Hegion B '
:J41 Chestnut Building
(Philadelphia PA 19107
November 1988
903R88001
-------
OUR REGION
PENNSYLVANIA
Philadelphia
Wheeling
EPA Region
Office Locations
MARYLAN
WEST
VIRGINIA
VIRGINIA
DISTRICT
OF
COLUMBIA
STATE
DELAWARE
DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
MARYLAND
PENNSYLVANIA
VIRGINIA
WEST VIRGINIA
TOTAL
POPU-
LATION
616,643
627,400
4,216,975
11,864,751
5,343,818
1,949,644
24,622,231
REGION III PROFILE
LAN! AREA
TOTAL
(SQ.MI.)
1,981
69
9,869
45,333
40,817
24,282 .
122,351
AGRI-
CULTURE
(SQ.MI.)
866
0
3,638
13,264
10,608
4,628
33,004
FOREST
(SQ.MI.)
543
0
3,790
23,907
21,290
16,285
65,815
URBAN
(SQ.MI.)
200
69
1,193
3,240
1,905
488
7,095
WATER AREA
RIVERS
(MILES)
500
36
9,300
50,000
27,240
28,361
115,437
LAKES
(SQ.MI.)
7
0,6
51
234
252
37
582
WETLANDS
(SQ.MI.)
347
>o.i
385
778
333
159
2,302
ESTU-
ARIES
(SQ.MI.)
357
6
1,981
0
2,382
0
4,726
OCEAN
COAST
(MILES)
25
0
32
0
112
0
169
Source: 1988 State Water Quality Assessment (.305(b)) Reports
USD A, SCS Statistical Bulletin 756, Basic Statistics -1982 National Resources Inventory
-------
Online Library System (OLS) Libraries US EPA
Page 1 of2
http://cave.epa.gov/cgi/nph-bwcgis/BASIS/ncat/pub/ncat/DDW?W%3DTITLE+PH+WORDS+%
i Libraries
OLS ; Record Display
Search
Help
j6 [ Display Records as Bibliography ] [ Item Status
RECORD NUMBER: 24 OF 31
Main Title
Publisher
Year
Published
OCLC
Number
Subjects
Subject
Added Ent
Collation
Holdings
Notes
Place
Published
PUB Date
Free Form
Holdings
Modified
Bib Level
Our environmental challenge : people and progress.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region 3,
1988
32620866
United States. Environmental Protection Agency.Region III
Environmental protectionMiddle Atlantic States
64 p. : ill., maps, ports ; 28 cm.
LIBRARY CALL NUMBER LOCATION
EJAM TDi7i.3.Mi.O97 1988 Region 3
Library/ Philadelphia, PA
ENAM TD171.3.M526O97 1988 2 Region 7 IRC
copies Library/ Kansas City,KS
Cover title. "November 1988."
Philadelphia, PA :
{1988}.
LIBRARY Date Modified
EJA 19970815
ENA 19980116
m
II
V,++.//,> r
-------
Online Library System (OLS) | Libraries US EPA
Page 2 of2
OCLC Time
Stamp
Cataloging
Source
Language
OCLC/NTIS
Type
OCLC Rec
Leader
19990318140145
OCLC/T
eng
OCLC
CAT
oo697nam 2200205la 45020
6 [ Display Records as Bibliography ] [ Item Status
URLs Provided for your Reference
i. http://cave.epa.gov/cgi/nph-bwcgis/BASIS/ncat/pub/ncat/SF
2. http://cave.epa.gov/ cgi/nph-bwcgis/BASIS/ncat/pub/ncat/SDW?W%
3DTITLE+PH+WORDS+%27our+environmental+challenge%
27+ORDER+BY+YR/Descend%26M%3D24%26R%3DY
3. http://cave.epa.gov/cgi/nph-bwcgis/BASIS/ncat/pub/ncat/DDW?W%
3DTITLE+PH+WORDS+%27our+environmental+challenge%
27+ORDER+BY+YR/Descend%26M%3D23%26K%3Dii9684%26R%3DY%26U%3Di
4. http://cave.epa.gov/ cgi/nph-bwcgis/BASIS/ncat/pub/ncat/DDW?W%
3DTITLE+PH+WORDS+%27our+environmental+challenge%
27+ORDER+BY+YR/Descend%26M%3D25%26R%3DY%26U%3Di
5. http://cave.epa.gov/cgi/nph-bwcgis/BASIS/ncat/pub/ncat/SBC
6. http://www.epa.gov/natlibra/olshelp.htm
..// /:/1_ 1 :/!-> A ore/ 4-1u/ wrM^iTi7ii-i7n/ TT^^TTT^T r: i DTT i \\ir\-n
-------
"When I look back and think about my
time at EPA, where we are today and
what the environmental issues are, I
think we have made tremendous
progress in the United States. We
can be very proud about that, and we
ought to talk about it."
Honorable Lee M. Thomas
Administrator
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
CONTENTS
2 OUR MISSION
Regional Administrator's Perspective
3 OUR ENVIRONMENT
Deputy Regional Administrator's Perspective
4 OUR PEOPLE
Assistant Regional Administrator's Perspective
10 OUR PARTNERSHIPS
20 OUR PROGRESS
54 OUR CHALLENGE
62 OUR ORGANIZATION
63 OUR FINANCES
U.S. Enviranmental Protection Agency
Region III Information Resource
Cปotซr (3PM52)
Ml Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
-------
OUR MISSION
Regional Administrator's Perspective
The awareness of the damage that
our modern industrial society was
doing to the earth fostered by
Rachel Carson's Silent Spring and
other works in the 1960s - became
part of our national consciousness on
Earth Day, April 22,1970. That public
concern for protecting the environ-
ment was the inspiration for the crea-
tion of the Environmental Protection
Agency in December 1970.
As employees of EPA, we are the in-
heritors of that spirit. More so than at
almost any other government agency
or private enterprise, we at EPA are
here because we believe in the spirit of
our mission - to protect our nation's
air, water and land from the pollution
risks inherent in our society.
In the 18 years since 1970, many of
the most visible pollution problems
have been addressed. Our streams
and rivers are cleaner - the Potomac
River was an open sewer in our
nation's capital, but now supports res-
tored recreational opportunities. Our
air is cleaner - the smoke over in-
dustrial cities like Pittsburgh is a thing
of the past. Our land is cleaner - the
Superfund program is remedying the
problems that we dumped, buried, or
ignored in the past.
Now we are crafting solutions to
problems we weren't even aware of on
Earth Day. Ozone, global warming, in-
door radon, and PCBs are today's
equivalents of the smog and DDT of
the 1960s. The science of environmen-
tal protection has advanced dramati-
cally and now gives us the ability to
detect many pollutants down to the
vanishing point. This presents us with
previously unimagined choices on ac-
ceptable levels of risk and tolerable
costs of eliminating them, and
provides previously undreamed of op-
portunities for innovative solutions to
environmental problems.
In the 18 years since
1970, many of the most
visible pollution
problems have been
addressed...Now we are
crafting solutions to
problems we weren't even
aware of on Earth Day.
Fortunately, we have many more al-
lies going into the 1990s than we did
going into the 1970s. Our state
partners are stronger and better or-
ganized. Industry, though probably
never enthusiastic about regulation,
now more clearly accepts the strong
public mandate for environmental
responsibility - a mandate the general
public speaks of more clearly and
knowledgeably than ever.
We offer this report to the public
with great pride. Given the legal,
programmatic, scientific, and
economic complexities of our mission,
our involvement in problems that have
taken many decades to evolve, and the
certainty that controversy is never far
away, it would be easy to become dis-
couraged. We are not discouraged,
and this report will show the reasons.
We are proud of our specific environ-
mental achievements, our innovative
management style and, most of all, the
fact that we are engaged in a mission
important to each of us personally and
to all humanity.
James M. Self
Regional Administrator
-------
OUR ENVIRONMENT
Deputy Regional Administrator's Perspective
The Middle Atlantic States --
Delaware, Maryland, Pennsyl-
vania, Virginia, and West Virginia -
are blessed with a magnificently
diverse environment ranging from the
Atlantic Ocean shoreline and the
popular Chesapeake Bay on the east
to the rugged mountains and wood-
lands to the west and north. These
states are home to over 24 million
people, numerous species of flora and
fauna, and thousands of industries and
farms. The combination of a fragile
environment and the needs of our
society creates a tremendous chal-
lenge for all those concerned with pol-
lution control. In EPA Region III, we
have a dedicated group of public ser-
vants working to protect the public
health and the environment to make
the Middle Atlantic States a better
place to live.
Our environmental problems are the
by-products of our industrial society,
our personal lifestyles, and even na-
ture itself. The Middle Atlantic States
have some of the most important
chemical, steel, coal, and other
manufacturing facilities in the world.
During the 1970s, environmental con-
trols focused on pollution from the
smokestacks and discharge pipes from
these industries. In the 1980s, the chal-
lenge has shifted, in part, to pollution
caused by many small, diverse and dif-
ficult-to-control sources. Often farms,
urban areas, and abandoned mines
individually produce relatively small
amounts of pollution; yet cumulative-
ly, they cause extensive water pollu-
tion problems that are difficult to con-
trol. In EPA Region III, we are on the
cutting edge of finding effective solu-
tions to these problems in our
Chesapeake Bay Program and our
ocean initiatives. The high level of
... we are challenged to
find innovative ways to
protect the public health
and the environment we
share with diverse
species of flora and
fauna. This is a challenge
we gladly accept.
ozone found in urban areas is also
caused by a large number of small
sources (e.g., automobiles, small in-
dustrial sources) and solutions to this
problem will require the regulation of
many more sources of pollution.
With the realization that individual
lifestyles also contribute to our en-
vironmental problems, the need for
public education is paramount.
Radon testing, home air ventilation,
pesticide usage, recycling at home,
and driving habits are some of the ac-
tivities where intelligent personal
decisions can help improve our en-
vironment.
In contrast to our concern about
small localized pollution problems, we
also face the issue of widespread pol-
lution transport beyond state,
regional, and even national boun-
daries. Hazardous waste transporta-
tion, acid rain, depletion of the ozone
layer, urban ozone transport, and
ocean pollution are examples of this
transport problem. Continued inter-
state and international cooperation
and environmental education are im-
perative if these problems are to be
resolved.
Within EPA, an abundance of infor-
mation on the relative risks from
various pollution sources has resulted
in discussion on where regulatory
agencies and society should expend its
finite resources. We are beginning to
focus on many difficult questions in es-
tablishing priorities. Should any addi-
tional funds for environmental control
be spent on hazardous waste cleanup,
radon, acid rain, sludge management,
or wetlands protection? Such ques-
tions are difficult to answer and will be
the subjects of debate for many years
to come. In Region III, we are chal-
lenged to find innovative ways to
protect the public health and the en-
vironment we share with diverse
species of flora and fauna. This is a
challenge we gladly accept.
Stanley L. Laskowski
Deputy Regional Administrator
-------
OUR PEOPLE
Assistant Regional Administrator's Perspective
More than a building or a
geographic area, Region III is
805 people. We are managers, scien-
tists, attorneys, administrative
specialists and support staff. Our
average age is 36 years. Many of us are
new in the Agency inasmuch as 169
people were hired in fiscal year 1987
and 38 in fiscal year 1988. Fifty-one
percent of us are women. In terms of
race, one out of four of us is from a
minority group. We are well-edu-
cated - 37% of us have Bachelor's
degrees, and another 27% have
Master's degrees or more.
While these numbers help to
describe us, we are better known by
our spirit. We are marked by a keen
sense of competition and zeal to excel
at our mission. Our environmental
ethic runs deep and strong - we are
here at EPA because our work is
meaningful and important to us. Our
own self-assessments and an inde-
pendent study of our organizational
culture show that we respect each
other and our leaders and value the
strong feeling of family that has
evolved since our founding eigtheen
years ago.
...our human resources
are the most important
component in the
operation of our
organization
In the spring of 1985, Region III
leadership committed itself to the
belief that our human resources are
the most important component in the
operation of our organization. From
there we shaped a human resources
program that has become the model
for the Agency and the entire public
sector. While the program has many
facets, it focuses on the following basic
tenets:
Develop the Best Work Environment
Possible. To create this environment,
it is essential to provide a modern and
healthy physical setting with efficient
working tools. A good employer-
employee relationship is a broader,
though less tangible, aspect of this goal
which is accomplished through sound
communications and good personnel
policies, procedures and programs
such as Compressed Work Week and
Flextime.
Encourage Employee Participation.
Our formal groups build our spirit and
provide counsel and information to
our leadership. We gratefully acknow-
ledge our many employee groups in-
cluding the Employees Association,
the Federal Women's Program,
AFGE Local 3631, Human Resources
Council, Women in Science & En-
gineering (WISE), Black Employ-
ment Program Advisory Council
(BEPAC), and the Hispanic Employ-
ment Council.
Provide a Comprehensive Training &
Employee Development Program. This
effort has grown to include the EPA
Institute, Temple University's En-
vironmental Management Program,
Rotational Assignments, Develop-
mental Details, and IPA Assignments
to states and municipalities.
Our challenge for the future is to
build on the strong foundation
estblished by our people and our
human resources program. We must
grow through positive recruitment ef-
forts, sustained and improved training
opportunities, open communications,
continued employee involvement and
additional innovative personnel
programs.
William T. Wisniewski
Assistant Regional Administrator
for Policy and Management
f. t
-------
WORKFORCE PROFILE
TREND IN TOTAL REGION 111 WORKFORCE
WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION
t988 - 805 POSITIONS
ENGINEBVSGIENTIST/ATTOBNEY 1406)
!931 1882 1983 1884 1965 1986 1987 1988
YEAR
WORKFORCE BY MEDIA/PROGRAM
OTHER SUPPORT (1001
MANAGEMENT/
SUPPORT (93)
POUCYANO
MANAGEMENT (126)
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES (111)
HAZARDOUS
WASTE (60)
HAZARDOUS
WASTE B53)
1981 - 513 POSITIONS
1988-805 POSITIONS
WORKFORCE BY SEX
EMPLOYEES
450
400
350
300
280
1984
86 MANAGERS
1984 198S 1986 1887 1988
YEAR
WORKFORCE BY RACE
1988-80S EMPLOYEES
WHITE (76%)
AMERICAN INDIAN (0.1%)
ASIAN (2%)
HISPANIC (2%)
'BLACK (20%)
TRENDS
84 '85 '86 '87 '88
YEAR
'84 '85 '86 '87 '88
YEAR
Equal Employment
and Affirmative
Action
The Equal Employment Op-
portunity (EEO) Program
provides advice and assis-
tance in the implementation
and administration of Region
Ill's civil rights and equal op-
portunity programs and en-
sures that an equal oppor-
tunity is aforded to all
employees. In cooperation
with the Director of Civil
Rights and the Regional Ad-
ministrator, the program is
committed to the enforce-
ment of all Civil Rights Laws
bearing on the Agency's
operations including further-
ing the goals of equal oppor-
tunity for all employees and
for all prospective employees.
EEO and Affirmative Ac-
tion activities are mandated
by a series of statutes, laws,
regulations and Executive Or-
ders. The primary law is Title
VII of the 1964 Civil Rights
Act that bans discriminatory
employment practices based
on race, sex, color, religion or
national origin. Amendments
to the law have been added to
include handicap and age.
Additionally, Presidential in-
itiatives have been issued
resulting in major Executive
Orders that give investigatory
powers to the Equal Employ-
ment Opportunity Commis-
sion. This Commission acts as
a "watchdog" for federal
agencies' compliance with
EEO laws and affirmative ac-
tion mandates.
-------
Employee Development
Employee development and recog-
nition programs are the signs of an
organization's commitment to its
people. Region III is proud of its ac-
complishments yet cognizant that con-
tinued effort is needed to maintain
and enhance these critical com-
ponents of human resources manage-
ment.
Employee training has benefited
from an increase in training funds an
increase accomplished despite con-
stant demands on EPA's budget.
Utilization of training funds has been
effective in creating a training
program highlighted by the number of
courses approved and diversity of
course offerings. In addition to cour-
ses approved for individuals, Region
III has been successful in the design
and implementation of several group
training initiatives:
A partnership has been reached
with Temple University to bring
an "Education in the Environ-
ment" program to the Region III
office for after-hours college
level instruction for secretaries
and other support personnel.
Region III managers completed
a two-year Zenger-Miller su-
pervisory program and a com-
parable program is inplace to
provide senior staff with this
training to help them determine
if they wish to pursue super-
visory positions.
A comprehensive Building Ex-
cellence through Secretarial
Training was developed,
providing basic instruction for
new employees and career
development for experienced
workers.
Even with increased training funds,
the Region recognized that innova-
tions would be necessary to meet an
ever-increasing demand for training.
The Region III Institute has proven to
be a cost-effective means of training
employees and also provides an op-
portunity for career enhancement for
employees serving as instructors.
-------
Dedicated EPA employees have
spent many hours after work in-
creasing their understanding of
environmental issues through
college-level courses taught by
Temple University instructors.
Region III Institute
Througfr the dedication of Region HI employees, the
old adage "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach"
has been changed to "Those who can, do and teach/"
From an initial group in 1984 of five instructors, the
Region III EPA Institute has become an integral part
of the Region's training program with over 50
employees participating as instructors for nearly 80
course offerings. Comtngat a time of increased train-
ing demands, the Institute is an extremely cost-effec-
tive means of fulfilling training needs while also
providing self-development for the instructors.
Tfie Institute training program runs the gamut from
wellness courses to microcomputer training to En-
vironmental Science. Comprehensive courses on
"Basic Environmental Toxicology9 and "Mechanisms
of Carcinogens" have been offered. One-day sessions
have provided information on topics including radon,
acid rain, lead in drinking water, implications of air
toxics on the ozone layer, and understanding Congres-
sional activities.
Registrations for Institute courses have exceeded
1000 a year indicating the tremendous acceptance of
the in-house training program. The growth of the
Region III Institute has provided the impetus for the
creation of a new training center in the Region III of-
fice. The new space will accommodate up to 60
people in a modular setting. Computer training, self-
development, and career development centers will be
part of the new training area. The expanded computer
training facilities are especially needed to meet the
growing demand in this popular subject area.
Keeping current in one's field, acquiring a new skill,
or learning about emerging issues are all essential for
career development and personal growth. EPA
Region IH is fortunate to have a large group of
employees willing to extend themselves to help their
co-workers become better informed and more profi-
cient employees.
-------
Employee Recognition
Recognition of a job well done is es-
sential to create a positive work en-
vironment. The number of Region III
recipients of honor awards, perfor-
mance awards, and other means of
recognition is a testimony not just to
the quality of Region III employees
but also to management's under-
standing of the importance of a
program to formally acknowledge that
quality.
