An effective local government will
provide the technical and informational assistance
necessary to ensure both prevention and safe disposal.
Many of the practices that apply to local government
facilities can be utilized on a smaller scale by resi-
dents. The information can be presented in the form
of articles in local government publications, inserts
into public utility bills, simple fact sheets, or more
elaborate publications such as handbooks and videos.
G Sponsor a Clean-Up Day
While many residents may actively practice pollution
prevention measures, there are still segments of the
population that are unaware of their role in waste re-
duction. By sponsoring a clean-up day, a local gov-
ernment promotes residents' awareness of the effects
of their activities. For example, a "Neighborhood
Clean-Up Day" sponsored in Mountain View, Califor-
nia helped to remove hazardous waste such as used
motor oil, old car batteries, and excess paints and pes-
ticides. While properly disposing of these items, local
government staff also distributed information on alter-
native, less toxic products and P2 practices. After
three collections, over 200 gallons of waste oil, 150
gallons of paint, 50 car batteries, and dozens of other
hazardous materials were collected.
n Join Cooperative Associations to
Promote P2
Local governments can establish links with their com-
munities by joining community organizations com-
prised of local retailers, manufacturers, and consum-
ers to discuss different perspectives and concerns
about pollution prevention and environmental quality.
Together, the participants can combine their resources
and develop comprehensive strategies for preventing
pollution.
This type of cooperation will not only serve to dis-
cover the best options for pollution prevention, but it
will also generate a positive climate for attracting ad-
ditional businesses and residents to a community.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 61
-------
Getting Citizens Involved
In residents, local governments perhaps have
their most receptive audience for pollution prevention.
Public sentiment places value on pollution prevention
activities and many residents simply require guidance
as to how to reduce the impact of their actions on the
environment. Depending on a local government's
size, the level of its commitment will vary. What is
important is to demonstrate the value and practicality
of pollution prevention activities at all levels. These
actions will cumulatively result in significant ad-
vancement in the reduction of waste and its harmful
effects on the environment.
Appendix D provides examples of surveys that help
evaluate citizen involvement and understanding of P2
activities. There are also model brochures offering op-
tions for residents in relation to recycling, landscap-
ing, and household hazardous waste.
Tools to Promote P2
Programs to Citizens
Promote backyard composting: Composting
is an excellent activity for residents to under-
take. Yard trimmings and food waste com-
prise a large part of the residential waste
stream. By being made aware of the ease and
utility of collecting yard clippings and fruit and
vegetable scraps into a composting pile or bin,
residents may choose to pursue this technique.
Education is the primary role local govern-
ments have in encouraging backyard compost-
ing. In developing a backyard composting edu-
cational program, local governments should
consider providing educational brochures to
residents that describe the reasons and benefits
of composting and the general process to be
used (ASTM). In addition to providing educa-
tional materials, local governments can spon-
sor workshops to promote composting and pro-
vide composting materials free or at a reduced
cost.
Suggest alternative products: Residents are
often unaware of the toxicity of products that
they are using in their households. Substitut-
ing less toxic pesticides, cleaning products,
paints, etc. can reduce the amount of house-
hold hazardous waste generated. Local govern-
ments can use their knowledge of pollution pre-
vention to compile a list of products and their
alternatives for distribution to residents.
Sponsor household hazardous waste collec-
tions: Although a local government is promot-
ing source reduction, the need still exists for
the safe disposal of household hazardous
waste A local government can sponsor
monthly drop-off days for excess pesticides,
oil-based paints, cleaning solvents, motor oil,
batteries, etc.
Provide information on landscaping tech-
niques: Residents can have a profound impact
on water quality by modifying their landscap-
ing techniques. Reducing fertilizers and pesti-
cides and planting appropriate trees and shrubs
make for a healthy lawn and healthy environ-
ment. Landscaping practices can be incorpo-
rated into the development process or retrofit-
ted by an individual homeowner. Local gov-
ernments can promote the implementation of
innovative techniques.
Initiate a water quality monitoring pro-
gram: Citizens provide volunteer service as
monitors of their local streams and rivers. A
minimum of time invested in training citizens
will result increased awareness of water qual-
ity issues and a long-term evaluation of the
health of a stream. Indications of improved
water quality will reinforce other citizen ef-
forts to reduce the amount of pollution enter-
ing water sources.
62 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
BayScapes
What is BayScaping?
B
JayScapes are environmentally sound
landscapes benefiting people, wildlife and the
Chesapeake Bay. BayScaping advocates a holistic ap-
proach through principles inspired by the relationships
found in the natural world.
Conservation landscaping promotes landscaping man-
agement that works with nature to reduce pollution
and enhance wildlife habitat. It encourages a low input
formula for yard care: less fertilizer and pesticide use
combined with less lawn area and the use of beneficial
plants equals less water use and less overall mainte-
nance. The goal of the BayScapes program is the pro-
tection of vital soil and water resources.
The BayScapes program teaches homeowners and
landowners how to practice conservation landscaping,
create wildlife habitat, use native plants, conserve
water, create diversity, use Integrated Pest Manage-
ment, and plan for the long term. Each guide suggests
practical techniques to help manage landscapes wisely
and, at the same time, reduce overall maintenance.
Through simple changes in the management of the
lawn and garden, BayScaping represents an innova-
tive way to contribute to the health and vitality of local
waterways and Chesapeake Bay.
What are the Program's Successes?
I he BayScapes program is outlined in the
following seven guides available to educate the home-
owners and residents about environmentally sound
landscape management.
Case Study ff 13
Sarah Richardson
Chesapeake Regional Information Service
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay
530 E. Main Street, Suite 501
Richmond, VA 23219
(804)775-0951
G Conservation Landscaping
The key to conservation landscaping is wise manage-
ment of soil, water, and vegetation. This guide ex-
plains low input formula for yard care, which is less
fertilizers and pesticides, and maintenance of a
healthy vegetative cover and proper pH and fertility
levels.
O BayScaping to Conserve Water
As much as 40 percent of the water used at home per
month can find its way into the landscape. Excess
water runs off the land and carries nutrients, sediment
and toxic products into local waterways. This guide
demonstrates how the amount of water needed to
maintain a yard can be reduced by two-thirds with lit-
tle expense or effort. Some key elements include tim-
ing and thoroughness of watering, proper equipment,
and plant selection.
CJ Creating Landscape Diversity
Areas of all sizes can benefit from diversity by utiliz-
ing different types of plants. Native grasses, ground
covers, wildflowers, shrubs and trees provide a variety
of shapes, colors, smells, and habitats.
H Using Beneficial Plants
Native plants require little maintenance such as trim-
ming, watering, fertilizer, or pesticides because they
are well adapted to local climate and soil types. Plant-
ing native plants reduces nutrients and pesticides run-
ning off yards and gardens into local rivers and
streams.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 63
-------
a BayScaping for Wildlife Habitat
Developing land for residential use destroys wildlife
habitat. Providing a backyard habitat for animals can
reverse this trend. Food and cover are provided by
planting a variety of native plants, artificial nesting
boxes, or water sources.
G Integrated Pest Management
IPM offers a variety of choices to manage pests.
While IPM does not totally eliminate chemical pesti-
cides, it does reduce the volume. This guide presents
some of the components of IPM such as identification
of pests, the use of beneficial insects, the application
of organic pesticides, and proper pesticide usage.
O BayScaping for the Long Term
This guide presents the four basic planning principles
of improving the yard over time: inventory existing
site conditions; plan uses for different parts of the
yard; select plants that are most suitable; and deter-
mine costs of maintenance.
To date, fifteen demonstration projects have been co-
ordinated in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. One ex-
ample is a project in Virginia where the City of
Chesapeake, the Elizabeth River Project (a non-profit
organization), and the Alliance for the Chesapeake
Bay co-sponsored a two-day workshop. Over 40 par-
ticipants at the workshop learned the principles of
BayScaping, discussed and designed a project, and
completed work at a park in the City.
How Much Does the Program Cost?
I unds required to implement BayScaping
techniques vary according to the specific site. How-
ever, it should be stressed that compared to other op-
tions to manage landscapes in an environmentally
sound manner, BayScapes is extremely cost-effective.
Plants are relatively inexpensive and at public sites,
volunteers can provide much of the labor. In addition,
BayScapes save money through low-impact, low-
maintenance design.
llow Can the Program Work for my
Local Government?
I he resources provided by the BayScaping
program are free of charge. They can be accessed on
the internet at:
http://web.gmu.edu/bios/bay/acb/bs/index.htm
or by contacting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at
(410)573-4500 or the Alliance for the Chesapeake
Bay at (800) 662-2747. Local governments can obtain
the information packets and promote the techniques to
their residents or residents can request the information
directly. The Alliance welcomes requests from local
governments to coordinate a BayScapes workshop to
implement the techniques at a community site.
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
Lach information packet presents a list of
additional resources that may be consulted. For spe-
cific information about soils, soil testing, fertilizers,
water management, pest control and other issues, the
local Cooperative Extension office is an excellent re-
source. The Cooperative Extension is a service of the
land-grant university systems in the District of Colum-
bia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia.
64 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
"Let's Be Partners...Water Pollution:
What We Can Do To Reduce and Prevent
It"
Case Study ff 14
Baltimore County, Maryland
What is the "Let's Be Partners..."
Program?
»ecognizing the value of educational pro-
gramming in promoting the protection of the environ-
ment, Baltimore County established a "Let's Be Part-
ners..." program as a cost effective mechanism to
maintain good water quality. "Let's Be Partners..." is
a citizen's educational program designed to encourage
students, residents, businesses and others to become
familiar with, and take actions to, prevent pollution
before it becomes a costly "end of the pipe" problem.
Baltimore County, the third largest county in popula-
tion and land area in Maryland, is a leader in innova-
tive environmental protection initiatives. "Let's Be
Partners..." is the only program of its kind in Maryland
that utilizes an integrated, comprehensive, and com-
munity-based approach to address citizen behavior
leading to water pollution.
The "Let's Be Partners ..." education program is a
modular, multi-level, mixed-media, County-specific
program that addresses the following:
The watershed concept/local stream awareness;
Water pollution causes, sources, effects;
What can be done to reduce and prevent pollu-
tion;
Where to get further information;
How to get involved.
Jeanne C. Armacost
Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection
and Resource Management
401 Bosley Avenue, Suite 416
Towson, MD21204
(410)887-4488 x251
Directly supporting the County's National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal
Stormwater Permit, the "Let's Be Partners..." program
is growing in its popularity with educators, citizens
and citizen organizations, as well as with other local
governments. In implementing the program, the
County makes presentations to community groups, in-
tegrates the program into public and private school
curricula, and prepares and distributes information to
the general public, including slide presentations, bro-
chures, and water pollution surveys.
The "Let's Be Partners..." program prides itself on its
unique and innovative ideas and creative implementa-
tion approaches. For instance, the program provides
an important linkage between the watershed concept
that underlies the County's environmental manage-
ment programs and individual behavior. The County
utilized extensive research on values, perception, mo-
tivation, behavior modification, and effectiveness
measurement to support its approaches. Additionally,
the program emphasizes cost-effective pollution pre-
vention over pollution regulation, structural controls
and clean-up.
What are the Program's Successes?
Jthough still in its early stages, the pro-
gram has demonstrated some notable early successes.
Over 7,000 citizens have participated in the program,
over 170 presentations were made, and 86 action
pledges have been received. In addition, requests for
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 65
-------
presentations are rapidly increasing, from 12 in 1995
to 84 in 1997.
When water quality issues and questions are raised,
up-to-date answers are available via speaker presenta-
tions and printed materials. This has lead to consider-
able citizen commitments to prevent pollution. For ex-
ample, the program's Environmental Pledge compo-
nent can demonstrate that over 350 volunteer action
projects to protect prevent pollution are being under-
taken as a result of the program's implementation.
Effectively piloted in public and private schools K-12,
university/college classes, workshops, neighborhood
meetings and community coalitions, youth groups and
service clubs, the program's school component is be-
ing used in Baltimore County Schools.
In addition to the results realized in the community,
the "Let's Be Partners..." program received an Innova-
tions in Government Award from the National Asso-
ciation of Counties (NACO). In 1997, Baltimore
County was one of only two Maryland counties to
achieve the Gold Chesapeake Bay Partner Community
status awarded by the multi-state Chesapeake Bay
Program. The "Let's Be Partners..." program contrib-
uted greatly to the Chesapeake Bay Partners applica-
tion.
llow Can the Program Work for My
Local Government?
Jthough the "Let's Be Partners..." pro-
gram is designed specifically for Baltimore County
audiences, its message is universal. The water quality
issues that are addressed in the program, particularly
non-point source pollution, are issues that communi-
ties throughout the country are addressing. This pro-
gram identifies pollution causes and their impacts on
valuable water resources, and suggests action alterna-
tives (called Enviro-Tips) which can help citizens ad-
dress their pollution issues.