Immediate recognition was the im-
petus behind the establishment of a
monthly awards program for special
efforts by employees. The monthly
awards program is designed to
provide a quick "thank you" for these
small but significant accomplish-
ments.
Region III also recognizes outstand-
ing employees through numerous an-
nual awards. The Region held its 10th
Annual Awards Ceremony on March
8, 1988. Awards presented included:
Gold, Silver, and Bronze Awards,
Combined Federal Campaign
Awards, MERIT Author Awards,
Student Aide Awards, EEO Award,
Safety Award, Communicator Award,
Adult Literacy Program Awards, and
Lenth of Service Awards. The follow-
ing annual honor awards representing
Region Ill's highest forms of recogni-
tion were also presented:
The Glen Witmer Award is
given for service distinguished
by concern for the environment,
enthusiasm for environmental
programs, a logical approach to
problem-solving, a concern for
detail that considers overall
program objectives, resource-
fulness and initiative, and an
ability to deal with people in a
manner that fosters coopera-
tion, understanding, and resolu-
tion of environmental
problems. This awared is given
in memory of Glen Witmer, a
Region III employee who died
of cancer in 1977 at age 27.
The Human Resources
Manager of the Year Award is
given to the manager who has
significantly enhanced
employee growth oppor-
tunities, positive working
relationships and better human
relations in Region III.
The Secretarial Excellence
Award is given in recognition of
demonstrated excellence in
achieving the highest possible
standards for secretarial excel-
lence.
Patti Kay Wisniewski
Glen Witmer Award
The Region also annually selects a
nominee for the EPA Administrator's
Excellence In Management Award
based on the manager's accomplish-
ments in one or more of the following
areas:
Human resources manage-
ment, including unusual skill in
supervising others
Management leading to major
accomplishments in support of
the Agency's mission
Management resulting in actual
and significant savings to the
government
Leadership in taking profes-
sional risks in order to advance
I he state-of-the-art in scientific,
technological or management
areas.
Robert J. Mitkus
Human Resources Manager
of the Year
Helen T. McCue
Secretarial Excellence Award
Orterio Villa, Jr.
Region III Excellence in
Management Award Nominee
-------
REGION ffl AWARD WINNERS
Gold Medal Award - DR. ALVIN MORRIS
In recognition of outstanding scientific and
managerial leadership of the Chesapeake Bay Program.
Silver Medal Group Award - WILLIAM T,
WISNIEWSKI, ANDREW P. CARLIN, MICHAEL H.
KULIK, CHERYL A, TALBOT
In recognition of outstanding leadership and
innovation in the management of Agency human
resources.
Bronze Medal Award - THERESA VIOLA
For outstanding performance and initiative in the
development of the Data Screen Entry Program for the
Grants Information Control System.
Bronze Medal Award -
ROLAND W. SCHRECONGOST
For leadership in the development and
implementation of a Superfund file protocol.
Bronze Medal Award - A. JOSEPH HAMILTON
In recognition for accomplishments in advancing the
information resources management program in Region
III to national prominence.
Bronze Medal Group Awards;
Hazardous Waste Management Division Mentor
Group - FRANCISCO N. BARBA, SALLY W.
BLOCK, TERRIDIFIORE, ELINOR ELISHEWITZ,
JOAN M, HENRY
For the development and institution of a highly
successful Mentor Program for the Hazardous Waste
Management Division of Region III.
Steel Support Team - JAMES M. BAKER,
MARGARET M. CARBAMQNE, JAMES W.
HAGEDORN, REGINA C. THOMPSON
In recognition of outstanding performance in the
enforcement of Clean Air Act regulations for the iron
and steel industry through a cooperative partnership
between federal, state and local control programs.
Cost Recovery Group - DARLENE F. KELLY,
LESLIE A. VASSALLO
In recognition of superior service in the area of
Superfund Cost Recovery, resulting in the recovery of
millions of dollars.
Tyson's Negotiation Team - DOMINIC DIGIULIO,
JOSEPH J,C. DONOVAN, CINDY GILES, JEFFREY
PIKE, TIMOTHY T. TRAVERS
For outstanding achievement in negotiating a
significant and complex Superfund settlement under
extremely arduous circumstances.
Regional Air Modeling Group -
ALAN J. CIMORELLI, MARK E. GARRISON
For outstanding contribution in the area of
mathematical diffusion modeling to the identification of
National air issues, the initiation of their solution, and
the development of national policy.
Hazardous Waste Management Division Field
Citation Group -
LARRY S. MILLER, CHRISTOPHER B. PILLA
For the development of afield citation program, on a
pilot basis, for TSCA compliance inspections which can
be instituted in all other Agency field enforcement
inspection programs.
CFC Awards - KEVIN A, MAGERR, JAMES
McCREARY, BERNICE PASQUINI, ALFRED
STURNIOLO
In recognition of commendable service in the 1987
Combined Federal Campaign.
Student Aide Awards- CHRISTINA C. BROWN,
DORLEATHA JOHNSON, ELYN VELAZQUEZ
In recognition of work that has displayed initiative,
efficiency, courtesy, helpfulness, availability and a
willingness to learn.
EEO Award - BARBARA BROWN
For special efforts in improving employee harmony,
promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Employment
Opportunity principles, and assisting the career
development of others.
U.S. Department of Labor Safety Award -
JAMES W.MARKS
For valuable contributions to the promotion of
occupational health and safety programs within federal
government,
EPA Communicator Award - JANET VINISKI,
PATRICIA BONNER
Exceptional service award for excellence in
communications.
-------
OUR PARTNERSHIPS
The primary responsibility of EPA's
Regional Offices is to work with
our colleagues in state (and increas-
ingly, local) government to effectively
manage and enforce our nation's en-
vironmental laws. The Office of Con-
gressional and Intergovernmental
Liaison is responsible to the Regional
Administrator for EPA Region Ill's
relationships with many important
segments of the environmental com-
munity:
Congress
Governors and other state and
local elected officials
State environmental sec-
retaries and directors
environmental interest groups
the business community, with
special emphasis on small busi-
ness
environmental educators.
The relationship that EPA and the
states continually strive to develop is a
partnership in which each agency
recognizes and accommodates the
other's special capabilities and en-
vironmental focus. As a Federal agen-
cy with a national perspective, EPA is
responsible for conducting research,
developing effective and equitable
policies, and providing technical and
funding assistance so that state en-
vironmental agencies are better
equipped to carry out their mandate
to protect and enhance their citizens'
health and the natural environment.
We have learned that frequent, open
communication between EPA and
state environmental agencies is a fun-
damental ingredient in the partner-
ships which have developed. This
communication occurs at all levels of
the Agency. Senior managers from
EPA headquarters, EPA Region III
and state agencies meet in various
... frequent, open
communication between
EPA and state
environmental agencies
is a fundamental
ingredient in the
partnerships which have
developed
forums to confer about the broad
direction of national environmental
policy and resource management as
well as the detailed aspects of program
implementation. EPA and state agen-
cy staffs interact daily concerning the
myriad of grant, enforcement and im-
plementation issues which merge to
determine the mutual aims and effec-
tiveness of the environmental
programs.
The quality of the State/EPA
partnerships and, more importantly,
the quality of the environmental
protection programs delivered by
EPA and our state partners, depends
on the willingness of all to openly
engage in this multi-layered com-
munication process. The Office of
Congressional and Intergovernmental
Liaison is devoted to assisting the
Region's operating divisions as they
interact with their colleagues in state
and local government.
EPA Region III has recognized the
importance of fruitful State/EPA
communication by making an un-
usually strong staff commitment to in-
tergovernmental affairs. State liaison
officers representing and advising the
Regional Administrator have been ap-
pointed for each of our states: Evelyn
MacKnight for Delaware and
Maryland, Ray George for West Vir-
ginia and the western portion of
Pennsylvania, Rich Kampf for Vir-
ginia (Rich also serves as the Region's
Small Business Ombudsman), Dan
Ryan for Pennsylvania, and Larry
Teller for the District of Columbia.
The Center for Environmental Learn-
ing is also located in this office to take
advantage of the broad outreach
responsibilities of the Region's state
liaison officers.
Current intergovernmental manage-
ment initiatives being carried out at
the national and regional levels are
aimed at providing greater oppor-
tunities for regional and state
priori! ies to be recognized and accom-
modated by EPA's budgeting, plan-
ning and performance evaluation
processes. Greater progress in this
area is increasingly recognized to be of
key importance to the combined ef-
forts of EPA and our state partners.
Lawrence A. Teller, Director
Office of Congressional and
Intergovernmental Liaison
10
-------
Center For
Environmental Learning
The objectives of the Center for En-
vironmental Learning (CEL) are to
promote environmental education, to
improve the public's understanding of
current and emerging policy issues
and to increase opportunities for the
public to communicate with the Agen-
cy.
To that end, the Center has spon-
sored an environmental lecture series
featuring prominent environmental
speakers and has co-presented forums
and seminars. These sessions, held
both in-house at EPA and throughout
the Region, focus on issues including:
waste minimization, air toxics, risk
analysis and risk communication, in-
door air pollution, environmental
education trends, and dispute resolu-
tion. Video tapes of some sessions are
available.
To support and promote environ-
mental education efforts within the
Region through official EPA recogni-
tion, the Center for Environmental
Learning, with assistance and
guidance from its Advisory Board,
selects and presents Environmental
Education Awards to exemplary
programs.
In 1987, the CEL presented its first
award from 57 nominations to Ms.
Marjorie Crofts, coordinator of
Delaware's Inland Bays Environmen-
tal Education Program. In 1988, 74
persons and programs were
nominated for the annual CEL
Award, from which seven were
chosen.
I n the coming year, the CEL plans to
accomplish its goals (1) by supporting
environmental education through in-
formal meetings, conferences, and
forums with educators, non-profit or-
ganizations, industry and other con-
stituencies, (2) by promoting out-
standing educational contributions
through CEL's Annual Awards, (3) by
supporting all efforts to improve the
public's understanding of environ-
mental issues and related public policy
developments, and (4) by stimulating
others to provide environmental
education.
Working in partnership with leaders
of non-profit organizations, local and
state government agencies, industry,
and academia is key to the success and
long-term effectiveness of the Center
for Environmental Learning. Bonnie
Smith, the CEL Director, actively seeks
these partnerships and also welcomes
requests for CEL assistance and invol-
vement at 215-597-9076.
1988 CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING AWARDS
Classroom teacher TERRY THOMPSON for her devotion and
professional accomplishments in developing numerous outstanding
environmental education programs in Accomack and Northampton
Counties, Virginia
THE MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE CENTER in Richmond,
Virginia for developing Tlie River Times Environmental Education
Curriculum to teach Virginia's students about the ecological and historical
significance of the James River
THE CENTER FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESEARCH of
The University of Pittsburgh for developing a Hazardous Waste
Minimization Manual for Small Businesses
In industry, PENNSYLVANIA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY for
the accomplishments of its field education programs in Central
Pennsylvania
PATRICIA HADDONofAnneAmndel County's Office of Planning
and Zoning for their program to deter "casual" pollution in a "Don't Dump
- Chesapeake Bay Drainage" campaign marked on storm sewers
countywide
THE NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION for its Backyard
Wildlife Habitat Program which encourages and educates individuals and
groups to preserve and improve wildlife habitat where we live, work, and
go to school
DR. WILLIAM RITTER AND RUTH ALMOND for inspiring
Environmental Education programs which involve participation from the
entire community at Robbins Park Environmental Study Center in Upper
Dublin Township, PA; and Eagle Scout, DAVID MOFFATTfor
following their lead
II
-------
DELAWARE
Delaware is the smallest state in
Region III, covering 2,057 square
miles with a population slightly over
600,000. Situated on the Delmarva
peninsula, the State lies primarily in
the Atlantic coastal plain with a small
area in the northeast corner of the
State in the Piedmont plateau.
Delaware's sandy soils, large quantity
of wetlands (18% of its land surface),
dependence on ground water as its
principal source of drinking water,
and diverse industry (e.g,, chemicals,
agriculture, poultry, shellfish, tourism,
automobile assembly) present sig-
nificant environmental challenges to
the State and EPA.
The principal environmental agency
in Delaware is the Department of
Natural Resources and Environmen-
tal Control (DNREC). Although the
drinking water compliance program is
handled by the Department of Health,
DNREC is responsible for all other
EPA delegated programs in air, water,
and hazardous waste management. In
spite of its size, Delaware has major
environmental concerns. Their was-
tewater discharge control program
deals with about 100 dischargers of
which 36 are classified as major. There
are 16 hazardous waste facilities in the
State, and 21 Superfund sites (second
only to Pennsylvania in number in
Region III). Recent air quality data
have required Delaware to expand its
current air pollution State Implemen-
tation Plan (SIP) to further reduce
sources of ozone and carbon
monoxide.
In addition to these delegated
programs, EPA and DNREC have
recently begun a process to protect
and enhance water quality and living
resources within the Delaware Bay
and the State's Inland Bays through
EPA's National Estuary Program.
This program assists states in develop-
ing and carrying out basin-wide
programs intended to conserve these
resources. Initial formal commitments
by EPA and the states for these
programs are being developed at this
time.
Honorable John E. Wilson, III
Secretary
Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental
Control
Secretary Jack Wilson ably repre-
sented his Region III colleagues on the
State/EPA Committee which meets
quarterly to advise the EPA Ad-
ministrator on planning and policy
direction. EPA was also fortunate in
1987-88 to have Phil Retallick,
DNREC's Air and Waste Division
Director, participate in a pilot process
involving a senior state environmental
official in evalutation of EPA's nation-
al operating guidance and cross-
media project.
Another point of note is Delaware's
recently completed Environmental
Legacy Program. This program was
initiated in 1986 by Governor Michael
Castle to develop a long-range plan to
ensure that Delaware's environment
would be protected and enhanced into
the next century. By executive order,
Governor Castle created a steering
committee of 27 individuals from the
public and private sectors to make
recommendations on how best to
produce this report. A total of 122 in-
dividuals from across the State served
on ad hoc committees which produced
the key findings and recommenda-
tions on ways to preserve environmen-
tal quality and educate the State's
citizens on how they need to con-
tribute to the effort. It is, indeed, a uni-
"Managing our natural resources and regulating facilities
which impact the environment are increasingly compli-
cated tasks. In Delaware, we've been able to strike a
balance between growth and maintaining the quality of life
we've come to appreciate. We haven't always seen eye to
eye with EPA officials, but with their continued support and
cooperation, we've been able to develop some of the best
environmental programs of their kind in the Nation. The
relationship between the states and EPA will play a more
important role as we begin to tackle tough issues at the
regional level."
12
-------
DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
The District of Columbia has suc-
ceeded in substantially improving the
water quality of the Potomac River
primarily through operation of the
Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment
Plant - one of the largest and most ad-
vanced treatment plants in the world.
Sewer service has been provided to a
major portion of the Washington
metropolitan area since 1938 with over
a billion dollars spent to expand and
upgrade the facility. The plant now
provides 98% removal of the
biochemical oxygen demand, 98%
removal of total phosphorus and 46%
removal of total nitrogen. The dis-
posal of sewage sludge generated
from the plant is an issue currently
under study.
With achievement of improved
water quality in the Potomac River,
the District is now focusing its atten-
tion on the long-neglected Anacostia
River. The real commitment to clean
up the Anacostia began with Mayor
Barry's participation in the signing of
the multi-state and Federal
Chesapeake Bay Agreement in 1983.
The District, in cooperation with the
Soil Conservation Service, has begun
work on the Watts Branch to reduce
stream bank erosion. Other projects
are planned or under way which will
reduce pollutant and sediment load-
ings to the Anacostia.
The District's Storm Water Manage-
ment Program will also help in the
cleanup of the Anacostia River and
other District waters by minimizing
the transport of pollutant and soil-
laden runoff. This program was the
first completely urban storm water
management program in the country.
Response by the developers has been
very encouraging and compliance with
the regulations promulgated on
January 1,1988 is high. A Storm Water
Management Guidebook was
published to familiarize developers
with required Best Management Prac-
tices for erosion control. A citizens'
brochure, entitled "You Can Improve
Your Natural Environment," was
published to educate the District's
residents on the importance of storm
water management practices for
homeowners.
The District's water quality
programs have been supported in
large part by grants from EPA. The
water quality improvements that have
resulted can be seen in both the
Potomac River and the Chesapeake
Bay with the return of significant num-
pleted in cooperation with the Nation-
al Park Service in Anacostia Park. A
boat ramp is also being constructed.
In addition to improving water
quality, the District has been actively
involved in a number of initiatives to
address other environmental con-
cerns. The District's pending under-
ground storage tank statute contains
provisions to fully regulate the instal-
lation, operation and removal of all
petroleum and hazardous material
storage tanks. An agreement between
the District and EPA includes a
Federal grant of $475,000 to develop a
program to take corrective actions
needed to remedy current problems
with existing leaking underground
storage tanks.
"The District of Columbia, in
partnership with the United States
Environmental Protection Agency,
is working to improve the quality of
our environment for all people now
and for generations to come."
Honorable Donald G. Murray
Director
Department of Consumer and
Regulatory Affairs
bers of game fish, including striped
bass and American shad, to the
District's waters. The District's
fisheries management program be-
came fully operational in 1985 and in-
cludes resource management, re-
search, and educational components.
Fishing clinics are conducted at the
annual Riverfest celebration and a
summertime Aquatic Resource
Education Program has been estab-
lished for children ages 4-16. The
program teaches conservation ethics,
aquatic ecology, biology, fishing tech-
niques and safety, and emphasizes
close-to-home fishing opportunities.
Expansion of the program to the
winter months will be possible when
the Aquatic Education Center is com-
The District of Columbia is the only
jurisdiction east of the Mississippi
River with regulations which require
gasoline stations to install specially
constructed fill nozzles to prevent the
discharge of gasoline vapors that in-
crease the ozone level. Despite the in-
itial opposition from service station
owners, the District has achieved a
compliance rate in excess of 95% and
a reduction in volatile organic com-
pound (VOC) emissions of ap-
proximately two tons per day. The Dis-
trict has a vigorous inspection and en-
forcement program where fines of $50
to $500 are imposed on the spot for
each violation.
13
-------
MARYLAND
7 can't imagine a better
working relationship between
any state and its supporting
region than between
Maryland and EPA Region III.
On all environmental fronts
and at all levels of our two or-
ganizations, we have excel-
lent communication and
cooperation."
Honorable Martin W. Walsh, Jr.
Secretary
Maryland Department of the
Environment
After his election as Governor of
Maryland, one of the first acts of Wil-
liam D. Schaefer was to create the
Department of the Environment to
centralize the management and enfor-
cement of environmental laws. Martin
W. Walsh, Jr., the former District En-
gineer for the Baltimore District of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, was
selected to be the first secretary of the
new department in July 1987.
There are four major program ad-
ministrations in the new department:
Air Management Administration,
Water Management Administration,
Hazardous and Solid Waste Manage-
ment Administration, and Storm
Water Management Administration.
There are two major program support
units: the Toxics Environmental
Science and Health Group, and the
Planning, Inspection and Compliance
Program. The Department is also
responsible for programs controlling
radiation, nuclear, and noise pollu-
tion, and the resource protection
program for soil erosion and sediment
control.
The Maryland Department of the
Environment (MDE) is responsible
for all major environmental programs
in the State. Its stated purpose is to
"protect and restore Maryland's en-
vironment by working to reduce the
uncontrolled release or disposal of
toxic, hazardous, or undesirable sub-
stances or emissions."
The dominant natural resource and
environmental concern in Maryland is
the Chesapeake Bay and its
tributaries. The Bay is at the center of
Maryland geographically, as well as
politically and economicly. It goes
without saying that the Bay's environ-
mental rehabilitation is a major focus
of the Department of the Environ-
ment. Although each of the MDE
programs has its own performance
goals, their efficacy is often measured
against how the particular problem
will impact upon the Chesapeake
Bay's water quality, flora or fauna.
EPA has demonstrated its involve-
ment and commitment to this ecosys-
tem through the creation of the
Chesapeake Bay Program Office in
Annapolis. This office is dedicated to
assisting Maryland and the other
states in the Bay's watershed with im-
plementation of the 1987 Bay Agree-
ment.
General areas where EPA and the
Department of the Environment are
working toward mutual solutions in-
clude:
Nutrient reduction from waste
water facilities (including ad-
vanced treatment require-
ments)
State revolving loan fund for
municipal waste water facilities
Sludge management
Modification of Maryland's
State Implementation Plan
(SIP) for Ozone
Community Right-To-Know
reporting and emergency
preparedness
Superfund waste site cleanup
Waste minimization efforts
Radon identification and
mitigation.
In addition to these areas, EPA and
Maryland are discussing innovative
programs in environmental education
both in the area of the Chesapeake
Bay and with general environmental
curricula for schools.
It should also be noted that EPA and
the MDE have other partners in
Maryland for achieving environmen-
tal goals. Included among the or-
ganizations are the Maryland Depart-
ments of Agriculture, Natural Resour-
ces, Health and Mental Hygiene, and
the Critical Areas Commission, as well
as the county health departments
which help provide a local contact for
Maryland's citizens.
In mid-1988, Secretary Walsh suc-
ceeded Delaware Secretary Jack Wil-
son as Region Ill's representative on
the State/EPA Committee which
meets quarterly to advise the EPA Ad-
ministrator on planning and policy
direction.
14
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
Pennsylvania is Region Ill's leading
state not only in physical size, but also
in the size of the environmental chal-
lenges facing its Department of En-
vironmental Resources (DER). Penn-
sylvania has more wastewater dis-
chargers, more community drinking
water supplies, and more hazardous
waste sites than any other Region III
state. Pennsylvania has a strong
agricultural economy much of it lo-
cated in the Chesapeake Bay drainage
area. Mining and heavy industry have
played a major role in the State's
economic development. Penn-
sylvania's environmental success has
resulted, in part, from the passage of
strong environmental laws, some of
which have served as models for the
rest of the Nation. This has been a ban-
ner year for environmental legislation
in Pennsylvania, with the passage of
the following:
Superfund Law
Governor Casey signed Penn-
sylvania's Superfund law in October
1988. The law establishes a State-
operated and State-funded program
to evaluate and clean up hazardous
waste sites that are not addressed by
the Federal Superfund program.
Solid Waste Disposal/Recycling Law
This legislation imposes mandatory
recycling of solid waste for all com-
munities of more than 10,000 people
by 1990; smaller communities must
comply by 1991. It also requires the
counties to control of all waste within
their borders and establishes strict
siting criteria for new waste disposal
facilities.
PENNVEST Water Systems Aid
This law provides low interest loans
and occasional grants to smaller com-
munities to improve water and sewer
systems. Over the next 25 years, the
"The pressing environmental needs confronting Pennsylvania
have required effective action on the part of both EPA and DER.
Only through a Federal and State partnership can we be fully
successful discharging our responsibilities to safeguard public
health and safety."
State projects $2.5 billion could ul-
timately be made available for these
projects.
Medical Wastes
A law signed in July 1988 requires
medical waste transporters to be
licensed and all waste shipments
manifested.
Radon Certification Program
Pennsylvania adopted a new law es-
tablishing a radon certification
program for all persons who test and
repair buildings for radon contamina-
tion. The regulations address fees,
qualifications including minimum ex-
perience requirements, proficiency
testing, certification measures, and
truth in advertising.
Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Disposal Law
This act mandates the licensing and
construction of a plant to handle
radioactive waste from four states.
This facility is to be completed by 1994
and prescribes strong State control
over the site selection, construction,
and its regulation.
Scenic Rivers
An act was passed designating addi-
tional sections of the Schuylkill River
as a scenic river this past spring. Two
other rivers are also in the process of
being designated. There are now 301
miles of streams in the State's scenic
river system.
The General Assembly also enacted
a bill that would increase the number
of hearing officers on the Environ-
mental Hearing Board. The passage of
this bill will decrease the backlog of
600 appeals and result in more timely
Honorable Arthur A. Davis
Secretary
Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Resources
hearings on appeals, primarily con-
cerning wastewater discharge per-
mits. Also pending before the General
Assembly is a bill to regulate bclow-
and above-ground petroleum storage
tanks.
In view of the many legislative man-
dates facing Pennsylvania's environ-
mental program managers, the
Department of Environmental
Resources, in cooperation with EPA,
is developing a process that will in-
tegrate health risk information and the
potential for risk reduction into the
State's planning process for setting
management priorities. These en-
vironmental priorities will help guide
the allocations of program resources
and enhance the accountability of
these resources to ensure that those
problems posing the greatest threat to
the State's citizens and environment
receive appropriate attention.
75
-------
VIRGINIA
Honorable John W. Daniel, II
Secretary
Virginia Secretariat of Natural
Resources
"The continued cooperation
shown by EPA has been an
important component in our
efforts to protect and preserve
Virginia's natural resources.
Much of the success that we
have had, and particularly
with regard to the recent
multi-jurisdictional agree-
ment to clean up the
Chesapeake Bay, has been
accomplished with EPA's
support and participation."
In 1986, the General Assembly es-
tablished a Secretariat of Natural
Resources. For the first time,
Virginia's environment was repre-
sented by a single voice within the
Governor's cabinet. Within this
Secretariat, a Department of Waste
Management was created to carry out
the many new solid and hazardous
waste laws passed within this General
Assembly. The advisory role of the
Council on the Environment was also
expanded to address long-term en-
vironmental issues which do not clear-
ly fall within the purview of the six
other resource agencies. A fine ex-
ample of the leadership of the
Secretariat of Natural Resources is
the efforts of Virginia to clean up the
Chesapeake Bay and to commit itself
to other environmental projects.
Chesapeake Bay
The Chesapeake Bay is one of the
finest natural resources in North
America. In 1983, the Commonwealth
of Virginia joined with EPA, the
States of Maryland and Pennsylvania
and the District of Columbia to estab-
lish goals and objectives to improve
and protect the Bay. These goals were
outlined in the first Chesapeake Bay
Agreement. In 1986, EPA Region III
transferred the Chairmanship of the
Chesapeake Bay Executive Council to
Gerald Baliles, Governor of Virginia.
In 1987, Governor Baliles developed,
along with his colleagues in the three
other Bay states, the Second
Chesapeake Bay Agreement. The new
agreement has many ambitious com-
mitments, including a 40% reduction
of nutrients being discharged into the
Bay.
Revolving Loan Fund
The Commonwealth of Virginia was
one of the first states to have an ap-
proved State Revolving Fund
Capitalization Grant. The revolving
loan fund established by the General
Assembly in 1984 is dedicated solely to
wastewater treatment improvement at
publicly owned facilities. Upcoming
water quality priorities in the State in-
clude meeting the requirements of the
National Municipal Policy, develop-
ing new water quality standards,
reducing toxic discharges, and reduc-
ing nutrient discharges.
Wetlands/Water Resource
Symposium
Over the past 50 years, the Nation
has lost valuable wetlands. Much of
these wetland losses are attributed to
fill material being placed in low-lying
areas so that development can occur.
Other significant wetland losses are
caused by flooding for private and
public drinking water impoundments.
EPA, the U.S. Army Corps of En-
gineers, and the Commonwealth of
Virginia recognized that many local
communities were planning for the fu-
ture population demand and propos-
ing dams along streams thus inundat-
ing vast acres of wetlands. On June 20,
1988, a joint water resource sym-
posium was hosted in an attempt to in-
volve local government and the
General Assembly to balance the
water supply needs against environ-
mental impacts. The 150 participants
in the conference evaluated this
balance and guidance is expected to
emerge from the General Assembly
on this important resource manage-
ment issue.
Comprehensive Data Management
During 1987, Region III began a pilot
effort with the Commonwealth of Vir-
ginia to develop a Comprehensive
Data Management Plan. The intent of
their joint planning effort is to address
the State's data management activities
to improve information system com-
patibilities between the two agencies.
After a one-year pilot effort, the roles
and responsibilities of our agencies
have been refined to a full-scale
operational mode.
16
-------
WEST VIRGINIA
West Virginia is regulated by a num-
ber of environmental resource agen-
cies. Its environmental problems are
a challenge to the several State and
Federal partnerships that have grown
in recent years. Since the late 1970s,
West Virginia has been in the
forefront in developing an annual ex-
ecutive agreement with EPA to iden-
tify the major environmental problems
in the State and to assign implementa-
tion responsibilities among EPA and
the State agencies.
West Virginia is characterized by a
vast reserve of energy resources, a
mountainous topography, and limited
commercial and industrial properties
usually found in the river valleys. This
combination of physical and economic
attributes has made compliance with
environmental laws difficult for the
regulated community and enforce-
ment of these laws equally challeng-
ing for the regulatory agencies. Local
government agencies have shared in
these compliance challenges in areas
such as air toxics, hazardous material
spills, power and steel facility air emis-
sions, municipal sewage treatment
plant operation, and coal mine waste-
water discharge control.
As a group, West Virginia's environ-
mental regulatory agencies have
responded admirably to many of these
challenges in the past year. The
Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) has begun a comprehensive
implementation of a major statewide
litter control law. Significant progress
has also been made in the pending
transfer of energy-related wastewater
discharge permitting from DNR to the
Department of Energy. EPA Region
III has been working with the Depart-
ments of Natural Resources and
Health to improve the State's environ-
mental laboratories. The Health
"The role of the environmental regulator has be-
come more complex. Not only must pollution be
controlled at the discharge point, but new and
better ways must be found to reduce the amount
of waste generated."
Honorable Ronald R. Potesta
Director
Department of Natural Resources
"EPA's support has aided our Environmental
Health program to serve our citizens more effec-
tively."
Honorable David K. Heydinger, M.D.
Director
Department of Health
"As the State energy regulatory agency, we will
continue to support the concept of primacy and
the direction of the current administration for
State control and cooperative efforts to reduce
duplication in governmental regulations and en-
forcement."
Honorable Kenneth R. Faerber
Commissioner
Department of Energy
"After 40 years of effort, I feel safe swimming in
and eating the fish from the Kanawha River
again."
Honorable Gus R. Douglass
Commissioner
Department of Agriculture
Department, with EPA's assistance,
continues to develop a risk assessment
protocol and is beginning asbestos,
radon, and wellhead protection
programs.
Problems such as sludge manage-
ment and pesticide management con-
tinue to receive significant attention
from the Department of Agriculture.
Voluntary industry reductions of toxic
air emissions worked out by the Air
Pollution Control Commission, in-
dustry and the National Institute for
Chemical Studies may prove to be a
model for the Nation.
Carl Beard, a
true pioneer in
the air pollution
control field,
has announc-
ed his retire-
ment at the end
of 1988. Carl's
shoes will be
| hard to fill.
Honorable Carl G. Beard, II
Executive Director
Air Pollution Control
Commission
17
-------
Communicating
With the Public
"EPA is committed to a
strong information outreach
program to ensure public
knowledge and involvement
in environmental decisions
that affect the quality of drink-
ing water, the air we breathe
and the ground beneath our
feet."
Janet Vmiski
Director
Office of Public Affairs
The environmental news story of the
year occurred in January 1988, when a
four-million-gallon tank of oil col-
lapsed sending over 500,000 gallons of
oil into the Monongahela River near
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Region Ill's
Office of Public Affairs handled
hundreds of inquiries concerning the
spill, its impact on drinking water sup-
plies from southwest Pennsylvania to
Kentucky, and Agency regulations.
For ten straight days, a public affairs
representative provided information
through daily press conferences and
responded to calls from dawn until
midnight.
In addition to on-scene work at this
site and many others, the Office of
Public Affairs writes news releases
and other materials to inform the
public of Region III activities. Over
half of the 297 news releases issued in
the past year concerned specific en-
forcement actions taken by EPA to
protect the environment. This year,
news releases on all penalties against
facilities with PCB violations helped
increase industry attention to EPA's
concerns about PCB handling.
Public Affairs staff also worked on
several consumer information
programs. Some of these included
developing public service an-
nouncements on radon in the home,
distributing TV spots on lead in drink-
ing water, and holding a press con-
ference on the removal of a common-
ly used termiticide from the market.
This year, education efforts began on
the Emergency Plan-
ning and Community
Right to Know Law, a
law which makes it
easier for the public to
learn about chemicals
in their communities.
Thousands of calls
come to Region III
from the news media
and the public. Many of the calls are
for more information on EPA ac-
tivities but some calls are the Agency's
first alert to a potential environmental
problem or community concern.
Public Affairs has a toll-free line to
enable people from across the Region
to call in information, to request
brochures and to ask questions. The
number is 1-800-438-2474
Over 2,000 written requests for EPA
documents were sent to Region III
over the past year. Under the
Freedom of Information Act, the
public affairs staff must ensure that
EPA responds within ten working
days. The staff also responds to many
informal letters from the public.
Public Information
Coordination
Many individuals outside EPA share
in providing information to the public
on environmental issues elected of-
ficials, news media, state environmen-
tal agencies, local governments, en-
vironmental groups, industries, and
others. Each year EPA develops an
External Affairs Plan to ensure that
we provide and exchange information
with these groups. This networking in-
creases the number of people who can
help inform the public about environ-
mental issues and involves a wide
variety of people in the discussions on
solutions to pollution problems.
18
-------
During the past year, this plan has
facilitated the coordination of efforts
to inform the public about the
progress achieved under the
Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the
problem of naturally occurring radon
in homes, the danger of lead in drink-
ing water, the value of wetlands, and
the efforts to clean up Superfund sites.
In all instances, the communication
principles guiding the coordination
activities in the External Affairs Plan
are honesty, openness to suggestions,
courtesy, and professionalism.
Superfund Community
Outreach
Region [II Community Relations
Coordinators arranged over 60 meet-
ings in the past year to inform the
public about Superfund sites in their
communities. Additional efforts in-
cluded about 100 news releases,
hundreds of door-to-door visits to
homes closest to the sites, thousands
of phone calls and many briefings for
local officials. The purpose is to in-
form the public so that they can have
input into cleanup decisions. The
Regional Administrator personally
visited about 20 sites.
A major challenge in 1988 has been
ensuring that the public has an equal
opportunity to become involved in
decisions at sites where the respon-
sible parties are funding Superfund
Site cleanups rather than EPA. Public
Affairs representatives have met with
EPA enfo rcement personnel as well as
company representatives to discuss
legal public participation require-
ments and to sensitize them to the
public's concerns at specific sites.
Efforts also began this year to inform
local citizen groups about grants avail-
able to them under Superfund for
hiring independent experts.
Communicating With Our Youth
In Region III, providing informa-
tion to the public is regarded as part
of everyone's job. The public wants
and needs to
know what
EPA is
doing to
protect the
en viron-
m e n t .
Region 1II is
especially
pleased with
the interest
and eti'
thusiasm
shown by students. During the past
year, activities continued with the
Region's adopted school
Abraham Lincoln High School, the
Philadelphia magnet school for en-
vironmental and horticultural
programs. Region III also sent
Presidential Youth Award Certifi-
cates to approximately 875
students throughout the
Region who completed en-
vironmental projects. The
Region HI winner of the
National Youth Awards
Competition was Debbie
Combs, 10, of Ceres
Elementary School in
Muefield, WV, Shegaveher
presentation entitled "Four-
Foot-ffigh Private Eye" to
over 25 civic groups, or-
ganizations and businesses. The
presentation covered environmental
problems such as Umr and water
pollution.
The Region
III Chapter of
Women In
Science and
Engineering
{WISE} held
a poem and
poster contest
for elementary
school
children in the
five-county area surrounding
Philadelphia. Approximately 200
entries were received. Winners were
selected for each grade and certifi-
cates were awarded at a ceremony
held at the Academy of Natural
Sciences Museum in Philadelphia.
19
-------
OUR PROGRESS
Is the quality of our environment im-
proving? Are the existing pollution
control programs protecting our
resources and our quality of life? Are
the most serious environmental
problems receiving appropriate atten-
tion? These are questions we at EPA
Region III struggle to answer daily.
We are confident that we have made
progress in protecting our environ-
ment. Billions of dollars have been
spent constructing wastewater treat-
ment facilities to control the quantity
and quality of industrial and municipal
effluents entering our streams. Mil-
lions of automobiles are inspected an-
nually reducing the emissions of carb-
on monoxide and volatile organic
compounds into the air. Thousands of
hazardous wastes sites have been as-
sessed to identify those posing the
greatest public threat. Hundreds of
these sites are undergoing cleanup ac-
tion. These are but a few of the pollu-
tion control efforts that have made a
difference in the quality of the en-
vironment in Region III.
Even with this progress, however, the
answer to the question Is the quality
of our environment improving? --
remains elusive. Water and air quality
monitoring results often show
progress being made on one front as
new, perplexing problems emerge on
another. We have significantly
reduced the ambient lead concentra-
tion in the air, but ozone levels have in-
creased. We regulate seven hazardous
air pollutants, but there are thousands
of unregulated chemicals on the
market with potential for release into
the atmosphere. We have reduced the
levels of biochemical oxygen demand,
nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspended
solids entering our streams from
municipal and industiral wastewater
discharges, but contributions from
nonpoint sources (e.g. agricultural,
mining, and urban runoff) mask many
point source control efforts. We issue
permits to those generating,
transporting, storing, disposing of or
incinerating hazardous wastes to en-
sure a safer environment, but we are
faced with many health risks from un-
safe hazardous waste disposal prac-
tices of the past.