Currently, the program is being used as a model for
other local governments and non-profit organizations
interested in preparing pollution prevention educa-
tional programs. The informational brochures and
educational materials need only slight modifications
in order for them to be utilized in other communities.
llow Much does the Program Cost?
B
Baltimore County's Department of Envi-
ronmental Protection and Resource Management en-
tirely supports the program's operating budget. The
budget includes a part-time educator ($40,000), part-
time staff support for festivals and other outreach
events ($6,000), printing and copying costs ($1,000),
educational supplies ($2,000), and travel costs
($1,000). The total estimated annual operating costs
for the program is approximately $50,000. However,
due to increases in public demand for the program, ad-
ditional resources must be leveraged to expand the
program and fulfill public requests.
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
I he "Let's Be Partners..." program includes
the following resource information:
Introduction/Background Training
Water Pollution Surveys
Curricula
Environmental Terminology/Definitions
Slide Presentations/Audio Tapes
Interactive, Hands-on Activities
Follow-up Activities (i.e., field trips, speakers,
art projects)
Regional Resources Library, Slide Bank, and
Resource Packet
Supporting Pamphlets, Brochures and Hand-
outs
Environmental Pledge Program
Program Evaluation
66 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
The Water-wise Gardener Program and
Handbook
Case Study ff 15
Prince William County, Virginia
What is the Water-wise Gardener
Program?
recognizing that the County's water supply
not only provides drinking water for the community,
but also feeds into the Chesapeake Bay, the Prince
William County Office of the Virginia Cooperative
Extension and the County Department of Public
Works collaborated to establish programs to encour-
age residents, businesses, and farmers to modify their
behavior to protect water quality. Their goal was to
educate County residents about the importance of pre-
venting pollution from entering local waters and the
Bay.
One element of the public education program is the
Water-wise Gardener program which was established
in 1991. The program helps homeowners reduce the
amount of non-point source pollution entering local
streams and the Bay by involving them in a series of
educational activities. Many homeowners have an in-
terest in establishing attractive lawns and landscapes,
but their maintenance of these areas impacts ground
and surface water. With improper management, pol-
lutants can be carried by water percolating through the
soil to the water table or washed into lakes and streams
via storm and surface water runoff.
The program is comprised of different levels of in-
volvement for participants: workshops/seminars, pub-
lications, demonstration sites, and one-on-one site vis-
its from trained Master Gardeners. In this way, people
Marc Aveni
Virginia Cooperative Extension
Prince William County Office
8033 Ashton Avenue, Suite 105
Manassas, VA20110
(703) 792-6285
can participate at the level at which they are most com-
fortable. The objective of the program is to have citi-
zens implement, in a measurable way, the techniques
and practices recommended for fertilization, pest con-
trol, water use, and composting through a partnership
with trained Master Gardener volunteers. Participants
develop model lawns utilizing the techniques and their
results are documented.
The Water-wise Gardener handbook provides public
officials with a framework for developing a program
and includes sections on planning, implementation,
data evaluation and reporting, surveys, and marketing
materials.
What are the Program's Successes?
A,,
Imost 500 people in Prince William's
County have participated in the Water-wise Gardener
program. Over a five-year period, these homeowners
have reduced the amount of nitrogen fertilizer applied
to their lawns by an estimated 20,000 pounds.
Prior to participating in the program, homeowners
rarely tested their soils before applying fertilizer. Af-
ter participating, more than 90 percent tested the soil.
Participants also reduced pesticides by more than 30
percent by applying integrated pest management prac-
tices learned through the program
The program has also been able to prompt an attitude
shift. Participants were taught that attractive lawns
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 67
-------
are not incompatible with water quality protection.
Using the techniques promoted by the program, the
homeowners not only learned how their actions were
protecting water quality, but also were shown that
their lawns could look good using alternative prac-
tices.
Impressed by the success of the Water-wise Gardener
program, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Coop-
erative State Research, Education and Extension Serv-
ice (CSREES) requested that the Prince William
model be developed into a regional model for residen-
tial water quality public education. Aside from Prince
William, the model has been transferred to ten coun-
ties in Virginia: Arlington, Caroline, Chesterfield.
Fairfax, Fauquier, Henrico, King George, Loudoun,
Spotsylvania, and Stafford. Information has also been
shared with counties in Alabama, Maryland, North
Carolina, and South Carolina.
now Much Does the Program Cost?
was able Jo earmark $10,000-520,000 per year for im-
plementation of the model in the County.
How Can the Program Work for my
Local Government?
local government can utilize the Water-
wise Gardener handbook to create its own educational
program. The local government can determine its
level of financial commitment to the program and im-
plement what is feasible. Working with its Coopera-
tive Extension Service, other agencies, or volunteer
groups, a community can implement the program with
little cost to the local government.
The handbook includes five incremental steps that
may be executed. For instance, if a local government
has limited financial resources, it may choose to hold
a workshop or seminar. The estimated budget to com-
plete this task is $350, but the event increases citizens'
awareness, provides some basic informational materi-
als, and may lay the groundwork for further activity.
I unding for the program has come from
various sources since its inception. The CSREES pro-
vided the initial funding to develop the model and
handbook. Over the years, its average annual grant
has been approximately $65,000 which has partially
paid the salary and benefits for 1.5 staff persons.
To implement the model, Virginia provided funds
through its Section 319 program. Grants of approxi-
mately $ 10,000-$20,000 annually were used for print-
ing costs and salary of technicians in counties where
the program was transferred. Virginia Tech has also
provided funds for the project. Prince William County
Are There Additional Pollution
Prevention Resources?
I es, the County prepared a notebook of pol-
lution prevention resources concerning seven topics.
The notebook contains brochures, articles, and fact
sheets on topics such as hazardous waste collection,
motor oil recycling, and integrated pest management.
Citizens can consult the notebook to locate drop-off
locations, determine points of contact, or learn more
about pollution prevention in general.
68 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Assistance Programs
The following section provides information on federal, state, and private organizations P2 assistance
programs. The programs have been separated into five categories:
The General Information category includes organizations, state agencies, and websites
that provide information on pollution prevention programs applicable to various audi-
ences.
The Financial Assistance category lists federal and state resources to help finance pol-
lution prevention activities in a local jurisdiction.
.j^f^v^^). The Business Assistance category provides pollution prevention resources specific to
the business community.
The Technical Assistance category provides resources to contact to address pollution
prevention problems and identify training opportunities to solve the problems.
The Energy Efficiency category highlights the array of programs aimed at helping local
government, business, and citizens become more energy efficient.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 69
-------
70 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
General Assistance
n Pollution Prevention Information
Clearinghouse (PPIC)
The PPIC is a free, non-regulatory service of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency dedicated to reduc-
ing or eliminating industrial pollutants through tech-
nology transfer, education, and public awareness.
Pollution prevention publications and fact sheets can
be ordered through the clearinghouse.
Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW, Room NEB606 (7407)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-1023
http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/library/libppic.htm
1 WasteWi$e
WasteWi$e is a free, voluntary, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency program to help eliminate costly
municipal solid waste. The program allows partners to
design their own solid waste reduction programs tai-
lored to their needs. Participants sign on to the pro-
gram for a 3-year period and undertake appropriate ac-
tivities to reduce waste.
WasteWiSe Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (5306W)
Washington, DC 20460
800 EPA-WISE (372-9473)
http://www.epa. gov/wastewise
n Enviro$en$e
Enviro$en$e, an integral part of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency's web site, provides a sin-
gle repository for pollution prevention information,
such as pollution prevention case studies, points of
contact, environmental statutes, regulations, and
compliance and enforcement policies and guidelines.
http://www.epa.gov/envirosense/index.html
O The National Pollution Prevention
Roundtable (NPPR)
The National Pollution Prevention Roundtable is the
largest membership organization in the United States
devoted solely to pollution prevention (P2). The mis-
sion of the Roundtable is to provide a national forum
for promoting the development, implementation, and
evaluation of efforts to avoid, eliminate, or reduce pol-
lution at the source.
The National Pollution Prevention Roundtable
2000 P Street, NW, Suite 708
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 466-7272 or (888) 745-7272
http://es.inel.gov/nppr
O Source Reduction Forum of the
National Recycling Coalition
The Source Reduction Forum's goal is to conserve re-
sources and reduce waste by: encouraging the efficient
use of materials; developing and promoting source re-
duction and reuse strategies; and integrating these
strategies into recycling.
Source Reduction Forum
National Recycling Coalition
1727 King Street, Suite 105
Alexandria, VA 22314-2720
(703) 683-9025
O Household Hazardous Waste
Resource Bank
The Chesapeake Bay Program's Toxic Subcommittee
provides a Household Hazardous Waste Resource
Bank to access for HHW publications and informa-
tion.
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/bayprogram/
committ/tsc/hhw/hhwcover.htm
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 71
-------
n Pennsylvania Office of Pollution
Prevention and Compliance
Assistance
The Office provides technical information, grants in-
formation and staff contacts. Additional Internet links
within PA DEP and other pollution prevention sites
are provided on the homepage.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
PO Box 2063, 16th floor
Harrisburg, PA 17105-2063
(717) 783-0540
http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/pollprev/
pollution_prevention.html
G Maryland Department of the
Environment
MDE's primary mission is to protect and restore the
quality of Maryland's air, water, and land resources.
The Department works to achieve the State's environ-
mental goals while fostering economic development,
safe communities, and environmental education.
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
Maryland Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
(410) 631-4119
http://www.mde.state.md.us/pernut/p2prog.html
O Virginia Office of Pollution Prevention
The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality,
through its Office of Pollution Prevention, provides
free, voluntary, non-regulatory, technical assistance
and materials to industry, governments, academia,
non-profits and the general public on how to prevent
pollution.
Office of Pollution Prevention
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
629 East Main Street, 5th floor
PO Box 10009
Richmond, VA 23240-0009
(804) 698-4235
http://www.deq.state.va.us/opp/opp.html
CJ DCRA Pollution Prevention Committee
The DC Department of Consumer and Regulatory Af-
fairs (DCRA) ensures the health,safety and economic
welfare of District residents and protects the environ-
ment.
DC Environmental Regulation Administration
2100 Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue, SE Room 203
Washington, DC 20020
(202) 645-6080
O DC Department of Public Works
The DC Department of Public Works collects recy-
clables from households every other week.
DC Department of Public Works
Recycling Coordinator
65 K Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
(202) 727-5887
72 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
financial Assistance
G Pollution Prevention Incentives for
States (PPIS)
These grants are intended to build and support state
pollution prevention capabilities and to test innovative
pollution prevention approaches. Awards are made
through EPA regional offices.
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (TS-779)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-2237
G Environmental Financing Information
Network
This network provides information on financing alter-
natives for state and local environmental programs
and projects, including pollution prevention and con-
trol, primarily in the form of abstracts of publications,
case studies, and contacts. Services include an online
database, a hotline, and distribution of publications
pertaining to financing. The case studies and abstracts
outline successful financing alternatives, while the
contact profiles refer users to financial and program
experts (for example, government officials) who have
general or particular experience in public financing
and environmental programs.
Environmental Financing Information Network
Resource Management Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (3304)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-0420
O Hardship Grants Program for Rural
Communities
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency makes
grants to states who in turn can provide assistance to
rural communities for wastewater treatment improve-
ments.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-2268
G Stormwater Management Program
Grants and technical assistance for PA counties and
municipalities for watershed planning for stormwater
control.
Bureau of Watershed Conservation
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(717) 772-4048
G Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Projects
Funding for PA projects that implement education,
monitoring, demonstrations or innovative practices to
control non-point sources of pollution.
Bureau of Watershed Conservation
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(717) 772-5629
G Recycling Grants
PA municipalities and counties are eligible for 90 per-
cent reimbursement toward establishing a municipal
recycling program.
Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(717) 787-7382
G Household Hazardous Waste
Collection Program
PA municipalities and counties engaging in HHW col-
lection and disposal programs are eligible for 50 per-
cent reimbursement,
Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(717) 787-6239
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 73
-------
H Alternative Fuels Incentive Grants
Grants for PA municipalities and others for costs asso-
ciated with implementing alternative fuel vehicles
program.
Office of Pollution Prevention
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(717) 783-9981
http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/pollprev/
Information/AFIG/AFIG_Homepage.htm
G Virginia Water Quality Improvement
Fund
The purpose of the Virginia Water Quality Improve-
ment Act of 1997 is to restore and improve the quality
of state waters and to protect them from impairment
and destruction for the benefit of current and future
citizens of the Commonwealth. Because this is a
shared responsibility among state and local govern-
ments and individuals, the Act also creates the Water
Quality Improvement Fund which provides grants to
local governments, soil and water conservation dis-
tricts and individuals for point and nonpoint source
pollution prevention, reduction and control programs
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
629 East Main Street, 5th floor
PO Box 10009
Richmond, VA 23240-0009
(804) 698-4545
n Virginia Pollution Prevention Grant
Program
Grants are awarded for pollution prevention activities
in two categories: manufacturers and members of the
Businesses for the Bay program.