Often the challenges of the future
have had a tendency to overshadow
our progress. Both the challenges and
the progress are important to recog-
nize. Many health threats of the past
challenged people then in the same
way today's problems challenge us.
Air pollution disasters and
widespread outbreaks of water-borne
disease presented life-threatening
problems problems which today
have largely been solved. These suc-
cessful solutions are important to
remember as we face future challen-
ges. With continued support from the
public and our Federal, state, and
local environmental partners, we at
EPA R egion III are confident that our
current progress will be the founda-
tion for future success.
20
-------
EPA REGION m ENVIRONMENTAL SUCCESSES
SAFE DRINKING WATER - Of the almost 23 million people in EPA Region III served
by community public water supplies, 99.2% are drinking water that meets the requirements
of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
AIR QUALITY IMPROVED - Inspection and maintenance programs operating in urban
areas throughout Region III have been responsible for a 34% decrease in carbon monoxide
emissions, and a 35% decrease in volatile organic compound emissions from motor
vehicles since 1977. Ambient lead concentrations have decreased 87% during this same
period as a result of using unleaded gasoline.
HAZARDOUS WASTE CLEANUP SUCCESS - To date, proper treatment or disposal
of hazardous substances in Region III has removed public health threats associated with:
53,201 tons of contaminated soils and sludges
1,404,660 gallons of hazardous substances
16,676 full 55-gallon drums of hazardous substances
3,866 gas cylinders.
In addition, 722,388 cubic yards of contaminated material has been stabilized on site.
CLEANUP FIRST- The Taylor Borough Site in Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania was
the first hazardous waste site in the Nation where cleanup was totally completed by the
responsible parties.
RADON SUCCESS - An extensive radon program has been developed in Region III. A
home-testing database is used to identify high-risk areas; and an extensive risk communica-
tion effort has been made to inform the public of the problem. The Maryland and Pennsyl-
vaniaprograms developed in cooperation with Region III are among the best in the Nation.
SUPERFUND ENFORCEMENT SUCCESS - Region Ill's Superfund enforcement
program is among the most successful in the Nation and has attained national recognition
for the number and quality of its settlements. More than $200 million of Superfund money
has been conserved or recovered through settlements with responsible parties.
CONSTRUCTION GRANT PROGRAM FIRST- In June 1988, Virginia became one of
the first states to be awarded a grant from EPA to capitalize a loan program for the con-
struction of wastewater treatment works.
NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM FIRST- In September 1988, Delaware was awarded
the Nation's first nonpoint source grant from EPA to implement four projects demonstrat-
ing control techniques.
WATER QUALITY IMPROVED - More than 8,000 wastewater treatment projects have
been funded in Region III since 1972 at a cost of almost $6 billion. Recreational activities
includingfishing, boating, and swimming are enjoyed on many streams and rivers previously
unsuitable for these uses.
21
-------
Enforcement Profile
"In order for environmental statutes and regulations to have their intended
effect, they must be complied with by a wide range of industries and in-
dividuals. In many instances, regulated entities are law-abiding. The goal of
enforcement is to assure that all others also comply. To pursue this goal, EPA
and the Department of Justice bring civil or criminal cases designed to re-
quire specific companies or individuals to pay penalties or even to serve
prison terms for their failure to comply voluntarily. The intended message is
that compliance pays - a message EPA hopes will spread throughout the
regulated community. EPA tries to
prosecute its filed cases vigorously, to
bring cases under all laws and against
all types of violators, to use penalty
policies designed to offset any
economic benefits gained from viola-
tions, and to publicize enforcement ac-
tivities. The goal of these enforcement
actions is widespread, rapid, full volun-
tary compliance with environmental
laws."
Marcia E. Mulkey
Office of Regional Counsel
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS
NUMBER
525
500
400
300
200
100
0
1984 1985 1986 1887 1938
RFRA
(41)
SOWA (183)*
CWA
RCHA
1988
* Includes UIC
CIVIL ACTIONS
48
NUMBER OF REFERRAL
SO
40
30
20
10
0
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
CWA
(15)
1988
EPA's authority to protect the en-
vironment is rooted in many separate
pieces of legislation -- the Clean Air
Act (CAA); the Clean Water Act
(CWA); the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA); the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA); the Comprehensive En-
vironmental Response, Compensa-
tion, and Liability Act (CERCLA);
the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA); and the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act (RCRA).
These laws and their amendments dic-
tate the level of environmental protec-
tion to be achieved and provide EPA
with specific enforcement authorities
to ensure these levels are met. EPA
Region III is committed to an aggres-
sive enforcement program designed to
bring violators into compliance
through timely and appropritate en-
forcement actions. Although the num-
ber of enforcement actions and penal-
ties collected is the primary indicator
of the success of the enforcement
program, the Region is also focusing
on actions that effectively reduce
health risks and address emerging en-
vironmental concerns.
Administrative Actions
Because each environmental law
provides EPA with different enforce-
ment authorities, the complexity of the
overall enforcement program is ever
increasing. In general, enforcement
actions can be divided into two
categories - administrative and judi-
cial. Administrative actions can be is-
sued directly from EPA to the violator
while judicial actions must be referred
to the Department of Justice and filed
in court. The types of administrative
actions routinely taken by EPA in-
clude notices of violation or non-com-
pliance, administrative orders, and
administrative complaints. A notice
of violation or non-compliance, as the
name implies, puts the violator on
notice that EPA is aware of the viola-
tion and planning to take enforcement
action. An administrative order goes
22
-------
one step further by actually requiring
the violator to take a specific action to
correct the problem. In some cases,
EPA also has the authority to issue ad-
ministrative complaints which can
result in civil penalties for violations
and, in the case of RCRA, may also
result in injunctive relief.
Judicial Actions
Two types of judicial actions can be
referred to the Department of Justice
-- civil and criminal. Under the civil
referral process, a complaint seeking
corrective action and penalties is filed
in court. Usually a settlement is then
negotiated with the violator and the
agreed upon terms are formalized in a
final consent decree. This is a legal
document binding the violator to the
terms specified and will ordinarily set
forth an expeditious schedule for com-
pliance with the applicable laws and
stipulate penalties to assure the
schedule is met. Consent decrees also
usually set a settlement penalty
amount for the violations involved. If
a case cannot be settled, it is litigated
on issues involving compliance and/or
penalties.
In instances where a violator has
knowingly and willfully disregarded an
environmental law, the criminal refer-
ral process is initiated. Because of the
strong stigma attached to criminal
prosecution and the potential for im-
prisonment, criminal sanctions are
EPA's strongest enforcement tool.
The criminal action begins with an in-
itial allegation arising from any source
including the EPA program office, a
citizen complaint, a referral from
another agency or from an investiga-
tion by an EPA criminal investigator.
If a preliminary evaluation of the al-
legation indicates that further action is
warranted, a formal investigation is in-
itiated by EPA's Office of Criminal In-
vestigation. When fact gathering ac-
tivities including surveillance, search
warrants, and witness interviews
generate enough evidence for
prosecution, the case is referred to the
Department of Justice and a grand
jury indictment is sought. Violators in-
dicted by the grand jury can enter into
plea negotiation or go to trial. Senten-
ces usually include fines and/or im-
prisonment.
The success of EPA Region Ill's en-
forcement program is a result of
cooperation among the program of-
fices, the Office of Regional Counsel,
and the Office of Criminal Investiga-
tions as well as the Department of Jus-
tice and the State enforcement
counterparts. Each plays a key role in
a complex process that challenges
everyone involved.
Region III Criminal Investigations
PUBLICKER CASE: On Novembers, 1987, a Federal grand jury indict-
ment charged Cuyahoga Wrecking Corporation, Overland Corporation,
Samuel Runfola, Virgil Cummings, and Ernest Ray Martin with conspiracy,
illegal transportation of hazardous wastes, and illegal storage and disposal
of hazardous wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. A
criminal felony information against Publicker Industries, Inc. of Greenwich,
CTand the company's agreement to enter a guilty plea were also filed simul-
taneously.
After pleading guilty, the Publicker Corp. was fined $50,000; the Overland
Corporation of Pennsylvania was fined $100,000; the Cuyahoga Wrecking
Corporation of America was fined $100,000; Ernest Martin was sentenced to
three years probation, a $3,000 fine, and 100 hours of community service;
and Samuel Runfola was sentenced to five years in prison - total time
suspended, 3 years probation, a $5,000fine and 250 hours of community ser-
vice. Virgil Cummings was sentenced to 4years in prison with all but 60 days
suspended, 4 years probation, and a $4,000 fine after being found guilty of
four counts in a jury trial.
*********
ASHLAND OIL CASE: On September 15, 1988, a Federal grand jury
returned an indictment charging Ashland Oil, Inc. with violating Federal en-
vironmental laws in the collapse last January of an Ashland storage tank that
spilled an excess of 500,000 gallons of oil into the Monongahela River near
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Ashland Oil was charged with two misdemeanor
counts each carrying a maximum penalty of $200,000 or double the monetary
loss suffered as a result of criminal conduct. Tliese counts were the most strin-
gent that could be brought under Federal criminal laws. Tfie spill is said to
have affected drinking water supplies and plant and animal life for at least
100 miles downstream. Ttie investigation is continuing and the government
will determine if Ashland Oil employees or officials may have been respon-
sible for violations of the law.
In a separate civil action in July, the Justice Department filed a proposed
consent decree requiringAshland Oil to complete the cleanup of the spill and
to reimburse the government $680,000 for emergency response work by
Federal agencies. Ashland agreed to the decree's terms.
23
-------
[ Air Quality*]
The Changing Air
Challenge
It is easy to lose sight of the job that
must still be done in controlling air
pollution. After all, we have cleaned
up the visible smoke stack problems of
the 1970's that polluted the air around
the industrialized areas, and the air
appears cleaner than it has for years.
Today's challenge involves cleaning
the air of what we often cannot see,
e.g., air toxics. We must begin to ad-
dress emerging air pollution issues in-
cluding the long-range transport of
pollutants, and the daily impact of mil-
lions of people doing simple activities
such as using household cleaners or
driving their cars. These challenges
will require a cooperative effort by in-
... the air appears cleaner
than it has for years.
Today's challenge
involves cleaning the air
of what we often cannot
see...
dustry, civic leaders, local officials and
planners, control agencies, as well as
the general population.
The answers will not be easy. We
must be willing to pay more for the
goods produced by the chemical and
manufacturing industry, many of
which we take for granted in our cur-
rent lifestyle. We need to better in-
tegrate our environmental programs
POPULATION EXPOSURE TO UNSAFE LEVELS
OF AIR POLLUTANTS IN REGION
POPULATION IN MILLIONS
OZONE CARBON PABTIC- SULFUR LEAD
MONOXIDE ULATES DIOXIDE
to ensure that the cleanup of one en-
vironmental media such as air or water
does not adversely affect another. The
great American pastime of driving our
cars everywhere without considera-
tion for its effect on the environment
will have to be reevaluated. Each com-
munity must be concerned not only
with the local effects of its air pollution
control efforts, but also with the im-
pact of these actions on nearby and
even distant communities located
downwind. The academic community,
industry, and the government must
continue to look for new solutions to
reduce the harmful by-products as-
sociated with producing goods. Im-
provements must be made in the com-
munication and understanding be-
tween control officials, elected offi-
cials, regulated industries, and the
citizens of each community.
Global warming, the hole in the
ozone layer over the Antarctic, the
deposition of toxic pollutants in
remote areas, and the acidification of
lakes are indicators of the impact of
man's activities on the delicate
balance in the natural environment.
We must be willing to work together to
improve our environment if we are to
leave the legacy of a healthy world for
our children and their children.
TJiomasJ. Maslany
Director
Air Management Division
\
24
-------
PEOPLE MAKE A PROGRAM WORK
Laws, money to purchase equipment, and a satisfactory
working environment are important to a program, but
people are what make it work. The Clean Air Act is con-
sidered one of the mast chaltengingpieces of environmen-
tal legislation, both technically and legally. But, the people
in the air and radiation programs are up to the challenge.
Many of them have been with the program since the pas-
sage of the major change in the Clean Air Act in the early
1970's. Others have joined more recently, often right after
college. The common thread between these engineers,
scientists, and others is their dedication to the under-
standing and control of air pollution. This dedication is
reflected in the attitude and enthusiasm that the people of
the program bring to their everyday performance.
Technology is ever-changing, but we
can only move forward by the skill of
the individual.
Teamwork and a clear understanding
of the issues are necessary for a
sound solution.
The Pollution Transport
Phenomenon
As our understanding of air pollu-
tion has changed over the years, we
have come to realize that air pollution
affects not only the local population
around a given source, but that certain
pollutants can be transported
hundreds of miles to affect other
cities, or even wilderness areas. In
1987, the entire Northeast was ex-
posed to a graphic example of atmos-
pheric transport, as smoke from large
forest fires in Kentucky and West Vir-
ginia blanketed cities to the north as
far away as Maine.
Ozone and air toxics, as well as sul-
fur dioxide and nitrogen oxides in the
form of acid rain, are examples of pol-
lutants which can be transported over
long distances. Such transport
dramatically increases the number of
people exposed to a given pollutant,
and increases the difficulty associated
with solving the problem as well. Con-
trol strategies must consider emis-
sions generated hundreds of miles
away across political boundaries,
where the state agency no longer has
jurisdiction. The transportation
phenomenon therefore demands that
we work closely with air agencies and
state legislatures throughout the
Northeast as we move to improve air
quality in the future.
25
-------
Ozone: An Intractable
Problem ?
Although great strides have been
made toward cleaning our air, a
serious problem has remained --
ozone, the principal component of
smog. This colorless, odorless gas af-
fects our lungs and immune systems,
and inflicts damage on crops, forests,
and building materials. Ozone forms
when volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) react in the presence of sun-
light. As temperatures increase in the
summer, ozone formation is triggered.
This process was demonstrated
dramatically during the summer of
1988 by the persistently high ozone
levels. Even historically clean areas in
Region III measured high ozone levels
during this period.
Former air pollution control efforts centered on large industry.
The pollutants which form ozone are
emitted from many small sources,
such as automobiles, dry cleaners, and
gas stations. The challenge facing
EPA and state agencies today is find-
ing ways to control emissions from
these small sources without complete-
ly disrupting the lifestyle we now
enjoy.
State inspection and maintenance
programs for automobiles currently
operating in most urban areas of the
Region help control emissions of pol-
lutants which lead to ozone formation.
Pennsylvania is adopting regulations
to control the volatility of gasoline
which will, in turn, reduce emissions
from automobiles, gas stations, and
oil refineries. EPA has asked the
states to review and modify their
regulations governing pollutants lead-
ing to ozone for-
mation. The goal
is to eliminate
deficiencies and
bring all areas
under the same
level of control.
EPA is looking at
the effectiveness
of the state
regulations in an
effort to improve
the existing
programs. While
current initia-
tives will go a
GOOD vs BAD
OZONE
Ozone is considered a harmful
pollutant when manmade emis-
sions cause /wg& concentrations
of the compound to occur near
the surface of the earth. Ozone,
however, also occurs naturally
in the stratosphere, about 30
miles above the earth's surface.
This ozone layer screens out
harmful ultra-violet (UV) radia-
tion from the sun. A class of
chemical compounds, called
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs),
that were developed in the 1930s
and widely used in industry, rise
up to the stratosphere and
deplete the ozone layer, allowing
increased UV to reach the
earth's surface. UV radiation
causes cancer and cataracts in
humans, and damages crops
and marine life. Unfortunately,
manmade ozone at the earth's
surface cannot rise up and
replace the depleted stratos-
pheric ozone, due to the short
lifetime of ozone molecules.
EPA has therefore acted to
protect the ozone layer by reduc-
ing CFC emissions, even as we
struggle to reduce ground-level
ozone.
long way toward reducing ozone
levels, they will not solve the problem
entirely. The options we have for fur-
ther reducing ozone will affect in-
dividuals as well as industry, so we
must all be willing to make some per-
sonal sacrifices to clean up our air.
Today, ozone is our most persistent air pollution problem caused
largely by petroleum refineries, automobiles, and other small
26
-------
RADON
Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas
which poses a health threat in a significant
number of homes across the country. The Of-
fice of the U.S. Surgeon General recently issued
a health advisory stating that indoor radon is
second only to cigarette
smoking as a leading cause
of cancer. Due to the geology
of Region III, radon is found
heremoreoften andin higher
levels than in most of the
United States. For this
reason, Region III has ag-
gressively pursued risk com-
munication efforts to inform
the public about testing and
mitigation measures. Region
HI efforts have led to the
development of comprehen-
sive profiles detailing the ex-
tent of the radon problem in
each of the Region HI states.
Their analysis has included
compilation of measured
house data, evaluations of
uranium deposits, water
data, and geology. The
results from these analyses are then used to help
develop and direct state programs. The
Maryland and Pennsylvania programs
demonstrate the efforts of state governments
and Region III to produce radon programs that
are among the best in the Nation. Region III is
also an active participant at the national level.
The study of radon in schools began in Fair-
fax, Virginia, in 1988; Maryland, Virginia, and
Pennsylvania are active mem-
bers in the House Evaluation
Program. By the end of 1990,
Pennsylvania will have
finished its participation in a
second national survey in
which testing is made avail-
able to homeowners on a
J934 voluntary basis. West Virginia
is currently negotiating condi-
tions for participation in the
survey.
Homes located in areas
where high levels of radon
have been found should be
tested. An informed
homeowner will notonfy have
a screeningtest conducted, but
understands that if an elevated
level of radon is found in the
dwelling, corrective action
should not be taken until a more detailed
evaluation is completed. The follow-up testing
willnotonfy determine whetherthe radonposes
an unacceptable health risk, but will also aid in
determining which corrective actions are neces-
sary.
1988
Through our com-
munication efforts,
public awareness of
radon has extended
from the Reading Prong
area of Pennsylvania to
the rest of Region III.
27
-------
Air Toxics
Historically, EPA has been con-
cerned primarily with air pollutants
such as ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides, carbon monoxide, lead and
particulate matter. In the past twenty
years, technological advances have in-
troduced thousands of new chemicals
to the market which have potential for
release to the atmosphere during
processing. Many of these chemicals
are toxic to humans, causing cancer or
other short and long-term effects.
...technological advances
have introduced
thousands of new
chemicals to the market
which have potential for
release to the
atmosphere...
EPA Region Ill's Air Management
Division has worked with the regional
states and local agencies to address
the serious and expanding air toxics
issue. Studies were conducted in
Philadelphia and Baltimore on the
causes, impacts, and alternative solu-
tions to toxic problems present in all
media. Philadelphia was among the
first cities in the country to adopt
regulations for toxic air pollutants.
Maryland and Virginia are currently
implementing adopted regulations.
Maryland's regulations cover a wide
range of pollutants and provide for a
state-of-the-art health risk assessment
for each pollutant.
EPA Region III is currently provid-
ing support to regional air agencies on
identification of potentially high risk
sources of air toxics through monitor-
ing, analysis, and management of data,
particularly from urban areas.
Hazardous Air Pollutant
Program
Section 112 of the Clean Air Act re-
quires EPA to regulate hazardous air
pollutants by promulgating National
Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAPs).
NESHAPs have been promulgated
for arsenic, asbestos, benzene, beryl-
lium, mercury, radionuclides, and
vinyl chloride. Because of the toxic,
hazardous, or carcinogenic nature of
these air contaminants, EPA has given
NESHAPs implementation and en-
forcement one of the highest air
program priorities.
Currently, the Region has 97 active
air pollution sources regulated under
NESHAPs. Region Ill's air enforce-
ment program issues waivers of com-
pliance, alternate monitoring re-
quests, and approvals to construct
new sources, in addition to its ad-
ministrative and civil enforcement ac-
tivity. Since 1984, EPA Region III has
referred 22 civil cases to the Depart-
ment of Justice and issued 37 ad-
ministrative orders for violations of
the NESHAPs.
Some of the Region's enforcement
activities include:
filingfourofthesixcivilsuitsfor
benzene violations
settling the Agency's first ben-
zene case
entering into the first consent
decree of its kind that required
a facility to hire an independent
consultant to conduct an en-
vironmental audit of its
program.
Formosa Plastics in Delaware City,
Delaware, settled vinyl chloride viola-
tions with the State by installing a con-
tainment system that would prevent
relief-valve discharges of vinyl
chloride to the atmosphere - a first of
its kind.
Region III has filed the first two suits
in the Nation against glass manufac-
turing facilities covered by the arsenic
NESHAP.
Region Ill's groundbreaking, prece-
dent-setting enforcement program
has put the Region in the forefront of
NESHAP compliance. The Region is
proud of this well-respected program.
28
-------
Formosa Chemical
An Air Pollution Control Success Story
In late 1984, Region HI began to address
serious relief-valve discharge violations at
Formosa Plastics Corporation's polyviuyl
chloride facility in Delaware City,
Delaware. Between 1981 and 1985, Formosa
discharged over 90,000 pounds of vinyl
chloride to the atmosphere from, these relief
valves. Vinyl chloride is a carcinogen, and
EPA regulates vinyl chloride emissions under
the Clean Air Act,
In November
1985, the State
revoked all of
Formosa's
operating per-
mits. Conse-
quently, the
plant closed
down. As neg-
otiations en-
sued among
Federal, State
and corporate
representatives,
the principal in-
jrnnctive relief
measure iden-
tified was a
relief-valve,
gas-containment system. This was considered
to be the only reliable means of environmen-
tal control given the problems associated with
production, maintenance and environmental
control.
Part of Formosa's containment system
On the eve of an EPA filing of a civil suit
against Formosa, the company settled the dis-
pute signing a consent decree with the State
of Delaware, The consent decree required
Formosa to construct and operate a gas-con-
tainment system valued at $2 million. The sys-
tem prevents any relief-valve discharge of
vinyl chloride to the atmosphere.
In a June 1988 article in Chemical Prooejss-
ing. the Formosa plant manager, Larry
Peyton, spoke of
how this contain-
ment system has
turned out a bet-
ter product, has
made the plant
operate more
smoothly and effi-
ciently, and has
made the plant
profitable. As of
August 1988, For-
mosa also marked
its second year
without a report-
able emergency
relief-valve dis-
charge. All vinyl
chloride that is
discharged from the reactors travels through
piping to the containment tanks. These tanks
are capable of containing releases from the
entire dispersion plant - a capacity of 60,000
compressed, liquid gallons of vinyl chloride.
29
-------
ASBESTOS
Because health studies of asbestos workers
showed they had a high risk of contracting as-
bestosis (scarring of the lung tissues) from in-
haling asbestos fibers, EPA listed asbestos as
a hazardous air pollutant under Section 112
of the Clean Air Act. Asbestos exposure
can lead to asbestosis, lung cancer, and
mesothelioma (rare chest and ab-
dominal cancer). EPA subsequently
promulgated regulations to control as-
bestos emissions to the air during
renovations and demolitions of build-
ings. For the past few years, EPA has
considered the implementation and
enforcement of the asbestos regula-
tions as one the Agency's highest
priorities.
Tlte asbestos removal industry, and
hence EPA's program, has grown ex-
ponentially. With this program growth,
EPA and the states have continued to inspect
more and more asbestos removal operations
and enforce against noncompfying contrac-
tors.
ASBESTOS PROGRAM 8BOWTH
Number of Notifications
6000 T
Due to the hazards associated with asbestos,
safety during removal and inspection ac-
tivities are inherent in EPA's enforcement
philosophy. Unsafe removal of asbestos
material can create a much Mgher risk to the
public than leaving the asbestos in place, EPA
inspectors must also take special safety
precautions when obtaining asbestos samples
during inspection.
Since 1984, Region HI has issued 252
Notices of Deficiencies, issued 26 Ad-
ministrative Orders and filed 16 civil and 3
criminal lawsuits against asbestos abatement
contractors. Tlirough these inspections, en-
forcement efforts, and initiatives to identify
nonnotifiers, EPA Region III has been a na-
tional leader in ensuring compliance with the
asbestos NESHAP Standard.
30
-------
Regulating the Steel
Industry under the Clean
Air Act
The history of enforcement of the
Clean Air Act for the iron and steel in-
dustry in Region III has been long and
arduous, yet highly successful in
decreasing the amount of pollutants in
the air. The Act required standards to
be developed for ambient air quality
for all regulated pollutants (e.g., par-
ticulate matter). Steel industry
processes are, in general, very emis-
sive because of the raw materials that
are used to make steel. Steel produc-
tion requires iron which, in turn, re-
quires iron ore, limestone, coke,
sinter, and other materials composed
of particulate matter. The production
of coke from coal is, in itself, a highly
polluting process. The size of these
facilities, combined with the potential-
ly high emission rates makes them
among the largest sources of air pollu-
tion subject to regulation.
Historically, the steel industry has
had a very strong presence in Region
III employing tens of thousands of
people. Whole towns have been built
in the shadow of these large mills and
have depended on them for a
livelihood. The industry has operated
through many economic ups and
downs, and often, Clean Air Act com-
pliance has mirrored these production
swings.
Through intense negotiations, and at
times litigation, Region III has been
able to obtain enforceable consent
decrees with the steel companies to
satisfy the regulations of the Clean Air
Act. In the process, the companies
have developed a good working
relationship with Federal, state, and
local regulatory agencies to maintain
compliance with the consent decree
stipulations. Costs of pollution control
equipment have run in the millions of
dollars.
Enforcement of Clean Air Act emission standards
that apply to the steel industry is a challenge
involving control technology considerations,
as well as worker job performance
in the operation and maintenance
of implemented controls.
A constant struggle to maintain
clean air conditions exists in the steel
industry because of the cyclical nature
of the industry and the high cost of
maintaining control equipment. The
challenge today, as it has been in the
past, is to balance our need for good,
secure employment with the need for
a healthful environment. Region III
will continue to enforce the Clean Air
Act and work with the steel industry
to meet this challenge.
Major Steel Facilities in Region III
USX Corporation
Clairton, PA
Braddock, PA
WestMifflin,PA
Fairless Hills, PA
Wheeling-
Pittsburgh Steel
Corporation
Fottansbee, WV
Shenango
Incorporated
Newville, PA
Bethlehem Steel
Corporation
Bethlehem, PA
Johnstown, PA
Steelton, PA
Sparrows Point, MD
LTV Steel
Corporation
Pittsburgh, PA
Aliquippa, PA
Weirton Steel
Corporation
Weirton, WV
Sharon Steel
Corporation
Farrell, PA
Monesson, PA
Armco Steel
Corporation
Baltimore, MD
Butler, PA
31
-------
Water
Quality
"Safeguarding people and the en-
vironment by protecting all water
resources under our stewardship in
a manner that merits public trust and
confidence is the purpose pursued
by members of the Water Manage-
ment Division.
In pursuit of that purpose, we
treasure those who, despite the
everyday diversions and frustra-
tions, tenaciously strive to over-
come barriers, create the path-
ways, and persist in the drive to
make the world a bit better because
they care enough to try to make it
so."
Dr. Alvln R. Morris
Director
Water Management Division
Water Quality Standards
Surface water protection in Region
III is measured in large part through
the use of state water quality stand-
ards. These standards designate
protected uses for the waters of the
state and establish acceptable water
quality criteria for their intended uses.
They serve as the regulatory basis for
both state and EPA surface water pol-
lution control efforts. In 1988 and
continuing into 1989, EPA's efforts
have centered on working with the
states in revising their water quality
standards with particular focus on the
needs to adopt additional criteria and
procedures for controlling toxic pol-
lutants. State standards are reviewed
every three years.
National Pollution
Discharge Elimination
System
The Clean Water Act of 1972 and its
amendments authorize EPA to regu-
late the wastewater discharges from
municipal and industrial facilities
through the National Pollution Dis-
charge Elimination System (NPDES)
program. All facilities discharging
into the surface waters of the United
States are required to obtain NPDES
permits. These permits establish the
levels of contaminants allowed in each
facility's effluent as established by
either industry-wide "technology-
based" criteria or stream-specific
"water-quality-based" standards. The
latter are established by the states to
protect the uses which they have desig-
nated for their streams. If the treat-
ment level established for a particular
facility will not protect the uses desig-
nated for the stream receiving its dis-
charge, the facility must provide addi-
tional treatment. Each facility has a
separate permit which must be reis-
sued every five years. The Region's
municipal and industrial facilities are
divided into two permitting categories
- major and minor ~ based on the
volume of their discharge. Major
facilities are those that discharge more
than one million gallons of effluent per
day.
Region III has delegated the
authority to issue NPDES permits and
take enforcement actions to
Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
Virginia, and West Virginia. EPA
maintains the authority to review and
NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
MAJOR FACILITIES IN REGION HI
32
-------
Region Ill's NPDES program maintains permit-
ting and compliance records on 775 major
wastewater discharge facilities and 115
pretreatment programs.
Permit Compliance System (PCS) staff enter
and maintain the compliance status of 2200
wastewater outfalls monthly.
comment on permits issued by these
states and can take direct enforcement
action when a state's response to a
permit violation is not timely and ap-
propriate. Formal enforcement op-
tions available to EPA include is-
suance of administrative orders, ad-
ministrative complaints, and civil and
criminal judicial actions. The Clean
Water Act also gives citizens the right
to bring actions in response to viola-
tions. Liability for noncompliance is
up to $25,000 per day for each viola-
tion.
National Municipal
Policy
The National Municipal Policy
(NMP) was issued by the EPA Ad-
ministrator during January 1984 in
response to the high level of municipal
facilities which were not complying
with their NPDES permit limitations
and conditions. The Policy required
all Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTWs) to comply with permit con-
ditions as soon as possible, but no later
than the statutory deadline contained
in the Clean Water Act - July 1,1988.
POTWs that needed construction of
additional treatment facilities were re-
quired to fully comply with permit re-
quirements regardless of the
availability of Federal construction
grant funding.
The initial phase of the Policy was
the identification of all NMP-af fected
municipalities, and the submission of
an NMP Strategy from each delegated
state which outlines how the Policy
would be implemented. In Region III,
122 POTWs were subject to the NMP
initiative.
The second phase was the estab-
lishment of enforceable construc-
tion/compliance schedules for each
NMP-affected facility. A key
provision of the Policy was that each'
NMP-affected POTW be placed on an
enforceable schedule to achieve com-
pliance by a certain date. Where com-
pliance could not be achieved by the
statutory deadline, these enforceable
schedules had to be contained in a
judicial consent decree filed in state or
Federal court. The status of the NMP-
affected POTWs in Region III as of
the statutory deadline of July 1, 1988
was as follows:
66 POTWs were in compliance
17 POTWs were in short-term
noncompliance
29 POTWs were meeting com-
pliance schedules established in
enforcement actions
9 POTWs were unaddressed.
The third and final phase of the
Policy has been to track compliance
with the schedules, and to take follow-
up enforcement action in response to
schedule violations, as appropriate.
As the initiative is winding to a close,
we firmly believe that the Region's im-
plementation of the NMP has been
successful in addressing noncom-
pliance with the requirements of the
Clean Water Act.
33
-------
Construction Grant Program
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of
1956 was the first national statute to provide
funds for municipal water pollution control.
Through 1972, Region III states benefited
from construction grants totaling $514 mil-
lion. In 1972, the pas-
sage of the Clean
Water Act provided a
dramatic increase in
the grant funds and a
higher level of par-
ticipation in the water
pollution control
programs. The Re-
gion III allocations
since 1972 total al-
most $6 billion.
These funds have
gone towards con-
struction of munici-
pal wastewater treat-
ment works, pumping stations and various
types of sewers; Kteralfy the entire gamut of
point-source pollution-control works. In
Region HI, 8000 projects hove been funded,
1450 of which ore still active.
During Fiscal Year 1988, Region IH
awarded a total of $347 million for 51 new
and 143 existing construction grants. These
included grants to Kent County, Delaware for
the purchase of land to apply treated sludge;
to the District of Columbia to continue con-
struction of the Blue Plains Plant; to Anne
Arundel County, Maryland for the Mayo
Peninsula project with a host ofonsite treat-
ment features toprotect a highly sensitive area
of flood-plains
and wetlands; to
Henrico County,
Virginia for
treatment works
to serve the huge
metro-potitan
area around
Richmond; to
Altoona, Penn-
sylvania to fund
a treatment
works cited as a
special project in
the 1987 Clean
Water Act; and
to Hurricane, West Virginia to fund a treat-
ment plant which is the target of a Region III
enforcement action.
Underthe Water Quality Act of 1987, atran-
sition has begun to supplant the grants
program with a loan program capitalized with
Federalfitnds. A grant awarded to Virginia in
June 1988 was among the first in the United
States under these new provisions.
REGION ill CONSTRUCTION GRANT AWARDS
PAf38%)
MD
(23%)
DC (5%)
DE (4%)
VA(19%)
TOTAL - $6 BILLION (1972-1988)
PA (34%j
TOTAL - ฃ347 MILLION (1988)
34
-------
Pretreatment
Many industrial facilities, rather
than discharging process wastewater
directly to surface waters, discharge
instead to Publicly Owned Treatment
Works (POTWs). The pretreatment
program is the way that POTWs con-
trol the industrial discharges to their
system to protect the treatment plant
and its sludge, and to prevent pol-
lutants from passing through the
POTW untreated.
The pretreatment program, like the
NPDES program, can be delegated to
the States. Only Maryland and West
Virginia have been delegated this
program in Region III. Unlike the
NPDES program, however, the per-
mitting and enforcement activities
relating to the pretreatment program
are carried out by the POTW rather
than than by the delegated State or
EPA. Initially, any municipality where
industrial discharge to the POTW is a
concern is required to develop a
pretreatment program. These
Control of Toxic Pollutants
One of the most urgent national environmental problems is the presence of
harmful levels of toxic pollutants in the waters of the United States. EPA's
goal is to work with the states to protect human health and aquatic resour-
ces by controlling the release of toxicants to surface water.
The Clean Water Act and its most recent amendments, tfje Water Quality
Amendments of 1987, provide a strong statutory basis and additional dead-
lines for activities to address the discharge of toxic pollutants. Section 304(1)
of the Act requires the states to develop lists of waters that have been impacted
by the discharge of toxics, and to develop individual control strategies for the
sources of the toxics.
In order to ensure that all states are equipped with the necessary tools to
make significant progress in controlling toxics and to meet the requirements
of the Act, Region III has conducted broad, comprehensive reviews of state
programs for identifying and controlling toxic discharges. The Agency's ob-
jective in reviewing state toxic control programs is to identify areas of needed
improvement orassistance, and to help ensure a degree of consistency among
state approaches, while at the same time allowing sufficient room for innova-
tion and flexibility in dealing with specific local problems.
As follow-up to the reviews, the Region will work with the states to develop
detailed action plans to strengthen existing state toxic control programs. Plans
will contain specific actions to be taken to ensure that the state is equipped
to identify and control toxics problems related to point sources.
Innovative methods can be used to dis-
pose of sludge made cleaner through ef-
fective pretreatment programs.
programs must be approved by EPA
or the delegated state. After approval,
the municipality has the authority and
responsibility to issue permits to its in-
dustrial dischargers requiring the
development and enforcement of
local limits. These limits are designed
to protect the treatment facilities, the
sludge, and the receiving stream.
POTWs are also required to ensure
that their industrial facilities are meet-
ing any minimum treatment levels es-
tablished for that industry.
The early emphasis of the Region's
pretreatment efforts was to work with
the POTWs to develop approvable
programs, which would give the
POTWs the legal authority to comply
with the pretreatment regulations and
assure that the POTWs have the tech-
nical capability, program plans and
procedures, and adequate resources
to run an effective program. With the
approval of the local programs, the
Region focused on providing techni-
cal assistance to the POTWs in the ad-
ministration of their programs, includ-
ing technical expertise on permitting
of and enforcement against industrial
users. We are now beginning to take
enforcement action against POTWs
that are showing an unwillingness to
accept their responsibility for running
an effective pretreatment program
which complies with the requirements
of the Clean Water Act and its as-
sociated regulations.
-------
Drinking Water
Protection
Most of us today would assume that
the water we drink is safe, and usually
we would be right. But some people
are still drinking water that is im-
properly treated and may be con-
taminated by bacteria, toxic chemi-
cals, or other pollutants. In Region III,
we continue to see waterborne disease
outbreaks such as giardiasis that are
unacceptable in our modern society.
The 1986 Amendments to the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) greatly
increased the responsibilities of EPA
and the states in protecting the
Nation's drinking water. A total of 83
new or revised drinking water stand-
ards will be developed by 1989 along
with three new treatment require-
ments for water systems. In 1988, the
states began implementing the first of
these new provisions with initial test-
ing for eight volatile organic chemicals
including trichloroethylene, vinyl
chloride and benzene. In addition,
many new state regulations were
under development to prepare for
changes in national drinking water
regulations.