Center for Innovative Technology
(703) 689-3013
n Utter Prevention and Recycling Grants
Grants totaling up to $250,000 are made to develop
and implement education programs for litter preven-
tion and recycling in VA.
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(804) 698-4556
74 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Business Assistance
n The American Institute of Pollution
Prevention (AIPP)
AIPP is a non-profit organization comprised of indus-
try trade associations and professional societies. It
provides information on P2 resources available from
AIPP Members and others; promotes policies, includ-
ing defining the economics of P2; and sets future di-
rections for P2 through cooperative and collaborative
efforts among industry, government, and the public.
The American Institute of Pollution Prevention
1616 P Street, NW, Suite 100
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 797-6567
http://es.epa.gov/aipp/
n Center for Hazardous Materials
Research (CHMR)
The Center offers pollution prevention workshops for
industrial representatives, consultants, engineering
students, and regulatory personnel. Other features of
CHMR are a speakers' bureau, onsite pollution pre-
vention facility assessments and technical assistance,
pesticide research and education, and a regulatory in-
formation and technical assistance hotline.
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
University of Pittsburgh Applied Research Center
320 William Pitt Way
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
(412) 826-5321
G Small Business Compliance
Assistance Centers
U.S. EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance -in partnership with industry, academic in-
stitutions, environmental groups and other federal and
state agencies -has established "virtual" (telecommu-
nications-based) national Compliance Assistance
Centers for four specific industry sectors heavily
populated with small businesses that face substantial
federal regulation and is working on two new centers.
The sectors include: printing, metal finishing, automo-
tive services and repair, printed wiring boards, small
chemical manufacturers and agriculture. In addition,
three new Compliance Assistance Centers are being
added to the site in 1998 for chemical industry, local
governments, and transportation.
Small Business Compliance Assistance Centers
http://es.epa.gov/oecaymfcac.hlm]
D Green Seal
Green Seal is a nonprofit organization dedicated to
protecting the environment by promoting the manu-
facture and sale of environmentally preferable con-
sumer products. It sets environmental standards and
allows the use of its certification mark on products
found to meet them. Green Seal also educates consum-
ers on how to use their buying decisions to help the
environment.
Green Seal
1730 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Suite 1050
Washington, D.C. 20036
(202) 331-7337
http://www.crest.org/environment/GreenSeal
n Anacostia River Business Coalition
The Anacostia River Business Coalition (ARBC) is a
group of businesses in the Washington, D.C. area that
is seeking greater private sector involvement in the
restoration and protection of the Anacostia River.
ARBC has sponsored technical assistance workshops
for businesses and is developing a public awareness
campaign to help residents and businesses participate
in the River clean-up.
Anacostia River Business Coalition
(703) 750-5558
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 75
-------
n Businesses for a Cleaner River
Businesses for a Cleaner River is the Elizabeth River
Project's outreach effort to include businesses in pol-
lution prevention activities. The service offers free,
confidential research and training to reduce pollution
at the source and minimize waste.
Businesses for a Cleaner River
The Elizabeth River Project
109 E. Main Street, Suite 305
Norfolk, VA 23510
(757) 625-3648
http://www.pilot.infi.net/~erp/
n Virginia Small Business Assistance
Program
The Virginia Small Business Assistance Program
(SBAP) is a non-regulatory branch of the Virginia De-
partment of Environmental Quality's Office of Small
Business Assistance (OSBA). It offers small busi-
nesses free technical assistance on air quality and re-
lated environmental requirements.
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
Office of Small Business Assistance
P.O. Box 10009
Richmond, VA 23240-0009
(804)698-4000
http://www.deq.state.va.us/osba /smallbiz.html
76 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Technical Assistance
G Waste Reduction Resource Center
(WRRC)
The WRRC provides multimedia waste reduction sup-
port for the states of U.S. EPA Regions III and IV. The
Center's clearinghouse staff provides access to and
supports the collection of waste reduction informa-
tion. The clearinghouse collection contains over 7,000
journal articles, case studies, technical reports, books,
and video tapes. The topics cover all general industry
categories, manufacturing processes, hazardous waste
streams, and water and air discharges. Specific infor-
mation includes economical and technical data, proc-
ess descriptions, waste reduction techniques, and im-
plementation strategies. The collection also contains
information on municipal recycling, solid waste re-
duction, environmental audits, and perspectives in
pollution prevention. In addition, the WRRC has list-
ings of numerous electronic bulletin boards providing
information on environmental issues and technolo-
gies.
Waste Reduction Resource Center
http://www.p2pays.org/wrrc/
(800) 476-8686
O The Waste Reduction Institute for
Training and Applications Research
(WRITAR)
The WRITAR is a non-profit organization dedicated
to facilitating the implementation of innovative strate-
gies, techniques, and technologies that prevent pollu-
tion at the source. The Institute's activities include
training, policy analysis, and the development of edu-
cational materials.
The Waste Reduction Institute for Training
and Applications Research (WRITAR)
1313 5th Street, NE
Minneapolis, MN 55414-4502
(612) 379-5995
n Pennsylvania Technical Assistance
Program
This program offers technical assistance, access to
pollution prevention information, linkages to other re-
sources, and sponsorship of seminars.
Pennsylvania Technical Assistance Program
Penn State University
110 Barbara Building II
810 North University Drive
University Park, PA 16802
(814) 865-0427
G Maryland Technology Extension
Service
This service assists in problem identification, support,
and solution development.
Technology Extension Service
Engineering Research Center
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742-3261
(301) 454-7941
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 77
-------
Energy Efficiency
G Energy Pollution Prevention
Information Clearinghouse (EPIC)
The U.S. Department of Energy Pollution Prevention
Information Clearinghouse (EPIC) was developed un-
der a joint effort of the U.S. DOE and the U.S. EPA to
enhance the exchange of pollution prevention (P2) in-
formation between Federal, state, and local govern-
ment agencies, as well as with industries, academic in-
stitutions and the general public. The system provides
access to Federal and state P2 regulations, DOE P2
policy and guidance, special DOE reports and memos,
site project summaries, Pollution Prevention Opportu-
nity Assessments, newsletters, P2 contacts, and other
periodic reports.
http://epic.er.doe.gov/epic/
H Center of Excellence for Sustainable
Development
The Center of Excellence for Sustainable Develop-
ment, created by the U.S. Department of Energy's Of-
fice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,
helps communities design and implement innovative
strategies that enhance the local economy, as well as
the local environment and quality of life. Assistance
to help communities develop more sustainably is
available in the resource database of articles and ordi-
nances that are accessible from the homepage.
Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
1617 Cole Boulevard
Golden, CO 80401
(800) 363-3732
http://www.sustainable.doe.gov/
D Green Lights Program
The U.S. EPA's Green Lights program encourages or-
ganizations to install energy efficient lighting in order
to prevent the creation of air pollution (including
greenhouse gases, acid rain emissions, air toxics, and
tropospheric ozone), solid waste, and other environ-
mental impacts of electricity generation. EPA pro-
vides free, in-depth, technical training software to help
determine the profitability of proposed lighting instal-
lations.
Green Lights Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW (6202J)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 564-9190
(888) STAR-YES
http://www.epa.gov/greenlights.html
n Clean Cities
Clean Cities is a locally-based government/industry
partnership, coordinated by the U.S. Department of
Energy, to expand the use of alternatives to gasoline.
Clean Cities works with local businesses and govern-
ments to establish viable alternative fuels markets.
Clean Cities Program
U.S. Department of Energy (EE-33)
1000 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20585
(800) 224-8437 (CCITIES)
http://www.eren.doe.gov/transportation/
transp ortation.html
~\ U.S. Postal Service Alternative Vehicle
Program
Through partnerships with industry, utilities, and the
U.S. Department of Energy, the Postal Service has fos-
tered the development of alternative fuel vehicles.
(703) 280-7138
n Metropolitan Washington Alternative
Fuels Partnership
The Partnership assists local governments in acquiring
alternative fuel vehicles and in establishing the neces-
sary fueling infrastructure.
Metropolitan Washington Alternative Fuels Partnership
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
777 North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20002-4226
(202) 962-3355
78 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Bibliography
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). November 1994.
Standard Guide for Development and Implementation of a Pollution
Prevention Program. Philadelphia, PA.
Chesapeake Bay Program Local Government Advisory Committee.
October 1997. Beyond Sprawl: Land Management Techniques to
Protect the Chesapeake Bay.
Chesapeake Bay Program. April 1997. Protecting Wetlands: Tools for Local
Governments in the Chesapeake Bay Region.
Fisher, Thomas. 1996. "Green Building." Environmental Design
Collaborative.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. June 1997. "Characterization of Municipal Solid
Waste in the United States 1996 Update." U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste, Division
Office of Solid Waste Report No. EPA530-R-97-015.
Goldman, S.J., K. Jackson and T.A. Bursztynsky. 1986. Erosion and
Sediment Control Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Goo, Robert. November/December 1991. "Do's and Don'ts Around the
Home." in EPA Journal, EPA-22K-1005.
International City/County Management Association (ICMA). 1998.
Composting: A Local Waste Managment Solution. Special Data Issue.
Washington, D.C.
International City/County Management Association (ICMA). August 1989.
Pesticide Management for Local Governments. MIS Report, Volume
21, Number 8. Washington, D.C.
International City/County Management Association (ICMA). Preventing
Pollution: A Guide for Local Government. Washington, D.C.
Jensen, R. 1991. Indoor Water Conservation. Texas Water Resources 17(4).
Mann, Julie E. Citizens Water Quality Handbook. Northern Virginia Soil
and Water Conservation District: Fairfax, VA.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 79
-------
Metro-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management.
October 1995. Guide to Establishing a Pollution Prevention Assistance
Program. Dade County, FL.
Montgomery County Department of Public Works and Transportation. June
1996. Hazardous Waste Management in Montgomery County.
National Association of Counties (NACO). Fall 1995. Preventing Pollution in
our Cities and Counties. Washington, D.C.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. November 1993.
Pollution Prevention Guidance for Local Governments. Albany, NY.
Northern Virginia Planning District Commission. December 1996.
Nonstructural Urban BMP Handbook. Annandale, VA.
PA Department of Environmental Protection. September 1996. An
Environmental Self- Evaluation for Small Business. Harrisburg, PA.
RMI. 1991. Water efficiency: A resource for utility managers, community
planners, and other decision makers. The Water Program, Rocky Mountain
Institute, Snowmass, CO.
Source Reduction Forum of the National Recycling Coalition. 1996. Creating
Incentives and Overcoming Obstacles to Source Reduction and Reuse.
Washington, D.C.
Source Reduction Forum of the National Recycling Coalition. 1996. Making
Source Reduction and Reuse Work in Your Community. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Energy. November 1995. Guide to Alternative Fuel Vehicle
Incentives and Laws. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. December 1992. Building State and
Local Pollution Prevention Programs. EPA. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. April 1995. Cleaner Water through
Conservation. EPA 841-B-95-002. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. April 1996. Pollution Prevention
Success Stories. EPA 742-96-002. Washington, D.C.
Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments. January 1997. 1996
Metropolitan Washington Pollution Prevention Conference Proceedings.
Washington, D.C.
Wigglesworth, David T. 1993. Pollution Prevention - A Practical Guide for
State and Local Government. Florida: CRC Press.
Wigglesworth, David T. 1988. Profiting From Waste Reduction in Your Small
Business. Alaska Health Department.
80 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Appendix 4
Chesapeake Bay Program Recognition Programs
n Businesses for the Bay
n Chesapeake Bay Partner Communities
The Chesapeake Bay Program promotes source reduction among local governments as a means of im-
proving the environmental health of the Chesapeake Bay. In order to encourage P2 at the local level, the
Bay Program developed two recognition programs Businesses for the Bay and Chesapeake Bay Part-
ner Communities.
The Businesses for the Bay program recruits industries, small businesses, and local government to be-
come part of a team dedicated to the long-term improvement of the Bay and its rivers and streams. Team
members develop annual pollution prevention goals and voluntarily implement their P2 practices. As a
result, businesses and others experience cost savings, gain an improved public image, and contribute to
a healthier Bay.
The Chesapeake Bay Partner Communities program recognizes local governments for their commit-
ment to the protection of the Chesapeake Bay, its rivers, and streams. By indicating activities achieved
in six theme areas, local governments determine their standing as Gold, Silver, or Bronze Bay Partners.
Chesapeake Bay Partner Communities form a network of local government officials who are concerned
with protecting local environmental resources and restoring the health of the Chesapeake Bay.
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 81
-------
82 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
BUSINESSES FOR THE BAY
Chesapeake Bay Program
w
hat is Businesses for the Bay?