In August 1988, EPA proposed far-
reaching revisions to the current
drinking water standard testing proce-
dures for lead in order to provide
greater protective measures for tap
water consumption. Although it has
been used in numerous consumer
products, lead is a toxic metal now
known to be harmful to human health
if inhaled or ingested. A major source
of lead exposure is drinking water con-
tminated by the corrosion of lead
materials in plumbing. During 1988,
five of the six Region III states had ef-
fectively banned leaded materials
from use in new plumbing systems or
repairs and Pennsylvania is working
towards this end.
Community Public Water Supplies 1
Compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act 1
State
DC
DE
MD
PA
VA
WV
REGION
Number
of
Supplies
2
229
548
2441
1T35
604
5759
Population
Served
1,837,000
594,000
3,437,000
10,210,000
5,137,000
1,674,000
22,929,000
Supplies
not in
Compliance
0
0
5
31
16
16
68
Population
Served
0
0
5,010
171,981
1,776
2,140
180,907
Percent I
% 1
0 1
0 1
0-10 1
1.7O 1
0.03 1
0.13 I
0.80 1
Public Water Supply Improvements
The level of enforcement activity by EPA and the states has risen
markedly to meet the challenge of the amended Safe Drinking Water Act.
Although most of these actions involved small water systems, many were
quite successful in achieving improvements in these public water supplies.
WINONA, WV- In response to EPA enforcement actions, the owner of
this small public water suppfy agreed to donate $10,000 for a new
chlorinator, storage tank and a reconstructed spring house to rehabilitate
the community water source. The water supply was then transferred to an
Association of the local residents who are now being trained to operate the
system and conduct compliance monitoring,
MEYERSDALE, PA-In response to EPA enforcement aetiansf this
municipal public water supply worked with EPA to develop a Jong-term
schedule for the construction of a filtration plant to eliminate future
turbidity violations.
IROQUOIS and STEPHENSON, WV* The owner of these two small
public water supplies failed to respond satisfactorily to initial EPA
enforcement actions. Finally, when faced with Complaints for Penalty for
$5006 for each of the two water supplies, he retained legal counsel attd
entered into negotiations with EPA. As a result, the owner agreed to install
disinfection facilities at each supply* inform the public and the users about
past violations, monitor water quality, report the results as required, and
pay a small penalty.
REGION III ISSUED TOE FIRST FOUR COMPLAINTS FOR
PENALTY Iff THE NATION UNDER THE NEWLJAUTHORIZED
ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS OF THE SAFE
DRINKING WATER ACT.
36
-------
Ground Water Protection
Ground water resources are used ex-
tensively in Region III to provide
drinking water and water for in-
dustrial purposes. Ground water also
provides the base flow for the Region's
surface waters and is vital to maintain-
ing the quality of life we currently
enjoy. EPA Region III is currently
POPULATION DRINKING GROUND WATER
100
80
Bill
MD PA W OE VA
STATE
The use of the Geographic Information System
will enable us to make better management
decisions so that we can more effectively
protect our ground water supplies.
working with the states in the Region
to protect our ground water resources
through several programs and initia-
tives.
Underground Injection Control
Program
The Safe Drinking Water Act
enacted in 1974 established several
programs to protect both surface and
underground sources of drinking
water. One such program, the Under-
ground Injection Control Program,
establishes technical criteria and
standards for the construction, opera-
tion, monitoring, and testing of wells
to control underground injection
practices. During 1988, regulatory
control over injection operations
centered on enforcement of oil and
gas well-casing and cementing re-
quirements and increased emphasis
on control of shallow injection wells of
various types. Significant enforcement
actions were completed for 15 major
oil facilities in northwest Penn-syl-
vania to ensure the proper closure or
reworking of over 1400 injection wells
which presented a risk to under-
ground sources of drinking water.
Each state in the Region also began
to escalate enforcement of regulatory
requirements for agricultural
drainage wells, service station dry
wells, commercial septic systems, and
other shallow injection wells which
previously were subject to few con-
trols. Precedent-setting enforcement
actions were taken by EPA directly in
Pennsylvania and Virginia to reduce
the contamination risk from seven
such facilities at selected sites where
ground water was most vulnerable.
Other Ground Water Programs
All states in the Region have ground
water protection policies and action
plans which establish the framework
for the development of classification
systems, monitoring programs, im-
proved date management systems,
and other elements needed to form a
comprehensive ground water protec-
tion strategy. With these strategies in
place, the states are now focusing their
efforts on implementation.
The 1986 Amendments to the Safe
Drinking Water Act authorized assis-
tance to states to develop a program
to protect the wellhead area of all
public water systems from ground
water contaminants that may adverse-
ly affect human health. EPA Region
III sponsored eight seminars across
the Region and has provided con-
siderable technical guidance to the
states to move the wellhead protection
program forward. Region III has also
secured the lead for a Regional pilot
project to demonstrate uses of the
newly acquired Geographic Informa-
tion System capability in the ground
water protection area. This effort has
helped to identify the wellheads in
New Castle County, Delaware at
greatest risk to contamination and
demonstrate the use of various flow
models to assist states in delineating
protection areas. The success of this
effort is leading to many new coopera-
tive agreements with state and local
governments interested in this tech-
nology as a management tool for
wellhead protection.
37
-------
Clean Lakes Program
The Clean Lakes Program was es-
tablished by the Clean Water Act of
1972 in order to demonstrate lake res-
toration and protection techniques
with the goal of minimizing man's con-
tribution to lake degradation. Region
III has provided grants for performing
lake assessments, feasibility studies,
restoration/demonstration proj ects,
and watershed management studies.
In 1988, the Region was involved with
projects on eleven lakes: North Park
Lake, Lake Wallenpaupack, and
Lake Nockamixon in Pennsylvania,
Lock Raven Lake, Lock Raven Deten-
tion Basins, and Columbia Lakes in
Maryland, Silver Lake in Dover,
Delaware, and Lake Accotink, Rivan-
na Reservoir, Lake Chesdin, and Big
Cherry Reservoir
in Virginia. Some
of the imple-
mented water-
shed manage-
ment techniques
include surface
water runoff con-
trol practices on
agricultural land,
streambank
stabilization,
erosion control
on construction
sites, stormwater
management,
waterfowl con-
trol, street sweep-
ing, ordinance
development,
and public educa-
tion.
Region III is working to slow the human-
induced degradation of our lakes
through the Clean Lakes Program.
Nonpoint Source
Pollution Control
The Water Quality Act of 1987
authorized a major new initiative to
address the growing concern over
nonpoint sources of pollution. With
financial assistance from EPA, all
Region III states met the require-
ments of the Act to complete a
statewide assessment of nonpoint
source problems and a management
plan to address those problems .
Delaware received EPA approval of
its Nonpoint Source Assessment
Report and portions of its Manage-
ment Plan and was awarded the
Nation's first nonpoint source im-
plementation grant on September 30,
1988. This grant provides over $1.7
million in both Federal (60%) and
state (40%) funds to support an ag-
gressive two-year program. Four
demonstration projects will be started
with these funds. To be successful,
these projects will need the assistance
and expertise of the USDA Soil Con-
servation Service, the University of
Delaware, Delaware's Conservation
Districts, and many other state and
local agencies. Key elements in each of
the projects will be (1) to raise the
level of public awareness about how
nonpoint source pollution affects
water quality and their daily lives, (2)
to provide information on practical,
feasible solutions to prevent or control
nonpoint source pollution, (3) to ex-
amine the economic forces that create
the behavior causing the problem, (4)
to examine the effectiveness of state
regulatory solutions, and (5) to further
develop the necessary tools to better
define nonpoint source pollution
problems.
38
-------
Chesapeake Bay Program
The Chesapeake Bay restoration and
protection program is the "flagship" of
EPA's national estuary initiative. A $27
million research study carried out by EPA
at the direction of Congress laid the
groundwork for the massive cleanup effort
now under way. The study led to the sign-
ing of the 1983 Chesapeake Bay Agree-
ment in which Maryland, Pennsylvania,
Virginia, the District of Columbia, EPA
and the Chesapeake Bay Commission
pledged to join in a cooperative approach
to deal with the pollution of the Bay. A
new and more comprehensive Agreement
signed in December 1987 commits these
jurisdictions and the Federal Government
to specific actions that will carry the
program forward through the 1990s.
EPA Region III established a liaison of-
fice in Annapolis under the 1983 Agree-
ment to help coordinate Bay restoration
activities. The Agency's role became a
statutory responsibility under amendments
to the Clean Water Act enacted by Con-
gress in 1987. Among other provisions, the
amendments direct EPA to coordinate
Federal and state efforts to improve the
water quality of the Bay and authorize
federal grants to help states implement
pollution reduction programs.
EPA, other participating
Federal agencies, and Bay
watershed jurisdictions
teamed to develop a series of
strategy documents during the
first half of 1988 as stipulated
in the 1987 Bay Agreement.
Among them were plans to
achieve a 40percent reduction
by the year 2000 in levels of
phosphorus and nitrogen
reaching the Bay, The control
of nutrients is critically impor-
tant because of their direct impact on the
living resources of the Bay. Nutrient en-
richment fuels the growth of algae and trig-
gers physical and biological changes that
deplete levels of dissolved oxygen vital to
finflsh and shellfish in the Bay. Steps to
stem the flow of nutrients into the Bay
range from improvements in treatment
technology at sewage disposal plants to the
implementation of "best management
practices" to control runoff from farms and
urban areas.
Otherstrategies developed to meet Agree-
ment commitments for 1988 deal with is-
sues such as the control of conventional
and toxic pollutants, research, monitoring
living resources of the Bay, reducing pollu-
tion from Federal facilities, the protection
of wetlands, and the impact of population
growth and development on the health of
the Bay.
EPA is currently spendingsome $12 mil-
lion a year in direct support of the
Chesapeake Bay Program, and other
Federal agencies contribute nearly $20
million more. This investment helps to
generate more than $100mitKon in Bay-re-
lated programs carried out by the States.
Anne Arundel County, MD campaign to deter pollution
by marking storm sewers coun tywide
39
-------
Hazardous Waste Control
"Living without risk is no longer possible given today's technology and the
demands of today's consumers for products that leave a trail of toxic
wastes. Chemicals, pesticides and various other products offer us an ex-
traordinarily high standard of living. At the same time, the inevitable risk from
the production and misuse of chemicals and other products has resulted in
a serious threat to our environment. Our goal is to control this threat by en-
forcing hazardous waste laws, providing remedies for Superfund sites and
for asbestos in schools, and issuing permits for proper disposal of waste.
As individuals, we must learn new patterns of behavior to help reduce the
production of wasfe. We can start by recognizing that our high standard of
living is accompanied by environmental and human health risks. As Director
of the Hazardous Waste Division, my goal is to ensure that both the govern-
ment and the public work together to reduce the risks from hazardous
wasfes to acceptable levels."
Stephen R. Wassersug
Director
Hazardous Waste Management
Division
Superfund Program
The Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980,
more commonly called "Superfund,"
authorized EPA to clean up those sites
where hazardous substances have
been disposed without proper regard
for the consequences to the environ-
ment or public health. Congress has
allocated $8.5 billion to fund the
program. Most of this money goes to
funding government-directed cleanup
through emergency removal actions in
acute emergencies, or long-term
remedial actions for sites posing
chronic risks to public health or the
environment. There are also sig-
nificant resources devoted to enforc-
ing the provisions of the act which re-
quire that parties who were respon-
sible for the improper disposal should
either perform the cleanup or reim-
burse the government for the cost of
the cleanup.
In Region III, there are currently
3,548 alleged, potential, or actual haz-
ardous waste sites tracked through the
CERCLIS database. Preliminary site
assessments have been completed on
3,197 of these sites and further inves-
tigations were conducted on 918 sites.
The information collected through
these activities is used to determine if
the sites qualify for inclusion on the
National Priority List (NPL) and
cleanup under Superfund. Sites on
this list are those determined to have
the greatest hazard based on the type,
quantities, and toxicity of wastes
present; the number of people poten-
tially exposed; the likely pathways for
exposure; the importance and vul-
nerability of the underlying aquifers;
and other factors. Region III has 156
NPL sites, 95 of which are currently at
one of the following stages in the
remedial process:
A remedial investigation of the
entire site area is conducted to
provide a comprehensive
evaluation of the health and en-
vironmental risks present
A feasibility study is developed
that evaluates the merits of op-
tions available in cleaning up
the site
A cleanup alternative is chosen
and formalized in a Record of
Decision
A remedial design is prepared
for the planned cleanup action
The remedial action is imple-
mented to clean up the site.
Any time that a site is found to
present an imminent hazard, EPA can
initiate a removal action. This usually
occurs following the site investigation.
If a high hazard exists, the site is
referred to the emergency response
group for immediate action. Present-
ly, Region HI has performed 210
removal projects on 167 sites (both
NPL and non-NPL) at a cost of $58
million.
Over $170 million has been spent to
date in Region III to remove threats to
the public health and the environment
40
-------
SUPERFUND REMEDIAL
PROGRAM
PENNSYLVANIA
2300 CERCUS SITES
WEST VIRGINIA
324CERCtlSSffES
75 17
PA SI NPL fWFS BD RA
CLEANUP ACTIONS
PA SI NPLRVFS RD RA
CLEANUP ACTIONS
DELAWARE
182 CIRCUS SITES
PA SI NPLRI/FS RD RA
CLEANUP ACTIONS
MARYLAND
278 CIRCUS SITES
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
- 7 18 CERCUS SITES
ฐ
PA SI NPL RI/FS flD RA
CLEANUP ACTIONS
PA SI NPL W/FS BD RA
CLEANUP ACTIONS
PA
SI NPL Rt/FS RD
CLEANUP ACTIONS
CERCUS SITE -
Alleged, potential or actual hazardous waste site
tracked on EPA's CERCUS database
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT (PA) -
initial review of background material and information
obtained during a sits visit
SITE INVESTIGATION (Si) -
More detailed investigation to determine environmental
hazards of sites
NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST (NPL) -
Sites qualifying for cleanup under Superfund
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY
STUDY (Rt/FS) -
Comprehensive investigation of entire site to develop
feasible alternatives for cleanup
REMEDIAL DESIGN (RD) -
Design of selected alternative for site cleanup
REMEDIAL ACTION (RA) -
Implementation of designed cleanup alternative
41
-------
SUPERFUND REMOVAL PROJECTS
$58 MILLION TOTAL COST
t2
Superfund Enforcement
The reality behind the $8.5 billion
Superfund is that it would be used up
by 1990 unless there was private party
funding of projects. Our challenge,
therefore, is to encourage responsible
party cleanup of hazardous waste sites
to allow Superfund dollars to address
more sites. Region III is among the
most successful in the Nation in its Su-
perfund enforcement program and
has attained national recognition for
the number and quality of its settle-
ments. More than $200 million of Su-
perfund money has been conserved or
recovered through settlements with
responsible parties that require them
to perform the needed remedial and
removal actions. The Region's aggres-
sive enforcement program and will-
ingness to negotiate have also avoided
costly and protracted litigation.
In instances where the Region is not
able to reach a settlement with the par-
ties responsible for a hazardous waste
site, cleanup action is carried out with
Superfund dollars. However, Section
107 of the Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act enables EPA to recover
the cost of cleanup from the respon-
sible parties. Region III has main-
tamed an aggressive Superfund Cost
MO
Assessment of more than 3,000 hazardous waste sites
in Region III has resulted in placement of 156 sites on
the National Priority List for Superfund cleanup.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY ACTIONS
ORDERS FOR REMOVAL ACTION
79 TOTAL
NUMBER
$25.1 MILLION SAVINSSTO FUND
MD (17.1%)
PA (35.4%)
VA (26.6%)
OE (0.2%)
DC DE MD PA VA WV
STATE
ORDERS FOR REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS
AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES - 36 TOTAL
NUMBER
25
$36.5 MILLION SAVINGS TO FUND
MD (8.2%)
DE (13.7%)
WV (1.1%)
DC DE MD PA VA WV
STATE
SETTLEMENTS FOR REMEDIAL DESIGNS
AND ACTIONS-15TOTAL
NUMBER
10
$109.1 MILLION SAVINGS TO FUND
MD
DC DE MD PA VA WV
STATE
42
-------
Recovery Program for many years. To
date, $14.9 million has been success-
fully recovered through cost recovery
litigation.
Region III attributes its success to a
team effort by the Office of Regional
Counsel and the enforcement
program staff. The Region is also a
strong advocate of the streamlined
negotiations process set forth in the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986
which imposes a 120-day deadline for
remedial action settlements. These
deadlines are necessary to avoid
lengthy negotiations and to get
cleanups started quickly.
Region III has also taken the lead in
mixed funding settlements. These set-
tlements occur when there are multi-
ple responsible parties involved at a
site and not all are willing to pay for
the cost of cleanup. EPA reaches a
settlement with some of the respon-
sible parties for all of the clean up
work and agrees to reimburse these
parties from the fund for a portion of
the cost they incur. EPA then initiates
litigation against those potentially
responsible parties unwilling to pay
for the cleanup (non-settlers) to
recover the fund dollars. If the Region
cannot successfully recover its costs
from the non-settlers, complete res-
titution is sought from the responsible
parties who originally settled. Al-
though this type of settlement is quite
Careful tracking of hazardous waste
site investigations allows early
identification of imminent
hazards and timely response
to emergency situations.
SUPERFUND COST RECOVERY
TOTAURECOVERED -
$15.1 MILLION
complex, it allows cleanup to proceed
more quickly and minimizes the use of
Superfund dollars in cases where
responsible parties are known. Region
III has two of EPA's three mixed fund-
ing settlements nationwide. In both of
these cases, Region III has sub-
sequently pursued non-settlers for the
balance of costs incurred by the Agen-
cy.
Innovative settlements such as these
and the certainty of aggressive follow-
up enforcement provide a strong in-
centive for parties to come forward
and settle with EPA, while sending out
a warning to those who "hide in the
weeds."
Overall, the success of Region III can
be attributed to the hard work, long
hours, flexibility, and creativity of the
Region's managers, attorneys, and
project officers.
43
-------
Taylor Borough Dump Site: A Superfund Success Story
The Taylor Borough Site, located in Lackawanna
County, Pennsylvania, is an abandoned strip mine
which was later used as a municipal landfill. During
its use as a landfill, numerous barrels and drums
were dumped in localized areas on the surface of the
site. In October 1983, EPA conducted an emergency
action to remove approximately 1,200 drums, con-
taining benzene) toluene and other hazardous com-
pounds. Immediately following this action, EPA in-
itiated a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
which was completed in May 1985.
On June 28, 1985, James M. Seif, Regional Ad-
ministrator, issued a Record of Decision requiring
the excavation of contaminated soils and wastes,
and the remediation of two ponds at the site. In ad-
dition, approximately 125 crushed and intact drums
were to be removed and the former drum storage
areas were to be properly backfilled and covered with
a minimum 24-inch soil cover. A subsequent
Decision issued on March 17,1986, determined that
there was no need for ground water remedial action
since no release of contaminants to theground water
was observed. However, a monitoring program was
warranted to verify that no release will be occurring
in the future.
Once EPA signed the Decision, negotiations with
the potentially responsible parties began for their im-
plementation of the remedy. A Consent Decree, filed
in U.S. District Court, enabled five of the ten named
defendants to settle with EPA and to perform the
work. The specific terms of this settlement included
(1) preparation and implementation of a remedial
design in accordance with the Records of Decision,
(2) funding the continued operation and main-
tenance costs, and (3) funding EPA's response costs
totaling $1.7 million. Total savings to the Fund was
more than $5.2 million.
On July 13, 1988, the Regional Administrator
visited the cleaned up Taylor Site with its newly grow-
ing grass and stated "It doesn't look like anything, it
doesn't smell like anything, and that's what we want."
On August 30,1988, the final closeout public meet-
ing was held and the residents and borough officials
were satisfied with EPA's and the responsible parties'
remediation efforts. This site is scheduled for dele-
tion from the National Priority List of Superfund
sites in early 1989. The Taylor Borough site is the first
site in the Nation at which cleanup was undertaken
and completed by responsible parties.
To initiate cleanup of hazardous waste
site, a thorough understanding of the
site conditions and a detailed
review of the proposed project
design are required.
44
-------
Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) was passed in
1976 to manage hazardous waste from
its initial generation to its final dis-
posal. The Act has been amended
twice (1980, 1984) and each time its
scope was expanded appreciably. The
two primary areas of focus in RCRA
are hazardous waste management
(Subtitle C) and underground storage
tank control (Subtitle I).
Hazardous Waste Management
The objective of Subtitle C of RCRA
is to assure that hazardous waste is
managed to protect human health and
the environment. To accomplish this
goal, regulations were established
covering the generation, transporta-
tion, treatment, storage, and disposal
of hazardous waste. These regulations
established two sets of standards for
treatment, storage, and disposal
(TSD) facilities: interim status stand-
ards and permit requirement stand-
ards. Interim status standards are
good management practices that must
be followed in order to properly hand-
le hazardous waste until a permit ap-
plication is issued or denied. Permit
standards are design and operating
criteria for facility-specific permits.
In addition, the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984
gave EPA the authority to require cor-
rective action for past releases of haz-
ardous substances from waste
management facilities. Region III has
delegated the base RCRA program to
its states but is currently responsible
for the implementation of the correc-
tive action provisions of HSWA.
Owner/operators of existing or new
TSDs must obtain an operating permit
or implement an approved closure
plan if its permit application is denied.
HSWA also established deadlines for
issuing permits to operating facilities.
Treatment/Storage Facilities
REGULATED HAZARDOUS WASTE
FACILITIES IN REGION
Generators
Transporters
Treatment/Storage
Incinerators
Land Disposal
Includes 92 facilities which are closing
The dates are November 8, 1988 for
land disposal facilities; November 8,
1989 for incinerators; and November
8,1992 for treatment/storage facilities.
In the past year, Region III has made
significant progress in meeting these
deadlines. Likewise, the states within
the Region have cooperated in fulfull-
ing these goals.
Enforcement
Because the RCRA hazardous waste
management program has been large-
ly delegated to the states, the states
also bear the principal responsibility
for assuring compliance with the Act.
EPA oversees state compliance
monitoring and enforcement
programs to:
assure that enforcement actions
undertaken by the states are
responsive and timely
support state enforcement ac-
tions, as appropriate and neces-
sary
retain enforcement respon-
sibility for those portions of the
Act which have not yet been
delegated to the states (i.e.,
regulations governing land dis-
posal of hazardous wastes, and
corrective action to remediate
contaminated sites).
PERMIT
DENIALS
PERMIT
ISSUANCE
CLOSURE PLAN
APPROVALS
Land Disposal Facilities UNDER
15 REVIEW
63
Compliance with RCRA, cor-
responding state regulations, and per-
mit requirements is ascertained
through inspection of hazardous
waste treatment, storage and disposal
facilities, generators, and
transporters. Inspections may be con-
ducted separately or jointly by state
agencies and EPA. When incidences
of noncompliance are discovered, en-
forcement responses may be informal
or formal, and may include ad-
ministrative, civil, or criminal penal-
ties, depending upon the seriousness
of the violations.
Section 3008(h) of RCRA
authorizes EPA to take enforcement
action at hazardous waste facilities
where there is evidence of environ-
mental contamination. Enforcement
actions issued pursuant to this section
can require facility owner/operators
to conduct extensive studies to deter-
mine the nature and extent of the con-
tamination and propose and imple-
ment remedies for site cleanup.
Region III has recently placed in-
creased emphasis on corrective action
under Section 3008(h) by developing
and implementing an aggressive
strategy which focuses on entering
into consent agreements with facility
owner/operators, early negotiations,
and a 60-day expedited schedule for
45
-------
consent agreement signatures. Under
this strategy, the Region has entered
into three such consent agreements
since June of this year. The Region is
also negotiating similar agreements
with eight additional facility
owner/operators with the expectation
that all eight agreements will be signed
in the near future. The Region is also
investigating an additional 25 poten-
tial corrective action cases.
Underground Storage Tanks
The objective of Subtitle I of RCRA
is to assure that underground storage
tanks (USTs) are designed, installed,
and operated in a manner to prevent
releases from occurring. If a release
does occur, there are requirements for
cleaning up the release. Owing to the
large number of regulated units, EPA
has adopted an approach that re-
quires the majority of the workload to
be handled by the States.
The first requirement of Subtitle I is
known as the Interim Prohibition,
which prohibits the installation of
tanks that are not protected from cor-
rosion. As of July 1988, more than 220
violations of this requirement have
been identified. Of these violations,
over 130 have been corrected. Ap-
proximately 50 of the violations have
required enforcement action to
achieve compliance. Corrective
measures were voluntarily taken in the
remaining cases. The second require-
ment of the UST program is iden-
tification of all tank owners. This
process was designed to be imple-
mented by the states. Approximately
80,000 facilities, representing 250,000
tanks, completed the notification in-
formation and the states have estab-
lished computerized databases.
In 1986, the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act (SARA)
amended RCRA to create the Leak-
ing Underground Storage Tank
(LUST) Trust Fund. The states in
Region III are currently working to es-
tablish programs to address the
cleanup of sites with leaking under-
ground storage tanks. Cooperative
Agreements have been developed for
all the states in the Region. Over 750
sites have been investigated resulting
in 18 emergency responses and 60 en-
forcement actions. Cleanup has been
initiated on 123 sites by the parties
responsible for the contamination.
Sixty-seven additional sites are
presently under control and cleanup
has been completed at 50 sites.
Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) char-
ges EPA with regulating the manufac-
ture, distribution and use of pesticides
in the United States. Region III has
taken an aggressive stand in enforcing
FIFRA to ensure the continued safe
use of pesticides while minimizing the
risk to man and his environment.
Region III has strengthened its en-
forcement activities which have
reached an all-time high of 35 civil
penalty actions assessed and six "Stop
Sale" orders issued for FIFRA viola-
tions during Fiscal Year 1988. Major
environmental issues including pes-
ticides in ground water and pesticide
impacts on endangered species are
being addressed by Region III states
through the preparation of manage-
ment plans with EPA oversight.
Region III continues to provide sup-
port and oversight for the states in
their pesticide enforcement and pes-
ticide applicator certification and
training programs. Fiscal Year 1988
also saw Region III actively involved in
farm worker protection and the can-
cellation of chlordane termiticides.
Under the 1988 FIFRA amendment,
there will be increased penalties and
registration requirements. In Region
III, this will mean improved enforce-
ment of FIFRA.
Toxic: Substances Control
Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act of
1976 (TSCA) protects human health
and the environment by developing
data on chemical substances and mix-
tures and regulating those substances
which present an unreasonable risk.
Asbestos Program
Under TSCA, regulations cover the
abatement of asbestos problems in
schools and public buildings. Asbestos
is an excellent insulating and fire-
resistant material but its fibers are
harmful to human health causing lung
cancer and asbestosis. Abatement of
asbestos problems may include seal-
ing, enclosing or removing asbestos.
TOTAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR
FIFRA AND TSOA PROGRAMS
DANGER
ASBESTOS
CANCER AND LUNG DISEASE
HAZARD
AUTHORIZED
PERSONNEL ONLY
RESPIRATORS AND
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
ARE REQUIRED IN
THIS AREA
46
-------
Secretarial and support staffs are
instrumental in keeping daily operations
moving forward in Region III so that we
can achieve our environmental mission.
Region III has a technical assistance
program which provides seminars for
schools and other building owners.
The 1982 Asbestos-in-Schools Rule
required inspections of school build-
ings for friable or damaged asbestos-
containing materials and notification
of parents of students and employees
if asbestos was present. Region III
conducted inspections under this rule,
covering most schools and many
private schools.
The 1986 Asbestos Hazard Emer-
gency Response Act (AHERA) now
requires schools to inspect for non-fri-
able as well as friable materials, to as-
sess all asbestos-containing materials,
to choose appropriate abatement ac-
tions and write an asbestos manage-
ment plan. Parent and employee or-
ganizations must be notified about the
availability of the management plan.
Region II t is preparing to carry out en-
forcement inspections under
AHERA. Also under AHERA, 35
courses have been accredited in
Region lit for training abatement con-
tractors and workers, building inspec-
tors, and school management plan
writers.
Public employees who are not
covered by Federal or state occupa-
tional safety and health laws are
covered under TSCA. Region III has
been inspecting removals in public
buildings under the Worker Protec-
tion Rule and has been issuing enfor-
cement actions.
PCB Program
EPA Region III has achieved a
measureable reduction in the level of
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in
the environment. PCBs are highly per-
sistent, chlorinated hydrocarbons that
bioaccumulate in the environment.
They are a public concern because of
their toxicity to humans and ecosys-
tems. PCBs were manufactured for
use as an electrical insulator and
coolant in transformers and
capacitors and as hydraulic fluid.
However, all manufacture of PCBs
was essentially banned in the late
1970s under the Toxic Substances
Control Act.
Region III continues to operate a
vigorous outreach and compliance
monitoring program to prevent and to
clean up spills and leaks of PCBs from
thousands of electrical devices still in
use. In addition, the Region performs
inspections and aggressive outreach to
ensure compliance with the PCB
Transformer Fires Rule. This Rule
was promulgated in 1985 to eliminate
the hazards of PCB transformer fires
which produce highly toxic combus-
tion products including chlorinated
dioxins and furans. These efforts will
continue as more comprehensive PCB
regulations become effective in 1988
and 1990 to prevent further releases of
these substances into the environ-
ment.
Commiinity-Right-To-Know Legislation
Title HI, Section 313 of the Superfiutd Amendments and Rewthorizotion
Act (SARA) required certain manufacturers to submit annual reports on July
1,1988, documented the amounts of toxic chemicals their facility releases
into the environment either routinely or as a result of accidents. Reffon HI
held 17 one-day workshops to help industry fill out the reports correctly and
has spoken to 2,700people in numerous organizations about the reporting
requirements.
EPA Headquarters will input the data from the reports into a database that
will then be made available in the Spring of 1989 to Ae pubic and govern'
ment officials for tlie purposes ofdata analysis through the National Library
of Medicine* To ensure data quality, compliance inspections andphone calls
to facilities are being made. Finally, public outreach will be performed to
show the public how to access and interpret the data.
47
-------
Environmental
Monitoring and
Assessment
"The issues facing today's environ-
mental managers are infinitely more
complex than those of 25 years ago.
Although we have made tremen-
dous progress on cleaning our
water and air, the problems that
remain, e.g., ground water con-
tamination, acid deposition, global
warming, habitat modification, and
estuarine and ocean pollution, will
tax our ability to formulate meaning-
ful solutions. The solutions we
devise will not only affect the quality
of our life but that of generations to
come.
It is the goal of the Environmental
Services Division to ensure that en-
vironmental managers have the
most up-to-date, accurate scientific
information upon which to base
sound and lasting solutions to these
challenging environmental
problems."
Greene A. Jones
Director
Environmental Services Division
Laboratory Support
In Region III, the Central Regional
Laboratory (CRL) in Annapolis, MD
provides analytical services and
quality assurance support to all
regional programs. The lab has the
capability to analyze water, soil, fish
tissue and plant samples for key
parameters relating to Agency
programs. Analyses for organic and
inorganic chemicals, dioxin, pes-
ticides, volatile organic compounds,
PCBs, and nutrients were performed
in the laboratory during the past year.
CRL also provides a host of other ser-
vices to the Region including:
administering contracts for
Special Analytical Services to
other labs to meet the needs of
Regional programs
providing expert testimony in
support of ongoing litigation
conducting onsite inspection of
other laboratories in support of
Agency programs
Region III employees at the Central Regional
Laboratory ensure that environmental decisions are
based on quality data.
ANALYSES PERFORMED IN 1988
SUPERFUND
ENFORCEMENT
SUPERFUND
REMOVAL
(8,142)
SPILL RESPONSE (49)
AIR ENFORCEMENT (39)
SPECIAL INfTIATlVES (18S)
WATER QUALITY
MONITORING (E92)
CHESAPEAKE BAY (50)
SDWA (47)
UIC (23)
TSCA (180)
RCHA(346)
48
-------
providing technical analytical
assistance to states, contractors,
permittees, grantees, and the
general public
holding training sessions for
state and industry analysts.
In order to provide data which are
legally defensible and of consistently
high quality, the CRL has an extensive
quality assurance program in place.
This program requires thoughtful
planning to identify data needs and
planned uses prior to sample collec-
tion, careful adherence to established
procedures and protocols during col-
lection and analysis, and thorough
documentation and review
throughout the process. This ap-
proach maximizes data quality while
considering cost, resources, and data
needs of the decisionmaker.
In addition to the analytical
capabilities of CRL, Region III also
performs biological analyses at its
field office in Wheeling, West Vir-
ginia. Biologists perform bioassays on
effluent and ambient water samples
and assist the states in these activities.
Compliance
Inspections
The success of
EPA's com-
pliance program
depends not only
on its laws but on
how well those
laws are en-
forced. Com-
pliance inspec-
tions serve as the
primary method
by which EPA
discovers viola-
tions. The
presence of a
compliance in-
spection field
force provides a
strong incentive
for facilities to
operate in ac-
cordance with the law. As laws are
amended and new laws are passed, the
knowledge and skills needed to en-
force these complex changes have re-
quired all field investigators to con-
stantly expand their capabilities. EPA
Judy Burke, PPG Industries, Inc.
Field inspectors perform an important role in
the enforcement of our environmental
laws and are often the first to identify
compliance problems.
Region III has field investigators lo-
cated in offices in Philadelphia, Pen-
nsylvania, Annapolis, Maryland, and
Wheeling, West Virginia. These inves-
tigators have and will continue to meet
the challenge before them.
25TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATED
IN WHEELING FIELD OFFICE
EPA Region Ill's Wheeling Office celebrated its 25th anniversary
of providing field, laboratory and emergency response assistance to
the citizens of the Ohio Valley, In September 1988, festivities were
hosted by the Region-
al Administrator, who
joined with the current
and alumni staff and
environmental offi-
cais from West Vir-
ginia, Pennsylvania
and Ohio in saluting
the Office's ac-
complishments and
future promise.
COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS
1988
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGES
(224)
PCBs (125)
HAZARDOUS WASTE
FACIUTIES (80)
AIR EMISSIONS
(222)
49
-------
Air Monitoring
Current air monitoring efforts center
on six pollutants for which National
Ambient Air Quality Standards exist:
carbon monoxide, elemental lead,
nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide,
suspended particulate, and ozone.
The overall air pollutant measurement
program is a cooperative effort be-
tween the respective state and county
agency and the EPA Regional Office.
Each year EPA Region III works with
each state and county agency on plan-
ning where measurements will be col-
lected. The monitoring networks are
designed based on guidance provided
by EPA Headquarters with considera-
tion of local conditions. Region Ill's
Environmental Services Division
works with these agencies throughout
the year to assure that reliable
measurements are collected when and
where they are needed. The state and
county agencies in Region III con-
tinuously operate about 600 monitors.
By following the national guidance
on network design, comparable net-
works have been established across
the country. Therefore, air pollutant
levels in one metropolitan area can be
compared with another, and the over-
all reduction in pollution levels across
the country can be determined.
%
100
REDUCTION OF AIR POLLUTANTS
1977-198?
CO LEAD N02
AIR POLLUTANT
Water Quality
Monitoring
The quality of the surface waters
within Region III is monitored by a
number of Federal, state, and local
agencies to assess trends and identify
emerging problems. Each state main-
tains a network of stations at fixed
locations where water quality data are
generated for trend analysis. These
networks are complemented by
studies on specific stream segments
that provide an intensive assessment
of local conditions. These studies are
usually in response to a known or
suspected problem and are used to in-
itiate corrective action. EPA has in-
itiated several projects in Region III to
identify emerging water quality
problems. A screening study to iden-
tify potential human health threats
from drinking water and fish con-
sumption is under way for six major
river systems in the Region the
Monongahela River, the Susquehanna
River, the Roanoke River, the
Schuylkill River, the Delaware River
and the Ohio River. Region III also
provides assistance to the states in as-
sessing water quality, managing water
quality data using EPA's STORET
database, and preparing the state
biennial water quality assessment
reports required under Section 305(b)
of the Clean Water Act.
RIVER MILES IN REGION I
TOTAL-115,500
WV (24.6%)
VA
(23.6%)
MD
(8.1%)
DC (0.03%)
PA
(43.3%)
RIVER MILES ASSESSED
FOR DESIGNATED USE SUPPORT
% 1985 -1987
100
VA PA WV
STATE
DE MD
ASSESSED RIVER MILES
SUPPORTIW3 DESIGNATED USES
% 1985 -1987
100
80
60
40
20
VA PA WV DC DE MD
STATE
50
-------
Near Coastal Waters
As the number of people living near
our coasts continues to rise, our al-
ready threatened coastal ecosystems
will be placed under increasing stress.