An Opportunity for the Bay
and An Opportunity for YOU!
Businesses for the Bay is a voluntary team of
forward-looking industries, commercial
establishments, and small businesses within the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. We are committed to
implementing pollution prevention in our daily
operations and reducing our chemical releases to
the Chesapeake Bay. As members of the
Businesses for the Bay Team, we helped design
this pollution prevention program.
B
enefits of joining our Businesses
for the Bay Team are:
Cost savings from reduced waste management
F ->sitive publicity
Increased patronage
Eligibility for the prestigious Chesapeake
Executive Council's* Businesses for the Bay
Excellence Awards
A cleaner, healthier Bay for all
What is Pollution Prevention?
Businesses for the Bay recognizes pollution
prevention as a hierarchy of activities that reduce or
eliminate the amount of chemicals at the source of
production or prevent them from entering the
environment or waste stream. Source reduction is the
preferred method when practical (including point and
nonpoint, industrial and agricultural, urban and
suburban sources), followed by reuse/recycling, and
energy recovery. Treatment, followed by safe disposal,
should be used as a last alternative.
Chesapeake Bay Watershed
The Chesapeake Bay receives
discharges from rivers
and streams in 6 states
and the District of
Columbia. The
watershed is
approximately
64,000 square
miles.
0
ur mission is to build support for
pollution prevention across all
businesses throughout the
watershed.
As a team member of Businesses for the Bay,
you will develop your own annual pollution
prevention goals which may range from reducing
the volume of chemicals used at your facility to
acting as a mentor and providing technical
assistance for other businesses. We recognize that
all pollution prevention activities, no matter how
large or small, will make a difference in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. We hope that by
working together our combined contributions will
have a substantial impact in reducing chemical
releases across the watershed.
* The Chesapeake Executive Council is comprised of Maryland
Governor Parris Clendemng; Pennsylvania Governor Thomas
Ridge; Virginia Governor George Allen; District of Columbia
Mayor Marion Barry; Chesapeake Bay Commission Chair
Delegate W. Tayloe Murphy, Jr.; and U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Administrator Carol Browner.
-------
Businesses for the Bay Goal
The overall goal of the Businesses for the Bay is to
contribute to the long-term improvement of the quality
of the Bay and its rivers through widespread, voluntary
implementation of pollution prevention practices
throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
B
usinesses for the Bay will
measure our progress by:
Raising participation in pollution
prevention activities throughout the
watershed. We strive to have 75% of all
businesses in the Chesapeake Bay watershed
implement pollution prevention by the year
2000.
Achieving an aggregate reduction in the
amount of chemical releases across the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. We expect
that our combined efforts will result in a 65%
reduction of Toxic Release Inventory chemicals
and 75% reduction of Chesapeake Bay Toxics of
Concern chemicals between a 1988 baseline
and the year 2000. This measure is not
evaluated at the facility-level, but represents the
combined efforts of all businesses throughout
the watershed.
Increasing the number of small
businesses participating in pollution
prevention.
Increasing the number of members
involved in pollution prevention
mentoring.
B
usinesses for the Bay would
like you to join our team! It is
easy! Here's how:
Step I: Choose your pollution prevention
activity. The list on the next page provides ideas
of the pollution prevention activities you can
choose, or you can develop your own. You can
commit to any number of activities each year.
Step 2: Fill out the enclosed Commitment
Worksheet. You also may attach a cover letter
describing any past pollution prevention
activities, your commitment(s), and any other
information you would like to share. Send the
completed worksheet and optional cover letter
to the address at the bottom of the worksheet
You will receive an acknowledgment of
membership. There is no cost to join.
Step 3: On August 1, 1997, tell us about your
progress by filling out a simple reporting form
that we will provide you.
Step 4: Reconfirm and update your annual
commitment(s) to Businesses for the Bay by
renewing your Commitment Worksheet for
another year.
Chemicals Targeted for Reduction by
Businesses for the Bay
Chesapeake Bay Joxics of Concern
Atrazine
Benz[a]anthracene
Benzo[a]pyrene
Cadmium
Chlurdane
Chromium
Chrysene
Copper
Fluoranthene
Lead
Mercury
Naphthalene
PCBs
Tributyltin
Toxic^.Release .Inventory Chernjcajs
Chemicals required for reporting under Section 313(c) of
the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know
Act
R
ecognition for Progress in
Pollution Prevention
As a Businesses for the Bay partner, you will
receive recognition for your pollution prevention
efforts. Businesses for the Bay will issue
periodic press releases that recognize the
accomplishments and ongoing support of partners.
Each partner will also receive individual recognition
through a certificate acknowledging progress in
pollution prevention.
-------
c
hesapeake Executive Council's
Businesses for the Bay
Excellence Awards
The Chesapeake Bay Program commends the
members of Businesses for the Bay because our
voluntary actions contribute to implementation of
the / 994 Chesapeake Bay Basinwide Toxics Reduction
and Prevent/on Strategy. This strategy, endorsed by
the Chesapeake Executive Council, recognizes
pollution prevention as the preferred approach to
reducing chemical releases throughout the
watershed. To honor the achievements of
Businesses for the Bay, the Chesapeake Bay
Program has developed a prestigious award for
which only team members are eligible.
The Chesapeake Executive Council's Businesses
for the Bay Excellence Awards will be presented
by your Governor/Mayor (of the District of
Columbia), the Administrator of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and the chair of
the Chesapeake Bay Commission. Separate awards
will be presented to small, medium, and large
businesses within the watershed that demonstrate
outstanding achievement in pollution prevention. A
separate application form for the Executive
Council's Businesses for the Bay Excellence
Awards will be distributed to you with the progress
report form each year.
Chesapeake Bay Program
The Chesapeake Bay Program is a unique regional
partnership dedicated to the restoration and protection
of the Bay watershed and its living resources.
Chesapeake Bay Program partners include the State of
Maryland, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the
Commonwealth of Virginia, the District of Columbia, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency representing all
federal agencies, and the Chesapeake Bay Commission.
The Chesapeake Bay Program, led by the Chesapeake
Executive Council, is a non-regulatory program aimed at
developing consensus- based solutions to
environmental concerns within the watershed.
Businesses for the Bay is a new partner, demonstrating
the commitment of industry to a healthy bay.
Examples of Pollution Prevention
Activities
Set a measurable reduction goal in your use/ generation of toxic
chemicals) [[[
^Y$.°y9rt>yy?.n9..?.^.$^ ..........
Practice preventative maintenance on equipment to avoid spills
and leaks
Substitute more toxic chemicals with less-toxic or non-toxic
chemicals
Conduct regular assessments of your facility to identify pollution
Train your employees on how to practice pollution prevention
Identify and employ technologies for in-house recycling of
production materials
Become a mentor to businesses in need of technical/financial
assistance
Work to recruit other businesses to join Businesses for the Bay
Team
If you have questions about Businesses for the
Bay, call I -800-YOUR-BAY and ask for the
Businesses for the Bay Coordinator or call your
stace pollution prevention coordinator at the
number listed below.
Melissa Whitmill (410) 631-3772
or(800)633-6IOI,x-3772
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
Maryland Department of the Environment
Sharon Kenneally-Baxter (804) 698-4344
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
Michele Blake (717) 772-8945
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection
Nick Kauffman (202) 645-6080
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
-------
'S!|odBiiuv
601 9PS
aoyjO wBjBoJd ABQ 9>)B9des9ijo
IBJU9LUUOJJAU3 'S'O 'JO}BJ}SIUILUPV
UOISSILULUOQ Aeg e^Bedeseqo 'JIB^O
Bjqwnioo jo JOUISIQ 'JoABy\|
BjUlOjIA JO 4HB9MUOLULUOO 'JOUJ9A09
BIUBA|ASUU9d iO IJHB9MUOWWOO 'JOUJ9AOQ
'JOUJ9A09
:|punoo
3H± nod sassamsna
h*. J*6** *,«<£*&««*
J
oin the Businesses for the Bay Team
This team represents busines es that helped design Businesses for the Bay and
are committed to implementing pollution prevention in their daily operations.
Allied Signal
Aristokraft, Inc.
Anhueser-Busch Inc.
Baltimore Gas & Electric Company
Buchart Horn, Inc.
Chemetals, Inc.
Chesapeake Paper Products Company
Condea Vista Company
Coors Brewing Company
CYTEC Engineered Materials
Duron, Inc.
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, Inc.
E.A. Engineering, Science &Technology
Eastalco Aluminum Company
FMC Corporation
Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Goldschmidt Chemical Corporation
Grace Division
Lebanon Agricorp
Liberty Fabrics, Inc.
Northrop Grumman Corporation
O'Sullivan Corporation
RH. Glatfelter Company
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company
Potomac Electric Power Company
Proctor and Gamble
Reynolds Metals Company
Shorewood Packaging
Siemens Automotive Corporation
Sun Papers
Taylor-Ramsey Corporation
Union Camp Corporation
Ward Machinery
Warner Lambert
Wood Preservers, Inc.
AND YOU!
-------
INESSES FORTHE BAY ANNUAL COMMITMENT WORKSHEET
r Businesses for the Bay Commitment Worksheet represents your pledge to help achieve
Businesses for the Bay pollution prevention goal of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Please
make sure that all the information on the Commitment Worksheet is included; the information
you provide helps us recognize your pollution prevention efforts. If you would like, you may
attach your Commitment Worksheet to a cover letter describing any past pollution prevention
activities, your commitment to the Bay, and other information you would like to share. Please
send the worksheet and the optional cover letter to the address listed on the mailer on the back
of this sheet
Address: ; .-'. - '
Business name: , ~1SK «^A Contact person:
, ~r
Primary type of business (i.e., what do you produce or what service(s) do you provide?):
Primary SIC (Standard Industrial Classification) code(s):
Does your company report to the Toxics Release Inventory? Q Yes Q No
Q I would like to join the Businesses for the Bay Team and
would like someone to contact me to help set my goals.
Dear Governor/Mayor:
As a Businesses for the I ay partner, ,
is committed to working toward the Businesses for the Bay goal by identifying and implementing
pollution prevention activities. As part of our pollution prevention commitment, we will complete
the following pollution prevention activities (check one or more pollution prevention activities you
will do during the upcoming year):
SOURCE REDUCTION
Q Set a measurable reduction in our use/generation of toxic chemicals.
G Avoid overbuying and discarding unused, expired materials.
Q Practice preventative maintenance on our equipment to avoid spills and leaks.
Q Change a process to eliminate or reduce the need for toxic chemicals.
Q Substitute more toxic chemicals with (ess-toxic or non-toxic chemicals.
Q Conduct regular assessments of our facility to identify pollution prevention opportunities.
Q Train our employees on how to practice pollution prevention within our facility.
Q Other: . -,.>;;. -4^ «»>;-
REUSE/RECYCLING - '»'» >':^;f^'^
"**-* '"
Q Develop and implement a recycling program in our facility for our
commonly disposed materials.
Q Employ technologies for in-house recycling of our production materials.
Q Other:
(continued)
-------
i.-.*1;
<-;;
V
me a pollution^
of technicai/finan**1' *'
ark to recruit
For more information about Businesses for the Bay, technical assistance or
pollution prevention resources, you can contact
Chesapeake Bay Program Office
Businesses for the Bay Coordinator
l-800-YOURBAY
Melissa Whitmill
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
Maryland Department of the Environment
(410) 631 -3772 or (800) 633-6101, x-3772
Sharon Kenneally-Baxter
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(804) 698-4344
Michele Blake
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection
(717)772-8945
Nick Kauffman
Pollution Prevention Coordinator
District of Columbia Department of
Consumer and Regulatory Affairs
(202) 645-6080
BUSINESSES FOR THE BAY
TO: George Allen, Governor
Commonwealth of Virginia
P.O. Box 1475
Richmond,VA 23218
Staple Hera
-------
Jd C C
\-* I \«^
-5 > f j
y-a ^/
V-
£
'£
3
£
E
0
U
*-^
\
S
S
]_r^
£
u
"S
f~i~,
g
i_<
2
u
i)
&
a
c
o
'*-;
o
CJ
Js"
-------
-a
1
.2
S
oc
- S°
O t!
QJ 7^3
r <
.s .£
§
*-* Cv (J
_ in
§2
0
8
1
o
U
c
J2 0
-S t*
2 w
u.
ra
a.
£
C3
"2
3
on
3
re
r-t
&
*^
<4w
0
CJ
c
o
<*
o
o
>s
re
E
l/>
<
*a
c
to
t/»
i_
«£?
c
«j
CJ
'in
O
a
L_
Z3
O
-a
«j
a.
"S
jc
«
3
"a
tn
a
o
o
on
1
5
<
u.
0
1
X
CJ
H
"re
£
S
5*\
communil
«j
4-*
o
o
P
,0
'C
"n
o
u
actions
M»
o
_o
"S
o
'S
8i
T3
C
to
c
,o
t3
H
2
D.
CJ
.£
T3
C
(O
streams
"3
u
o
>i>
IO
ea
CJ
_*
re
CJ
o.
re
«
CJ
U
on
5
OE
l >
3 C
§^
2SI
ia-s
c,
yi
P
c c £:
3 5 c
^il|
< c5£^
c &
^o I g
I Sc3
iSl-g
.3
§ I
oc5
u
3
_c
u
§ fr
% I
o 2
o c
§
-
0 T3
OJ rt
.5 PQ
w ,
C ^
II 11
-
0 C
c a
rt rt
C O
V
rt
u
onment for busi
»-<
>
c
4J
I"
"tfl
^
03
aj
4_)
rt
a
u
:itizens.
T3
03
itional technical
TJ
T3
oi
^
^
.§
3
'Sp
"a;
_C
'rt
O
4
c/;
tance program
t/j
»-i
t/j
«
rt
a
a
rt
4-)
r^
S
&JD
4g
c/:
C
_c
4-1
rd
u
cC
13
(T
S
i
r«
S
1«(
4->
C/3
commitment to
i^
3
Q
monstrating y
w
T3
>-
J2
4
c/:
u
onmental effo
^
'>
C
D
t/>
U.
A)
W
T3
fH
*w
_ftj
CJ
4-»
°?
0
ITS
a»
re
t/i
cj
^
'c
ommui
u
CJ
t/i
CJ
£
re
u
_O
-a"
o
in
4-1
3
o
Otl
c
f
re
u
C
,o
'on
CJ
,
ft)
|S
t/>
^^
1
CJ
4^
ft)
E
c
1
o
on
"re
u
5
cause
Si
(Q
>v
re
CC
CJ
£
on
c
'C
o
^Nt
V)
fc
^
(n
tn
succe:
1
C
t/)
*-
T3
C
«3
'^^1 =
5 - III
O U1")
on
|D^|=2
-------
Appendix B
Developing a Local Government P2 Program
n Economic Cost Accounting Technique
n Purchasing Policies Checklist
G P2 Model Ordinances and Policies
Recycled Product Procurement Policy
Developing a Hazardous Waste Reduction Program
Procurement Policy for Recycled Products, Norfolk, VA
City of Cincinnati Draft P2 Policy Statement
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 91
-------
92 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Economic Cost Accounting Technique for Pollution Prevention
The following tables will assist your local government in identifying cost savings that result
from certain pollution prevention techniques. In determining what pollution prevention
activities to implement first, local governments are encouraged to calculate the potential cost
savings a P2 technique may have in order to prioritize your pollution prevention initiatives.
A. Capital Costs for this Pollution Prevention Technique
Item
New Equipment
Materials and Supplies
Facility/Storage Preparation
Installation/Utility Connections
Permitting Costs
Staff Training/Marketing/Educational Information
Other
Total Capital Costs
Cost
B. Annual Operating Costs for a Pollution Prevention Technique
Item
Equipment
Materials and Supplies
Operation & Maintenance (e.g. labor, storage space, service contracts)
Waste Disposal
Ongoing Staff Training and Marketing
Other
Total Annual Operating Costs
Annual Cost
-------
C. Annual Cost Savings for this P2 Technique
Decreases in operating cost or increases in revenue are positive. Increases in operating cost or
decreases in revenue are negative.
Item
Equipment
Materials and Supplies
Operation & Maintenance (e.g. labor, storage space, service contracts)
Waste Disposal
New Revenue (e.g., from sale of recyclable materials, or in materials
exchange)
Other
Total Annual Cost Savings
Annual Savings
D. Calculation of Net Annual Cost or Savings for this P2 Technique
Total Annual Savings - Total Annual Operating Costs = Annual Net Cost or Savings
(from table C) (from table B)
E. Calculation of Payback Period for this P2 Technique
Total Capital Costs -r- Annual Net Savings = Payback Period
(from table A) (from table D) (years)
Source: ICMA, Preventing Pollution: A Guide for Local Governments
-------
HOW GREEN ARE OUR
PURCHASING POLICIES?
1. Do you have a green mission statement for purchasing?
Yes No
2. Do you have any of the following policies?
Yes No Policy encouraging purchase of environmentally preferable
products
Yes No Policy of buying products made with recycled materials
(such as paper)
Yes No Policy of ordering outside print jobs on recycled paper
Yes No Policy of ordering outside print jobs copied double-sided
3. Do you use any of the following tools to support purchasing decisions?
Yes No Life-cycle cost analysis
Yes No Energy audits
Yes No Water use and loss audits
Yes No Material safety data sheets
Yes No Computer-based tracking systems for chemicals
4. Which of the following materials do you purchase with recycled content or other
environmental attributes (e.g., energy-efficient, chlorine-free)?
Yes No N/A Printing and writing paper
Yes No N/A Newspaper
Yes No N/A Other paper products
Yes No N/A Office products
Yes No N/A Toner cartridges
Yes No N/A Engine oil
Yes No N/A Paints
Yes No N/A Other
Yes No N/A Other
Yes No N/A Other
5. Who decides what products are purchased? Do individual buyers have discretion in
purchasing some items over others (e.g., discretion with computers but not paper)?
How much product is purchased directly by users (i.e., outside of the formal pur-
chasing function)?
-------
6. Review existing specifications.
a. Which products have detailed specifications?
b. Do these specifications inadvertently work against
environmentally preferable products?
7. Does your RFP process provide disincentives for green buying?
-------
Model Ordinance Establishing a
Recycled Product Procurement Policy
WHEREAS, the volume of material disposed of at the (city/county) landfill (s) has been increasing
annually, and
WHEREAS, sanitary landfill space is at a premium and it is becoming increasingly difficult to site new
landfills, and
WHEREAS, much of the material that enters the waste stream can be recycled, reused or incorporated
in the manufacture of new products, and
WHEREAS, (city/county) participation in and promotion of recycling programs can significantly
reduce the volume of material entering the waste stream thereby extending (city/county)
landfill life expectancy and reducing expenses, and
WHEREAS, for recycling programs to be effective, markets must be developed for products that
incorporate postconsumer materials in their manufacture, are reusable, or are designed to
be recycled, and
WHEREAS, California State Law requires that local agencies buy recycled products if fitness, quality
and price are equal to nonrecycled products and allows local agencies to adopt purchasing
preferences for recycled products.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the (Council/Board of Supervisors) of the (city/county)
of as follows:
That is hereby amended by adding Section to read as follows:
1. Within twelve months subsequent to the effective date of this section, all (city/county)
departments, agencies, offices, boards and commissions must conduct a review of existing product
and service specifications to determine whether existing specifications either require the use of
products manufactured from virgin materials or exclude the use of recycled products, reusable
products, or products designed to be recycled.
2. In the event that such specifications do exclude the use of recycled products or require the use of
virgin materials, then such exclusions or requirements must be eliminated unless the pertinent
department or entity can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the (city manager/chief executive
officer/etc.) that these recycled products would not achieve a necessary performance standard.
3. Within the same 12 month period, all (city/county) departments and agencies must recommend
changes to the (city manager/chief administrative officer/etc.) to ensure that performance standards
for particular products can be met and that specifications are not overly stringent, and to
recommend changes to ensure that specifications will incorporate a requirement for the use of
recycled materials, reusable products, and products designed to be recycled to the maximum extent
practicable, subject to an alternative snowing that either the performance of the product will be
jeopardized or that the product will negatively impact health, safety or operational efficiency.
4. Outside contractors bidding to provide products or services to the (city/county), including printing
services, must demonstrate that they will comply with the specifications described in paragraph 3
to the greatest extent feasible.
-------
5. (City/county) staff will work to encourage the copier industry to develop high-speed copiers that
will accept recycled paper, in addition, recycled paper shall be purchased and used In all copy
machines trial will accept it.
6. When recycled products are used, reasonable efforts shall be undertaken to label the products to
indicate that they contain recycled materials. (City/county) departments and agencies shall use for
their mast-head stationery and envelopes recycled paper that includes postconsumer recycled
content and indicate on the paper and envelopes that they contain recycled material. Other recycled
products used by the (city/county) shall also indicate that they contain recycled material to the
extent practicable.
7. A (10% or greater) price preference may be given to recycled products, reusable products offered as
alternatives to disposable products, arid products designed to be recycled where they are offered as
alternatives to non-recyclable products. The preference percentage shall be based on the lowest bid
or price quoted by the supplier or suppliers offering non-recycled products.
8. The (city/county) will cooperate to the greatest extent feasible with neighboring city and county
governments in an effort to develop a comprehensive, consistent and effective procurement
effort intended to stimulate the market for recycled products, reusable products and products
designed to be recycled.
9. All related (city/county) departments and agencies shall work cooperatively to further the purposes
of the ordinance. The (city/county)'s economic development process shall incorporate the goal of
stimulating the market for recycled material.
Source: Local Government Commission, Model Ordinances for Environmental Protection (Sacramento: Local
Government Commission, 1990). Reprinted with permission.
-------
Model Resolution for Developing a Hazardous Waste
Reduction Program in the City/County/District of
In the matter of establishing a program to assist businesses adopt hazardous waste reduction measures
in the City/County/District of .
WHEREAS, hazardous waste reduction includes reducing the use of hazardous substances, reducing
the generation of hazardous waste at the source, and recycling hazardous waste to
reduce pollutant releases to all environmental media; and
WHEREAS, hazardous waste reduction saves businesses money by increasing productivity while
reducing hazardous waste management costs, short and long-term liability, and chemical
feedstock costs; and
WHEREAS, hazardous waste reduction protects the health and environment of the community,
decreases employee exposure to workplace chemicals, and reduces the need for offsite
hazardous waste management facilities; and,
WHEREAS, the City/County/District of encourages businesses, where feasible, to
employ hazardous waste reduction practices, rather than treat and/or dispose of toxic
chemical waste into the land, air, and water-,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City/County/District of establishes a
hazardous waste reduction program to assist area businesses reduce their hazardous waste; and
FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the following educational activities will be pursued: (Choose one of
more)
1. Establish a blue ribbon task force on waste reduction;
2. Encourage local business groups, trade associations and volunteers to assist local businesses
incorporate waste reduction measures;
3. Develop a waste reduction library;
4. Conduct a series of workshops;
5. Include waste reduction education as a part of local inspections;
FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that in-depth technical assistance will be provided to area businesses
interested in reducing their waste; and
FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that regulatory measures that encourage the use of waste reduction
measures will be developed; and
FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the Department/Division serve as the lead agency for
this effort; and,
FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the (lead dept. or division) submit a proposed work program to this
Council/Board by (date) that identifies the hazardous waste reduction activities selected for
implementation, along with a timetable and required financial support.
Source: Local Government Commission, Model Ordinances for Environmental Protection (Sacramento: Local
Government Commission, 1990). Reprinted with permission.
-------
Procurement Policy for Recycled Products
City of Norfolk, Virginia
Sec. 33.1-46. Policy for recycled materials; preference for recycled paper and paper products
in competitive scaled bidding.
(1) It shall be the policy of the city to promote the recycling of materials and the reduction
of waste matter so as to make environmentally sound procurement decisions.
(2) In the procurement of the following products for use in city operations, the city will
select products containing recycled materials provided the quality is suitable for the
purpose intended:
(a) Cement and concrete containing fly ash;
(b) Paper and paper products containing recovered materials;
(c) Lubricating oils containing re-refined oils;
(d) Retreaded tires; and
(e) Building insulation products containing recovered materials.
(3) In determining the award of any contract for paper and paper products, the purchasing
agent shall procure using competitive scaled bidding and shall award, consistent with
Virginia Code section 11-47.2, to the lowest responsible bidder offering recycled paper
and paper products of a quality suitable for the purpose intended, so long as the bid price
is not more than ten (10) percent greater than the bid price of the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder offering a product that does not contain recycled material.
(Ord. No. 36,567, § 1, 9-17-91)
-------
The City created a pollution prevention policy statement that affirms its commitment to
P2. Following is a draft version of this policy statement.
City of Cincinnati "Draft" P2 Policy Statement
(currently pending before City Council)
The City of Cincinnati is committed to excellence and leadership in protecting the
environment. In keeping with this policy, the City's objective is to reduce waste and
emissions whenever possible. We strive to minimize adverse impacts on the air, water, and
land through pollution prevention and energy conservation. City management charges each
employee to accept this commitment and incorporate sound pollution prevention and waste
minimization practices into our daily goals and project activities.
Within our operations and support functions, we incorporate the objective of reducing the
quantity and/or toxicity of all wastes, and minimizing adverse impacts on air, water and land
resources.
By successfully preventing pollution at its source, we can achieve costs savings, increase
operational efficiencies, improve the quality of our service delivery, maintain a safe and
healthy workplace for our employees, and improve the environment. The City's guidelines
include the following:
Reducing or eliminating the generation of waste is a vital and prime consideration, and
receives equal consideration with issues such as safety, costs, quality control, environmental
quality and project design in service delivery, or in providing facility support operations.
Emphasis on the elimination, reduction, reuse or recycling of materials eliminates the need to
classify and dispose of generated waste.
Pollution prevention is an individual, as well as collective responsibility of our City, and
serves as an indicator of successful performance for each employee and our entire
organization. Therefore, program progress and special achievements resulting from the
implementation of this policy will be encouraged and routinely shared with all employees.
In addition, employee performance evaluations will include ratings to reflect the individual's
level of commitment to sound pollution prevention and waste minimization practices.
-------
Cooperation and flexibility among organizational units promotes broader acceptance and
participation with pollution prevention activities, and management is committed to
enhancing this process. Therefore, interdepartmental "focus groups" or "P2 assistance teams"
will be formed to help promote the concept and implementation of pollution prevention.
Periodic program evaluations will be conducted to measure the effects of pollution
prevention activities. The City's P2 program will set specific "milestone" dates for achieving
specific levels of success in the prevention of pollution. First, base line data on all City
generated waste streams will be established and then, periodic assessments will be conducted
to measure the progress of the program.
Each city department and/or division will be responsible for identifying, quantifying and
prioritizing all of their waste streams. Prioritizing should be based on the hazardous nature
and/or the volume of the waste generated.
The City will develop a mechanism whereby all departments and/or divisions pay directly for
their waste disposal costs out of their individual budgets, if they do not already do so. This
will internalize the costs associated with the waste and create an additional incentive for the
elimination of reduction of these wastes.
Finally, the City commits to continue the pollution prevention program beyond the
completion of the U.S. EPA funded Pollution Prevention Incentives for States g tnt project,
which is in part, the impetus for the City's current efforts. This total management level of
commitment will ensure the City's dedication to the P2 concept of continuous improvement
by waste reduction.
-------
Appendix C
Promoting P2 Activities to Small Businesses
n Steps to Establishing a P2 Program
G Economic and Technical Evaluation Forms
n P2 Checklists
PA DEP Facility Pollution Prevention Checklist
Office Environmental Checklist
Environmental Checklist for Printers
O Educational Brochures
Eco-Wise Program, Montgomery County, MD
Businesses for a Cleaner River, Elizabeth River Project, VA
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 103
-------
104 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
Steps for Establishing a Small Business Pollution Prevention Program
The process outlined below is only a general overview for getting a business started on
pollution prevention. More detailed resources are available; however, this process should
provide the framework by which a business can establish its program.
Step 1 Create a Pollution Prevention Group
Seeking the input and ideas from all parts of a business is critical to getting support for
the initiative and creating a pollution prevention program that benefits all aspects of a
business. An group or team can be the first step in getting organized. The team should
consist of employees, management and in some cases the owner(s). The primary
objectives of the team will be to organize the effort, conduct self audits, consider areas
in which pollution prevention can be used, and report on the groups findings.
Step 2 Examine your Business Profile
A small business needs to consider incorporating pollution prevention techniques into
its business plan. Reducing waste through business planning requires little money to
implement, but can have significant impact on the waste stream by preventing waste-
producing materials, processes and procedures from entering the business. Careful
business planning can lead to better purchasing procedures, inventory procedures, and
process operations.
Step 3 Conduct a Self Evaluation
The team should consider all aspects of a business in developing a pollution prevention
program. All policies and procedures should be evaluated to identify areas in which
pollution prevention techniques can be utilized. The information collected during this
process should be well documented to provide a baseline for measuring the effectiveness
of waste reduction activities undertaken in response to the evaluation. The appendix
provides a checklist (not exhaustive) of activities a small business should be evaluating
during its self evaluation.
Step 4 Select Waste Reduction Techniques
After completing an evaluation, it is time to select those options that will help achieve
pollution prevention goals. Comparing technologies used at similar facilities can lead to
optimum selections. When selecting options, it may be useful to utilize the following
two forms as general guidelines, (from Wigglesworth, Profiting from Waste Reduction in
Your Small Business')
-------
Economic Evaluation Form
Date completed:
Person completing form:_
Waste Reduction Option:.
Yes
Is this option within your price ranged
Does this option have an acceptable payback
period (under one year is considered excellent)
-------
FACILITY POLLUTION PREVENTION CHECKLIST
Pollution prevention, through waste reduction and energy efficient practices, can result in cost savings for
businesses, while at the same time protecting environment. The following series of questions is meant to stimu-
late thinking about possible pollution prevention actions that might be undertaken by many manufacturing
facilities. Each set of questions begins with the phrase, "Haveyou considered...
YOUR MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
D developing a usable source reduction plan for
your facility?
D training employees to be aware of hazardous
waste reduction opportunities?
D accounting for waste treatment and disposal
expenses as a direct cost of producing a
product?
WATER USE/REUSE
D flow control valves?
D identifying water inflow and outflow from each
unit process?
D evaluating reuse of clean or contaminated
water?
[3 using timers or foot pedals to control water
usage?
d reactive rinsing?
MATERIAL HANDLING
D segregating raw and waste material containers?
D segregating different waste materials in
separate containers?
D purchasing materials in bulk or larger
containers?
D controlling inventory to reduce waste?
D labeling all containers properly?
D labeling process tanks?
SOLVENT CLEANERS
D avoiding cross-contamination of solvent?
D avoiding water contamination of solvent?
D removing sludge continuously?
D using a tank cover or air knife to reduce surface
evaporation?
D monitoring solvent composition?
D consolidating cold cleaning operations?
D using cryogenic or plastic media blasting for
paint stripping instead of solvent stripping?
D using nonchlorinated solvents instead of
chlorinated solvents?
D installing a vapor recovery system to capture
vaporized solvents?
D installing on-site distillation units?
D evaluating work removal rate?
ALKALINE/ACID CLEANERS
D removing sludge more frequently?
D avoiding cross-contamination of solvent?
D reusing cleaners by filtering and rejuvenating?
PLATING/ETCHING/METAL FINISHING
D using low temperature baths to reduce surface
evaporation?
D prolonging plating solution bath life through
filtration, reducing drag-out, avoiding
contamination, etc.?
D using lower concentration plating bath?
D redesigning part racks to reduce drag-out before
the rinse, possibly with air blow-off?
D using trivalent chromium instead of hexavalent
chromium?
D using noncyanide plating solutions such as chloride
or sulfate solutions?
D using in-line recovery techniques?
D regenerating spent bath solutions?
D segregating all waste streams?
D using spray or fog nozzle rinses to reduce drag-
out?
D using wetting agents to reduce surface tension,
this minimizing drag-out?
D reusing rinse water?
D recovering chrome and nickel plating solutions by
an evaporation unit?
RINSE WATER
D using multiple rinse tanks?
D using countercurrent rinsing?
D installing drainboards and drip tanks?
D installing racks above plating tanks to reduce drag-
out?
D using fog nozzles and spray units?
D agitating rinse bath (air or solution agitation)?
D recycling and reusing spent rinse water through
such metal recovery techniques as ion exchange,
reverse osmosis, and electro-chemical recovery?
D segregating all waste streams?
D using an evaporator for material recovery from
rinse tanks and reuse in plating bath?
-------
PAINT APPLICATION
D using equipment with high transfer efficiency
such as electrostatic applicators?
D using high-solids coatings such as powder
coatings?
D segregating all waste streams?
D using cheesecloth over filters to reduce spent filter
generation?
D recycling over-spray, for instance, from powder
coatings?
D evaluating the use of different types of paint
arresters such as water wash and filters?
D arranging formal training for spray operators?
D optimizing spray conditions in terms of speed,
distance, angle, pressure, etc.?
D using booth coatings for easy booth cleaning?
D inspecting all parts, such as racks, for cleanliness?
D using gun washer equipment for equipment
clean-out?
D reducing the use of solvent-based and metal-
based paints, where possible, by using water-
based coatings?
D using a charged screen with electrostatic system to
reduce edge buildup and to capture and reuse
over-spray paint?
LEAK AND SPILLS
D using seal-less pumps?
D installing spill basins on dikes?
D installing splash guards and drip boards?
D installing overflow control devices?
D maximizing use of welded pipe joints?
SLUDGE DEWATERING
D using mechanical dewatering devices such as filter
presses, centrifuges, vacuum filters, or
compression filters?
D keeping different metals sludges segregated?
D using filter bags?
D using sludge dryers?
PARTS WASH ING
D covering all solvent cleaning units?
D using refrigerated freeboard on vapor degreaser
units?
D improving parts draining before and after
washing?
OIL/WATER SEPARATION
D using a centrifuge system to cover cutting fluids?
D chemical treatment?
D filtration?
D coolant regeneration?
GENERAL LIGHTING, HEATING AND WATER
D using fluorescent overhead lamps?
D installing motion detectors for rest room lights?
D trying less expensive lamps for exit signs?
D adding set back thermostat for heating system(s)?
D testing water valves regularly throughout building
to eliminate leaks?
D checking for leaks around windows and doors?
For more information about pollution prevention approaches contact:
DEP's Office of Pollution Prevention & Compliance Assistance
P.O. Box 2063.16th Floor, RCSOB
Harrisburg, PA 17105-2063
(717)783-0540
FAX: (717)783-8926
This fact sheet and related environmental information are available electronically via
Internet. Access the DEP website at http://www.dep.state.pa.us
(choose Information by Subject/Pollution Prevention and Compliance Assistance).
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Tom Ridge, Governor
An Cqual Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
-
Department of Environmental Protection
James M. Seif, Secretary
7000-FS-DEP1720 Rev. 4/97
Recycled Paper;
-------
OFFICE ENVIRONMENTAL
PRACTICES CHECKLIST
This checklist was compiled by the Bullitt Foundation from various sources and is
provided to their grantees. The Foundation requires grantees to complete this checklist
with grant contracts and encourages them to take the steps outlined below.
Yes No N/A
Reduce
D D D Offer incentives to staff and volunteers to travel to work and
meetings without driving alone in a motorized vehicle.
D D D Provide advice or assistance with ridesharing, mass transit or
nonmotorized transportation options for workshops, conferences
or other special events hosted by your organization.
O G O Replace disposable plates and utensils with durable dishes and
flatware.
D D D Keep a supply of extra mugs and glasses in a common area.
G G D Keep cloth towels next to the sink to be used instead of paper towels.
G G D Make two-sided copies, and print letters and reports on both sides
of the page.
C G D Use electronic mail whenever possible.
G C D Avoid using cover sheets to send fax transmittals.
C G D Buy a plain paper fax, so the paper can be recycled.
D L- G Use canvas shopping bags when buying office supplies.
G D D Purchase products (including take-out meals) in recycled and
recyclable containers.
D G G Purchase items in bulk packages or in concentrated form.
G G G Be selective with mailing lists for annual reports and newsletters.
G G n Reduce junk mail by taking your name off unwanted mailing lists.
Reuse
G G Q Reuse paper that is clean on one side for in-house drafts and
photocopies.
G G G Refill toner cartridges used in photocopiers and laser printers.
G G G Give preference to products that incorporate post-consumer recycled
materials.
i. G G Do research at libraries or on-line, rather than ordering written
materials.
-------
D D D Share periodicals with associates instead of receiving multiple
copies.
D D D Donate old or outdated equipment or furniture.
Recycle
D D
D D
D D
D D
D Recycle office paper, aluminum, steel, glass, newspaper and
cardboard.
n When possible, recycle magazines, colored paper, wood, oil and
plastics.
D Reduce or eliminate the use of colored paper.
D Purchase recycled paper with high post-consumer content that is not
bleached with chlorine. Use Green Seal-certified products whenever
they are available.
Toxics & Hazardous Materials
D D D Use only non-hazardous supplies for cleaning, landscaping and
D D D
D
D
D
n
n
D
D
D
maintaining the office.
If hazardous materials cannot be used up or recycled, take them
to a hazardous waste disposal facility.
Switch to soy-based and other non-toxic inks for your printing needs.
Use rechargeable batteries instead of disposable ones.
D Avoid chemical pesticides for insect control.
Score: Total Yes
Total No
Total N/A
Organization
Date
Note: Purchasing officers or buyers can contact Green Seal at (202) 331-7337 for more
information or to become a Green Seal Environmental Partner.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR PRINTERS
How can you determine if a particular printer has a true commitment to the environment. The
bottom line is that it is at best difficult to gauge a company's overall environmental score, and
that score will probably change depending upon the type of printing a company does (heatset
web, for example, is inherently more polluting than sheetfed printing).
Short of going on-site with an expert in environmental compliance and conducting an audit,
what can you doi The following list will help evaluate the company that does your printing.
You may be able to use this list of concerns to help determine a printer's degree of
environmental sensitivity.
Is the printer...
Q Actively stocking and promoting the use of environmentally desirable papers^
Q Knowledgeable about new developments in papers^
Q Knowledgeable about new developments in inks^
Q Pro-actively training their staff members to be flexible in work habits and to be open to new
environmental innovations-? Or are you often warned that using a new paper or ink will
probably result in compromising quality and turnaround^
Q A signatory of the CERES principles-a public commitment to an environmental code of
ethic s£
Q Conducting regular environmental audits of shop operations^
Q In compliance with the federal Clean Air Act and EPA regulations, as well as state and local
Q Recycling their waste ink to the maximum extent possible, thus minimizing the
amount hauled away as hazardous wasted
Q Recovering photochemical (silver) wastes from darkroom chemicals^ Has sewage
effluent been tested for compliance with local regulations^
Q Recycling other waste from their manufacturing operations:
4 Wash-up solvents^
->Paper trimmings and plates'?- (Nearly all printers now do this.)
-^Cardboard1?-
-»Steel banding from pallets1?-
-»The pallets themselves^
Q Conducting an annual audit of energy consumption and comparing it to sales volume^
-------
Q Taking steps to improve lighting, heating, and air conditioning efficiency^
Q Monitoring water usage1?-
Q Providing on-site recycling for employees1?-
Q Considering environmental impact when making purchasing decisions on equipment and
chemicals:
->Using low-volatility wash-up solvents and cleaning agents^
-»Eliminating chlorinated hydrocarbons wherever possible1?
-> Eliminating ozone-depleting compounds wherever possible1?-
-» Eliminating the use of alcohol in press fountain solutions'?
-»Using vegetable off-based inks with under 10% VOCs as their standard ink£
Q Actively educating customers about the environmental impact of printed products and
offering production alternatives'?
Reprinted with permission from Newsletter for the Environmentally Responsible Print
Buyer, Jan/Feb 1995, © Ecoprint, 1995.
-------
aw '3||i«p°>i
aivd
aSasoj
ajsy >||ng
OS80Z QW 'sil
459 'jaajas 8ojuo^ |Q|
S3DJAJ9S 3JSEM p||O$ JO UOjSjAjQ
N4*'
"^
W)
2
a;
- <£
*Z
o
u
O
-ii
>
CO
a)
LU
M
§.8-*! s I «
Illlll
o * a- o
0 a.
3! oo 's ~
-5 S re «
y *» .«
-c
JZ " .
U,.bC
*M*
O i
5: S
o
ti
-S
u
00
_ a)
S 8
+-i (U
S s
£*§
8
a>
-5
i *
* *
I?
II
it
BO *^-
£ JJ
1i
I
o
c
rdo
I S-S
g» o I S I
"- l- f> 41
M W in > U
18 w Q w
0. « « O «
S -2. .£
||
SI
4=
'B
a>
o
1
n
§
E o
£ c
= .2
C|
? 5
O
V)
lo
| S^
S E-
l!"
£££
-------
(D
00
c
g_
'y
'+->
rd
Q_
LO OO
c O
i >
rd
JZ
« Q.
00 rt
2 i
I
I
.2
5 O.
!«
" S
M .£
S «
22
BO .
°- I/,
T3 C
" 2
2
> "8 =
> 5 2 £
.S2
S S
-Q *+Z
M
O O 41 ~
^ -C S <"
Q. O O u
11
H II
1
r*^-
O3
rJb
2
Q_
CU
to
O
LLJ
(D
-M
LO
1
S S
« .a
X «5
« on
1 <"
am is a partnership be
y Division of Solid Wast
The EcoWise progr
Montgomery Count
i/i
anization
ty businesses and org
c
o
U
T>
C
re
i^
oo
Q
s- s
pportuni
i wastes
irganizations with the o
quantities of hazardous
o _
(/> re
-2 I
go
0. XI
0 ^
i 2
responsible manner.
an environmentally i
m <->
v> C.
costs le
anageme
he EcoWise program
:h a hazardous waste m
Disposal through t
than contracting wit
W 1
«= >
s 1
0)
.Q jjj
O w
u OO
ng organizations stand
ared publicity recognizir
firm, and participati
from County-spons<
in
hip of EcoWise partner
ronmental stewards
EcoWise
!_
£
^
_-M
5
'Cxp
, 1
E
&
2
Q.
OJ
rticipate in the EcoWisi
re
a.
2
0)
.a
'So
~Z
CU
_a
,0
ganization:
/our business or or
o
$
in Montgomery County
-o
I
£
3
3 g
8 .1
»- ii
9-3
-------
C
liance ftu the Chesapeake Bay
Lesapeake Bay Foundation
lesapeake Bay Program
ty of Chesapeake
ty of Norfolk
ty of Portsmouth
ty of Virginia Beach
impton Roads Chamber of
Commerce
impton Roads Planning District
Commission
impton Roads Sanitation Distrii
rginia's Center for Innovative
Technology
rginia Department of
Environmental Quality.
u u u u u b K
a
o o .£
t^H fy?
~ 2 -S
3
m
£ W
i- w
££
s
"^1
c
o
U
Q-V=
5
w
o.
' o
82
-------
!«
I S. 1 S S '.a 1
| till II
"H'S-a
2*=r>5 2'
1»sr*»«T- - "Si
*m 3 3
"lP»
li1*
H»-s
o
.=
§
ta
§
js
a
«
CO
en
£
13
o
c
CO
o
c
§
o
(
UH
8
i
o
on
0>
j3
CO
V
4-*
"to
'§
,«
V
4^
CO
O
O
inimize
E
T3
§
o
o
3
O
00
0>
5
a
cd
§
&
1
S
en
CO
^
^
^«
en
O
O
&
G
1 S*
"1
»3 8
Si
2-S
?"§ «
^ S s
c5 o
*->««
3*13
^ 5 £
.« E >,
^ ^. .J?
v tC
c3t3
§9
^ c
o.o
en O
^fe
^"o
*>%
tn ff
?5
£.3
°-s
T 2
3 U
5t|
«» c s
O « G
u ha S
.2=3^
111
8
*= o
-------
Appendix D
Promoting P2 Activities to Citizens
G Survey Questionnaires
Pollution Prevention
Water Pollution Action Alternatives
G Educational Brochures
Rain Gardens, Prince George's County, MD
Recycle, Let's Separate Together, Lancaster County, PA
Creating a Water-Wise Landscape, Virginia Cooperative Extension
Household Hazardous Waste, Pennsylvania Environmental Council
Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit 117
-------
118 Local Government Pollution Prevention Toolkit
-------
CITIZEN QUESTIONAIRE-POLLUTION PREVENTION
SURVEY QUESTIONAIRE #1
Thank you for taking a few moments to answer the questions below. The results of this survey will be used by the Baltimore
County Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management (DEPRM) in an environmental education
program for pollution reduction.
1. Is there a creek, stream or other waterway near your home (within a mile)?
Yes No Don't know
If Yes, what is it called? _____^_^_ Don'/ know
2. Do you believe the water in the creek or stream nearest your home to be clean enough for:
Yes No Don'tknow
Drinking
Fishing '
Swimming/Wading
3. Is the place where you live:
Single family detached house Apartment
Street name:
4. Have you ever planted a tree or a shrub? Yes
Mobile home Townhouse or duplex
Zip:
No
5. Approximately how much of your lawn do you and your family members use on a regular basis?
All Most Half Less than half None N/A
6. Would you be willing to convert some of you lawn to ground cover, shrubs, or trees?
Yes No Not Sure N/A
7. Who performs the lawn care/landscape maintenance where you live?
Property Owner Lawn care company Both Other.
8. How often is fertilizer applied to the lawn where you live?
Not used
Once every 2 to 3 years Season:
Once every year Season:
_Twiceayear Seasons: _
_More than twice a year Season/s:_
_Other Season/s:_
Don't know
If used, approximately how much is applied per year (Ibs)?_
9. How often are chemical pesticides used on the property where you live?
Applied on a regular schedule Applied as needed Not Used Don't know
Do you ever use non-chemical pest control methods?
(artractants, barriers, traps, hand-picking of weeds, etc.) Yes No
Please turn over
-------
10. Is your home served by Baltimore County's
"One and One" curbside recycling service? Yes No Don'thww
11. Does anyone in you household regularly recycle?
Yes No If Yes, where? Home Office School
12. Do you have a compost pile where you live? Yes No Don't know
13. When someone in you household washes the car, where is it done? (Check all that apply)
On the grass On gravel On a concrete driveway
On bare soil At a commercial car -wash On the street
14. Approximately how often is the car washed?
Weekly Monthly Every other month Once a year Twice a year Other
15. When the oil or antifreeze in your car must be changed, where is the work done?
At a dealer, At home If you change it yourself, how do you dispose of used oil?
gas station, or lube center Recycle Other(specijy)
\ 6. Use the appropriate letter to indicate how you would dispose of the following materials:
(T) TRASH (R) RECYCLE (D) HOUSEHOLD DRAIN (0) OTHER (specify) (X) DON'T KNOW
Paint (water based) Yard waste Fertilizer Paint (oil based
_Metal polishes Gasoline Turpentine Pesticides
Chlorine bleach Wood stain Pet waste Batteries
\ 7. When choosing a product to buy, do any of the following factors influence your decision? please check
Amount of packaging Product safety Packaging material Ease of disposal None of these
18. Do you have a pet? Yes No If Yes, what type:
How do you dispose of pet waste?
19. Do you own a "Bay" license plate? Yes No
20. Is your age: Under 10 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 Over 70
21. Sex: M F
22. What is the highest grade of school you completed?
Less than high school: present grade level
High school or GED
Some college, university or technical school
College graduate (4 years)
Post graduate degree
Comments:
THANK YOU!! If you would like information about this project, call DEPRM at (410) SS7-5683, Monday thru Friday 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
PLEASE RETURN SURVEYS TO: Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management (DEPRM)
401 Bosley Avenue, Suite 416
Tovvson, Maryland 21204
-------
WATER POLLUTION ACTION ALTERNATIVES
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE #2
Thank you for taking a few moments to answer the questions below. The results of this survey will be used by the
Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management (DEPRM) to determine the
effectiveness of the "Let's Be Partners" educational program.
As a direct result of the information you received in the program, have you begun to use any of the environmental
action alternatives listed below? Place an (/) in the appropriate space for each action. (Leave the question blank if it
is not applicable to you).
Action I already I am considering I will No Change Comments;
do this doing this do this
1. buy low or non-
toxic products
2. buy products with
less packaging
3. for pest control:
a. use attractants
b. use barriers
c. use traps
d. use less chemicals
4. wash car on grass
5. use a hand mower
6. recycle:
a. oil
b. antifreeze
c. paper
d. yard waste
7. reduce lawn area
8. plant trees or
shrubs
9. plant ground cover
10. compost at home
11. buy less fertilizer
12. remove some paved
surfaces
13. take household
hazardous waste to
a collection center
-Please turn over
-------
Action I already I am considering I will No Change Comments:
do this doing this do this
14. take a soil sample
15. use recommended grass
seed varieties
16. collect pet waste
17. flush pet waste (dog)
18. use biodegradable
detergent
19. use marine pumpout
20. join a greening
committee
21. remove trash and leaves
from a storm drain
22. paint a storm dram
23. buy a Bay License Plate
24. join or support an
environmental non-profit
organization
25. help with a dean-up
26. Is your age: Under 10 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 Over 70
27. Sex: M F
28. What is the highest grade of school you completed?
Less than high school: present grade level:
High school or GED
Some college, university or technical school
College graduate (4 years)
Post graduate degree
Comments:
THANK YOU!' If you would like information about this project, call DEPRM at (410) 887-5683. Monday thru Friday 8:30 am-4:30 pm.
PLEASE RETURN SURVEYS TO: Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management (DEPRM)
401 Bosley Avenue. Suite 416
Towson. Man-land 21204
-------
-------
w
CJ
£
o
u
z;
w
Q
«
- re
(L)
re c
* re I
i $ =
3.2 g.
O
4^
0)
i.
V
Q
x
c
o
U
v>
~U
e°
8
o
V
u
OL
0)
H
g
"8
§
V
0»
o
t3
JZ
to
Ji
u
L.
O
Ul
£
g
V
c
e
'>
LU
8
ensiti
V)
i-
1
V
C
o
5
^
«
TJ
R)
«
'^
5
o
_c
M
I
u
V
u
s
M
no
u
-o
£
S
-5
o
a.
s-
0)
5
S
c
.0
*w
3
0
V)
C
«)
C
re
£
re
M
V
g
re
(D
c.
'a
ce.
*
rd
a-
u
V
I
i_
O
c5
'5
V
s
a.
*_
o
0)
00
c
_«
"S
u
V
c
i
o
ji
(U
-C
w
s
"
1
V
_o
>v
R)
«
jo
8
Q.
w
HI
e environmf
-S
o
c
re
O
«
u>
t>0
V U
i 5
V "> ti «
ilf.sf
S "g
c -o
V C
(V
Jg
1 ^i.s &«
; 2 S g s -I
! O -O W 4) O"
U R( X..C
-------
H
w
S
Z
O
«
>
w
s
I
I
a.
OJ
=
S ^ * "3 - .5 '«
jr"#5jH#-3s^«^^
~ z '£ * 'C. $ S ^ <£^^
^Sj^^cJS-J bo J - =
^u-5 ="^S^ S»-v"2^
O
\
! f 31
§ m
115 f
5 «gl
V * ^5
ils-l
ill?
to S C .S .
i;
fe -^ 5
S
Z '->
O =
s -s
= w
K S - i ^= ^
3 5 s. 5 - a;
a :f
-------
r
^ c
-
tn ^
£ §'
^ r3
' bC
= y
be
£ 'be
= " = _
'i .5 ~ T; ^ Ji
^
o
- := = S V
= ^^-Sre~c=ti<^
-- '" ^ £ i: -5 " -7- r- ~
-=='r~£="~So'£?=~
.£ c ~ - sj
v^.. * - J~
_Sc= = r^-3^"i
j2 bc_= ^. u = re
cJM 3 ~ c > " "^
^ 55 ? I ? i -S s u «= g
Z S s- £ ~ - ^ s ,=
U
> a « z i s -
« 5
SB
en
2IS - - §
O = $ ^ re S 'S
C T5 s i-5 S r
3 r.ssis
o
u
ce:
u
C/3
_n ^ d;
S.
0
J
Z £-=: S 5 "° _. ^
j^l i"2 |l="l
, = g .s g ^ L -
i is _ te oj -c Si i
!1 lIlF"
be « &
oj
f I-reNl 1-^11= o
l|j!=fIf!s||
- 'E ^ = S
.£ S
-------
I
M "ff J= _. _
S-15§1
ta Q. U ii
O v5 - js at
u
H S
c
Q.
U
&.
9 S » E "~
8," 3 >> 5
s 5 S-5 5 S
sn*1
i g-i
! S3
UJ oa C W M W
2*ft*?
o
o
ec
c
.
37? 3 ifl tS
8 "S
(
"5 -"S
* 8
111! alii
M
« o
.
iiia
iii
-------
M
I
es
U
u
O
JS
^
13
£
e. c
se Optimum Cultural Prac
se Turfgrass Appropriate
3
TJ
e
n
a
I
flOir!
COU360U60
»l'ajs
=sJ*s
E ^"2 £>
w» 60 M §
si as
* *^ ~ B
?*|s
ggp
2 J>
c £>
cr-
«
JJ -3 g 5 a e -S g IS
o> u2-?;73rachy
2 ^ U
B. J ^^ J -5 5 S -2
ndscape
se
er-
OJD
'w
S!
^
U
₯
'a
es
w
(A
B
e
JJ
m
VS
I
c^
u
c
u
u
SP
c
(^
E
T3
a
.60
'35
1^1
«!
ra
JC
u
3
W5
^X
orces
w*
"S
3
Td
B
o
«
u rs
s §
5 ^
> "
" u
606
c
'3 g
JJ 2
"S.03
^s
11
I M
~ Ifl
ts u
u '
(A
.
O T3 ^
'
o §
o ^2 3
iples
best
e-
izi
es
Se
i
eq
en
- -
-o
U
O " *
ur °- s " a"
$OJ'*i«'
a
Plan Your Landsca
3
f/i
t/J
o
U9
>*
n
^e
a
U
ts
1
I
jg
2
TJ
«
U
4H*
'35
1
1
O
n
"5,
-a
£
u
use of different areas o
*y
jj
3
<3
Ui
'3!
4j
uf
§
B3
i
IS
o
'5
u
u
concerns (such as wind d:
d
>,
u
e
and traffic flow through 1
3
tj
3
t/i
including any permanent
a
a
&
if
n
_u
2
I
1
«^
CO
w
sidewalks.
CCT3
o u .a -3 - .«
^S 3. S » "S « j< ^
.
«
^ E
III.! ill "I"! ill
-Se--:-32^ujSc9-Cu
-------
-3
v o .2
o 55 C
§o O-n i
<"* "3 fe'
T3 a S i
C 3 00 I O JB '
flsl II
ilelH
III511
. U3
22
£?£
^P
S r-l
SI t-
?l
16.
<£
S^
E £
0353
I'ER
« 'p t-( CO
O£ 10
at-1 < to
«-s2«
|IP
18 |P
eM Sr;
B - «C
*2S
«3^
V
£ g
212
|«Hs
o " « r<
aig^t
«|23
"lf§
c S
o B
!!
i =
. w
4)
*8f
§SI
M fi
<-" f7
S 2 * c :
O -S oo "3 »
Hi! if
«!2!!.r
SgJfS .5"?
ll^s
Is! s-
I s Sg
CO
-a
"
I
§ 1
-------
0
4-1
C/5
C8
£
W5
3
O
"S
OS
N
OS
£
M-l
O
2
V
1
D.
3
§
1
S
C/}
cj
3
CQ
E
CO
-
a
^E
o
Sf
0
\ '
Q.
g
11
_D
C
S
V
tA
§
J5
1
Ui
J
S
CO
1
g
1
-e
&
-o
CO
"B
B
"S.
2
1
§
o
cu
3
CO
<£
s
E
S
CO
^
^
*to
S
U
S
j
HI
"S.
I
-o
"S
iS
.1
*o
O
1
JS
0
(/>
CO
s wastes can
wastes.
Hazardou
0
(A
*i
ij
|2
CO
8
§
(A
.4J
*!M
S
£
2
CO
"8
"2
S
(A
5
1
(A
3
poisono
a
CO
Some wastes
substances. !
e
<&
V
-o
-§
15
uT
S
1
0>
CO
3
S
§
CO
IM
V
1
ju
Ic
vS
2
>
CO
JU
^
S
Q.
ious medical
k*
u
(A
ha
U
1
O
-------
About the Chesapeake Bay Program
I he Chesapeake Ba% Pfognuri i< ioadinu ihc " a> ; ;hc propel ion and ivsioia'.m;1 >' ;':c 'sa'.'ui, -. .'argent cstuan -
the Chesapeake Ba\ 'Shis uniy >:,. pannetvnp nJudcs die s;au> ; = M;T. 'and f e:v:--. i- an.a. Virginia, the
Distncl of ( olnmiiij I.' c- Fiv jronmcntfll Kri>Lxtinr Hyonn r;p:>c:'i 'H ,".,- c-'ci,; «<~\ errn;n!. the
Chesapeake Bay Con-unssMn. a .n-suiie- L".;^i;>.i . hoih ,u; ; -la-ai ,vs
(n the historic 198" Chesapeake B.A Agreement !he( aeNaj's.ak iL,\ ''.';;,: in, paiire;^ -es i j<.:ai h> i educe the
nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus JiHcni!", the 8,:v [>\ -1C ;i n,e:i' '' ;ii- v^;ti "1""(' la ,n^ ,^i<->} \;nendmcnis
so the Chesapeake Ba\ Agrcenicn;. partners agrce»! t.i nun-'Min ti> t1; j\ ; --m juai i)^x oiu! tiv ' ear y;00 and to
attack nu'.neius at ilic;r source - up stream in ihv. MI^UKII ;,,-:- !>.,- ;>oas ' eaiu'!!;.,' n:it:ieiu> i-- I!K- ( l;esapeake
Bay is intended to hcip achieve tk; Chcso|>eakv, B(n |Jr H:KI:: ii.-,;n.>- - P' :. !: - '<. iv- 1 r,.: and ,- nee', the Ba\ "s
in !!ll! iCS
[he Toxics Subcommittee of the ( hvsapeaki. Ba>, t'ia,jjrni:i ^ leading iise .-i iv/n t..,> :r,un.e eheiMcal contaminants
iiomcntciinglhc Ba\ v^\ih a=i uitin.aie gc.>ul ol\: "!it;\ rree.\ 7o\ic- ' 'i,-- > ,.i! '.-..-isse! ',' a-\, Chesapeake Ba\
Program in 1994 a^ i/an u! its ( ;?fv../ii. ,;/.«,- he- ;'<,-, -,-M i.' /'>i. ,.,', ' . .<>:/' /'.'..t ',.-,- >//t/.'( ^v Ihc
Strategy rtcoeni/ci. liiC import. *"i ' an,'J ci::\. MI. !",-, ;i.i 'ir^' ::;cn!!''' ., ;x >i'',i >r, ,'/"" ,.- ;oi. .irii.uics io
achieve tlas goal
r he Chesapeake Bay Program I ocai Governmcnf \d\i-».,ir^ f]a^ au-i :r. r,.:\'x : l^- i . -ca' - \'iii?..;,i- '>:.}* '\ .:;n)jnee i.eeks to
;mpro\ecojnmunKa!:<.'.; bv nroxiUiriy iiiiunsiaSuT, md i:.\:i;,;,a! :b.-M-!.i,,v '^ .lie ; " : i; -eai -..-. etn/uents in the
Ba\ regk.n. and sen ,-s as ihc ineai fjoxerpmeui ^ V;L. n- -lie B.A '''.v ; .n- It. . - * ' «vu;i , ,.- 1 hoapeake Ba\
Programs adoption ;i the /;.,,/. i u-< t-!' '-^cr- l'iir';> ,'/';/'.',.' i, '"',.' 'i:>. !.(,-',< s -iupporting the
developnent ot looK and techm.|i.,^ thai \\>!i ^IM ii-cai -uv. Lrrip\r.'-, ; MK.!' J'1. rt~ v 'ir -;ti ioc.i' natural
resource.1- and crntnix;:e !,_> the pi,;:.\.!io!'. ana K-'ioraiK.- <'i t!:. i ; :-.'. v:.u- , .-.-
4cknowiedgineiits
The Chesapeake Ba\ Program s "' L>VC.S Snbcc'ninnttee ar.dthe '" iw.;.eaK.- Ba> i vica: U:n ernment Ad\isor\
Committee uould hKe !o thank niemheis ril'she ; otjj v \einir J;M i'r,' 'i.,.^1 '^xi.e'.'lii1 . ' eu-. iircujp lot their
insight arid input into the devclujmcMi of'ihe !.u< ai Cio1 ..-.i:i7ient i'.'i'i.an'/i :>ri. \e:;^^ i . ./oik1' \]embers of the
Focus Group ntc'ude Jeanne Armaiost t^altini.ne C'nir4\. XlarJar'J Mjirc \irrii ''rffv.e vViiliam County
Cooperative hxtension Scrsicc. '\"i'vima. Sliam» Baxter ' >MU.">.>! !';. -i'lio:1 |Ji:-e-i!:. ,' - :vi:-.ia L>e;)anment
ot En\iicnnicnia) (,)uaiit-, Michele Biake. Oiike >'< Fniiuu;--'; i- :\entioi, a'1.: ( '.i.i;.,anee Assistance.
Pennsylxama Deparment of Err* 'ronniemj! Pie/ievi'^n Benj> Btackuuiii i .i\\\:<'-:: C.".!!;-.1., \. nginia, Larry
Coffman. Prmee ( ieori>e b Cv.ujii>. Mar\!a:n' Kcl!> hisenman '-< i -i\ :r..!,>r_"ia: !J!.>tL\ii'>n Agenc\
Chesapc.tkc Bay Program Oiflcc Naomi Friedman ^..IM "!.ii -is-;,n i.,. -.! V-.M .nini'es It.fn (iriffin Ol'ikeof
Pollution Prevention v'lr^sruii IX-partmern ' H:\ ^.'^uie'ii..1 1.,..',|>. Uickv Rt-dmait \Jairs C'ountv
Penns\hama. Sarah Richardson Aihaiu. '.': fi\ * i.vS.tpe.ik'. B i- Xnm TrdtnhkH ^ '."Ugowerv Count)
Man land, and Jame,s Wheeler P-jnn^l-. ahia Vs. ^ ,r. i;: >! ; v.'^i<-; ^!n_t..' <-;
We \vould also like io lhank i^.; ION.LS N t; .,". :;ri:;.u,.- % l\:ii..t.' ; .'v . ^iiiiv:1 A\'!K;'.\it:^ and ihose local
go\emmeni represen;aine;. that plodded .'li'uma.i " ': :! co"'r:K';'i-': , m ;a>. -. ,d'. a.-.u !oca! goveimnent
highlights that aie nx hided thn-xghou! liK- C-vkn
-------
I'hii Chesapeake Bay Program is the, cooperative partnership
among the states of Man/land Pennsylvania, Virginia; the
District of Columbia: the Chesapeake Bay Commission, a tri-
statc legislative body; the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, representing the federal government; and
participating cit'zen advisory groups.
\vw\v .chesapeukebay .net/bayprogram
------- |