Through the provisions of the Clean
Water Act and the Marine Protection,
Research and Sanctuaries Act, EPA
Region III monitors the current con-
ditions and assesses long-term trends
in the near coastal waters of the Mid-
Atlantic Bight which extends from
New Jersey to North Carolina.
Monitoring and assessment of marine
water quality is accomplished through
two complementary activities - nauti-
cal and aerial surveillance.
Through use of the Ocean Survey
Vessel, Peter W. Anderson, Region III
conducts comprehensive sampling
and evaluation of the status and trends
in water quality during monthly survey
cruises from June through September.
Water samples are collected from one
to ten miles off the coast and evaluated
for both chemical and biological
parameters. Bottom sediment
samples are also collected near three
ocean sewage outfalls and a dredge
disposal site. In addition, sitings of
dolphins, whales, and sea turtles are
added to the National Marine
Fisheries Service database to assist in
long-term trend evaluation of near
coastal water quality.
Along with the monthly cruises, En-
vironmental Services Division staff
also conduct weekly aerial surveil-
lance of the coastal region to provide
a quick and timely visual assessment of
changing coastal conditions. The
presence of a variety of marine
animals is carefully monitored. Aerial
surveyors watch for water discolora-
tions possibly indicating algal blooms,
floating plastics and garbage, and un-
usual occurrences such as oil slicks
and illegal dumping. Unusual findings
are reported to the appropriate state
or Federal agency for investigation
and appropriate action. Aerial survey
information is also used as a guide in
planning sampling activities on the
monthly cruises.
The ocean survey crew for the September 26-29,1988 cruise collected
samples between Ocean City, New Jersey and Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Delaware's Inland Bays Pilot
Project
In March 1988, EPA Headquarters' Office of Water
funded three joint Federal and state Near Coastal Water
pilot projects at a total of $950,600. These projects
demonstrate innovative management actions for ad-
dressing identified environmental quality problems in
selected bay, estuary, coastal wetland, and coastal
ocean waters. The Region III project, "Decisionmaking
Information System for Delaware's Inland Bays,1" was
selected as one of the pilot projects based on criteria for
innovation, action-orientation, applicability to oiher
near coastal waters, likelihood of success, strong state
and local commitment, strongpublic interest, and com-
pletion within two years.
EPA is providing the State of Delaware with $350,000
overtwoyears to develop an integrated information sys-
tem to help officials reviewproposeddevelopmentplans
for their potential impacts on the environment of
Delaware's Inland Bays. This innovative system willim-
prove the existingprocess ofmakingpermit decisions by
providing an accessible, geographically formatted
database of technical and ecological parameters for the
entire area. It wilt be used primarily to help regulatory
agencies decide permitting issues such as siting new
housing developments and waterfront construction,
promoting appropriate land use, and avoiding or
mitigating wetlands alterations.
51
-------
National Estuary Program
Two Region III estuaries valued for their natural and economic resources
have come to national prominence in 1988 with their nomination and accep-
tance into EPA's National Estuary Program. On My 18, 1988, EPA Ad-
ministrator Lee Thomas convened the Management Conferences for the
Delaware Bay and the Delaware Inland Bays. A Management Conference is
established to develop a Comprehensive Conservation and Management
Plan (CCMP). Each plan will address the goals and objectives of the
Management Conference and present the strategies for achieving improved
water quality and cleaner, healthier estuaries. Region Ill's Environmental
Services Division is responsible for coordinating the Management Conferen-
ces, working with the public and the the State of Delaware in the develop'
mentofthelnfandBays'CCMPandwithRegionn, thepublic, andtheStates
of Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania in the development of the
Delaware Bay's CCMP.
Wetlands
Wetlands in Region III are vital
natural resources not only to local
residents, but also to others who con-
sume or utilize the products they yield.
In their natural condition, wetlands
provide many benefits including (1)
fish and wildlife habitat, (2) aquatic
productivity, (3) water quality im-
provement, (4) flood damage
protection, (5) erosion control,
(6) natural products for human
use, and (7) opportunities for
recreation and aesthetic ap-
preciation. Each wetland is part
of a complex, integrated system
that delivers these benefits and
others to society.
Over one-half of the native wet-
lands in Region III have been lost
since colonial days. Between the
mid-1950s and the late 1970s, the
Region lost about 133,000 acres
of inland vegetated wetlands, and
20,000 acres of coastal wetlands.
Virginia experienced the
greatest recent losses of inland
vegetated wetlands, while coastal
wetlands were most threatened
in Maryland. Delaware lost 21
percent of its inland vegetated
wetlands.
Most of the lost wetlands were
covered with dredged or fill material
and converted to another use. EPA's
authority to protect wetlands from
such activities rests with Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act. The provisions
of this section give EPA and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (COE) joint
authority over any activity resulting in
the deposition of dredged or fill
material in the waters of the United
States. While the COE is responsible
for actual permit issuance, EPA is
directed to issue environmental
guidelines for these permits. EPA
therefore reviews all permit requests
going lo the COE and provides com-
ment on their compliance with these
guidelines. On the average, Region III
reviews 1200 Section 404 permit re-
quests during the year and raises sig-
nificant issues on approximately 20%
of the requests. In the past year,
Region III has issued two administra-
tive complaints and 20 administrative
orders against violators who illegally
dispose of dredged or fill material. In
addition, 15 cases have been resolved
meaning restoration or mitigation has
been successfully completed.
In a related area, Region III has been
actively involved in advance iden-
tification activities where sites are
designated to be either generally
suitable or unsuitable for the future
disposal of dredged or fill material.
These projects are usually initiated at
the request of a state or local agency.
The public meetings held in conjunc-
REGIONAL WETLAND CHANGES
1000 ACRE ESTIMATES
40
COASTAL WETLAND LOSS
INLAND VEGETATED WETLAND GAIN
M INLAND VEGETATED WETLAND LOSS
f1 FRESHWATER POND @AIN
+5.1
DE VA MD (588 MD PA DE VA
&JM
wv
DE WV MD VA PA
52
-------
tion with this activity have proven to be
useful educational tools for informing
the public of the value of their wetland
resources. In the past year, advanced
identification projects have been com-
pleted for Cedar Island in Virginia
and for English Swamp, Twomile Run
and Silkman's Swamp in the Pocono
Region of Pennsylvania. Ongoing
project areas include Sussex County,
Delaware, Phillipsburg, Half Moon
Lakes, and Lost Lakes in Pennsyl-
vania, and Canaan Valley in West Vir-
ginia. Region III is currently working
on an initiative to develop a manual
describing advanced identification
techniques so that in the future, state
and local agencies can participate in
this activity.
National Environmental
Policy Act
In 1970, Congress enacted the Na-
tional Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) to ensure that Federal agen-
cies consider the environmental im-
pacts of their activities and achieve a
balance between society's needs and
environmental protection. EPA
Region Ill's role under the terms and
conditions of NEPA has traditionally
been to develop environmental
documentation and mitigation plans
for EPA projects that could adversely
affect the environment. Historically,
these projects have centered around
the wastewater treatment construc-
tion grant program. Recent Environ-
mental Services Division activity in
this area has been the development of
the environmental impact statement
for the disposal of sludge at the Blue
Plains wastewater treatment facility in
the District of Columbia. This study,
which is scheduled for release by the
end of 1988, has evaluated the merits
of various disposal techniques includ-
ing incineration, composting, land ap-
plication, landfilling, ocean dumping,
and various combinations of the
above.
As priorities have shifted away from
the construction grant program, the
Region has become increasingly in-
volved with the review of activities as-
sociated with the cleanup of hazard-
ous wastes. The environmental in-
tegrity of each project is evaluated
through review of remedial investiga-
tions and feasibility studies. In cases
where impacts are unavoidable, the
Environmental Services Division staff
provide recommendations on the
most effective means for mitigation.
An additional EPA function under
NEPA and Section 309 of the Clean
Air Act is to review and provide com-
ment on the environmental assess-
ments and environmental impact
statements for projects developed by
other Federal agencies, e.g, construc-
tion projects for dams, highways, and
power plants, dredging projects,
resource extraction projects, and
Federal land use projects. As an ex-
tension of this function, the Environ-
mental Service Division provides tech-
nical support to these agencies by con-
ducting special studies. Region III
recently assisted the National Park
Service in evaluating the condition of
the Steamtown National Historic Site.
The study revealed the presence of
PCBs and asbestos which will require
a cleanup effort by the Park Service.
Region III also coordinated a study of
the Folcroft Landfill at the Tinicum
National Environmental Center in
conjunction with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. The purpose of this
ongoing study is to evaluate the effects
of the landfill on the ecology of the
Center.
Federal Facilities
Federal facilities represent a sig-
nificant component of the regulated
community in Region III. More than
25% of the Federal workforce is
employed in this Region at 2,314
Federal installations ranging from
shipyards to post offices. Of these
facilities, 23 require NPDES permits
for wastewater discharges each ex-
ceeding one million gallons per day, 34
require RCRA permits for the
transportation, storage, and disposal
of hazardous wastes, two are on the
National Priority List of Superfund
sites, and five are proposed to be
listed. Currently, 121 facilities are
being regulated for their activities in-
volving hazardous wastes. There are
also 460 facilities (e.g., Frankford Ar-
senal, West Virginia Ordinance
Works) that were formerly owned by
the Federal government.
Region Ill's Federal Facilities
Program provides the coordination
and scrutiny necessary to ensure
Federal facility compliance with EPA
statutes. Environmental Services
Division staff review and evaluate
proposed and existing pollution
abatement projects designed to con-
trol or eliminate the pollution
generated by Federal facilities. Site
visits and inspections are performed
to ensure compliance with environ-
mental standards, permits and/or
regulations and tracked on a database
developed in Region III. There are
currently 702 pollution abatement
projects under way in the Region at a
total estimated cost upon completion
of $628 million.
55
-------
OUR CHALLENGE
How is a large, complex
organization in an ever changing
society to be managed? As the
management team at EPA Region
III, we take pride in our ability to
anticipate changes, be innovative,
and remain at the cutting edge of
managerial development. We
constantly assess the needs of our
staff and respond to them. At the
same time, we evaluate the needs
of the public we serve and act to
improve communication and
responsiveness. We strive to
identify technological changes
that will help us to be more
productive in our jobs. Our
emphasis on participatory
management has resulted in
consensus building both inside
and outside of the Agency, a focus
on bottomline environmental
results, and an increase in overall
productivity.
Stanley L. Laskowski
Deputy Regional Administrator
New Initiatives for Environmental Success
Over the past several years, EPA has
made significant progress in cleaning
up traditional forms of pollution.
However, the complexity of the
problems we still face are very dif-
ferent from and will dwarf the
problems of the past. We are develop-
ing a new appreciation for the inter-
dependent nature of people and the
components of then" environment, and
we must start addressing risks to those
systems in a more holistic cross-media
fashion. Also, as the public's demand
for environmental protection grows
while financial resources remain
scarce, we are facing the biggest chal-
lenge ever to make decisions that yield
the greatest possible environmental
benefit. Region III has been a nation-
al leader in developing initiatives to
deal more effectively with this chal-
lenge. We are making progress in
analyzing environmental problems as
they impact all media: air, land, and
water; we are continuing to develop
management initiatives that focus on
achieving environmental results
through greater risk reduction; and we
are fostering efforts in cooperative
problem-solving with other institu-
tions concerned with our environ-
ment.
Greene A. Jones
Director
Environmental Services Division
54
-------
Managing for
Environmental Results
Initiatives (MERTTs)
Much of Region Ill's environmental
protection agenda is set by program
managers in Washington, D.C. to ful-
fill our part of national goals. While
the great majority of nationwide en-
vironmental problems are also high-
priority issues for the Region, the na-
tional agenda does not always include
all issues of importance to our Region.
In order to address these Regional
problems, the Region has established
the Managing for Environmental
Results Initiatives (MERITs) process.
This process allows flexibility in al-
locating resources to solve regional
high-priority environmental and
public health problems while still ful-
filling our national commitments.
Each year, Region III staff (as well as
our state counterparts) are invited to
propose projects that would further
enhance EPA's efforts to protect the
environment. A Region-wide commit-
tee then evaluates the environmental
benefit and feasibility of the
proposals. Upon final approval, the
Region has a set of results-oriented
projects that supplement our national-
ly mandated responsibilities. Projects
have ranged from air toxics work in
Kanawha Valley and advanced iden-
tification of wetlands to a model radon
awareness program. MERITs
projects may also address cross-media
problems or other issues that do not
clearly fit into an established program
area.
Region Ill's MERITs process has
achieved real environmental results
over the past several years, and has be-
come a model for similar programs
across the Nation.
Radon MERIT
Prior to the establishment of the EPA National radon program,
Region III became concerned with die radon health threat.
Through the MERITs process, the Region's senior managers
learned about radon and approved a project aimed at (I) further
investigation of the problem, (2) preparation of adequate respon-
ses to public inquiries, and (3) provision of radon mitigation train-
ing. As a result of the Radon MERIT, the Region provided states
with maps showing the highest risk locations, a radon mitigation
course was presented, and public outreach activities were initiated.
Region III lead the Nation in addressing the health risk associated
with radon.
Advanced Identification of Wetlands
MERIT
Each year Region III loses several thousand acres of wetlands
largely as a result of development activities. The Region developed
the Advanced Identification of Wetland MERIT in an effort to
control this loss. Advanced identification provides protection to
wetlands prior to any announcement of public or private intent to
fill them. An assessment is made of the environmental and
ecological attributes of a wetland to determine its suitability for
use a$ a future disposal site for dredgedorfillmaterial. As aresult
of this MERIT, EPA headquarters developed a nationalprogram
commitment for advanced identification of wetlands in all EPA
Regions,
Hazardous Waste Impacts on the
Chesapeake Bay MERIT
To enhance the ground and surface water quality in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed, Region III developed aMEKFTto in-
vestigate, map, andprioritme existing sources of hazardous waste,
pesticides, and herbicides for appropriate remedial action. Ac-
tivities focused on RCRA facilities and Superfund sites wiOtin
close proximity to the Bay shoreline andmajar tributaries--ฎ total
area of 4tQQQ square miles~ to maamize the direct effect on
Chesapeake waters, facilities were evaluated and targeted for
remedial action through the RCRA and Superfund programs to
improve the environmental quality of Ms watershed.
55
-------
Kanawha Valley Study
In late 1984, the tragic chemical
poisoning of thousands of people in
Bhopal, India propelled the
Kanawha Valley of West Virginia
info the national limelight because
of the heavy concentration of
chemical manufacturing facilities
locatedthere.
Public con-
cern and
congres-
sional
scrutiny in-
tensified over
the potential-
ly adverse
health effects
posed by
both high
short-term,
and low con-
tinuous ex-
posure to a
variety of
toxic pol-
lutants
known to be
present.
Part of
Region Hi's
response to
this concern
was to undertake a study of the
health risks (primarily cancer) as-
sociated with long-term exposure of
local residents to several unregu-
lated chemicals present in Kanawha
Valley. In cooperation with West
Virginia, EPA examined exposures
througli air, drinfdngwater,flsh con-
sumption, and ground water path-
ways with air receiving the most at-
tention. The study was the first in the
Valley to look not onfy at the levels
of pollutants present, but to link
these levels with possible com-
munity health risks using improved
methods of risk assessment.
The results
showed that in
several cases the
potential risks
were sufficiently
high to suggest
action be taken
to reduce their
levels. Study
results have been
used by area in-
dustries and the
West Virginia Air
Pollution Con-
trol Commission
to target reduc-
tions in the
amounts of
several chemi-
cals emitted into
the air. These ef-
forts have sharp-
ly reduced public
risks.
Tliis study has served as a model
for addressing other environmental
issues requiring an integrated ap-
proach to problem-solving and has
provided Region III with an oppor-
tunity to communicate with the
public about risk assessment con-
cepts and results.
Risk Assessment
EPA Administrator Lee Thomas has
described EPA as a risk reduction
agency. He has further stated that to
be effective, we must assess clearly
and honestly the relative significance
of various hazards.
Region III has been a leader in ex-
panding and refining applications of
risk assessment through activities in-
cluding:
Regional scientists helping
state and local governments to
analyze and interpret
lexicological and exposure data
Regional scientists and
managers serving on various na-
tional EPA committees which
have developed scientific
guidance and policy
Region III development of our
own risk training course
presented to 100 Regional staff
members a year before Head-
quarters released a similar cur-
riculum
Regional scientists and
managers frequently speaking
about EPA's risk assessment
methods to civic, industrial, and
environmental groups
Region III use of our Managing
for Environmental Results In-
itiatives to fund important risk
assessments not linked to any
specific EPA programs
Region III ranking of the en-
vironmental problems in the
Region based on risk.
56
-------
Comparative Risk Project
In a world of growing demand for en-
vironmental protection but finite
resources, il is becoming an increasing
challenge for EPA to set its priorities
for reducing risk to human health and
the environment. In addition, many of
the statutes under which EPA
operates, e.g., Clean Air Act, Clean
Water Act, etc., have traditionally
mandated that the Agency address en-
vironmental problems in a particular
media. As we develop a growing un-
derstanding of the interconnected na-
ture of our environment, several ef-
forts are being made to look across air,
water, and soil media to determine
where and how the Agency has the
greatest potential to reduce risk.
In 1986, EPA completed the Nation-
al Comparative Risk Study which
compared the risks of existing
problems being addressed by national
environmental programs as well as
emerging issues. A year later, Region
III became one of the first in the
country to undertake the same exer-
cise on a regional level. Several dozen
regional staff experts were assigned
the task of determining what problems
still pose the greatest risks to human
health and the environment in Region
III given the programs and controls
the Agency currently has in place.
Data were collected, risk assessments
and other analyses were performed,
and a relative ranking of the eighteen
issues was completed during the sum-
mer of 1988. The results are currently
under review and will be released in
the near future.
The challenge now facing the Region
is to integrate these findings into our
existing programs and management
structures while maintaining the sig-
nificant gains already accomplished.
This will require:
a creative problem-solving ap-
proach to both emerging issues
and persistent existing ones
efforts to modify budget, plan-
ning, and management systems
communication with state agen-
cies and outreach to the public.
Through comparative risk analysis
and the development of initiatives to
address the findings, Region III has
taken another significant step towards
managing for environmental results.
Technology Transfer
As state and local governments along
with industries themselves assume
more responsibility for environmental
protection, one of the most vital func-
tions the Federal government can per-
form is that of technology transfer.
Frequently, it is not appropriate for
the Federal government to mandate a
solution to a local problem, but rather
to provide assistance to the local
decisionmakers as they devise their
own solutions. These technology
transfer activities include information
dissemination, technical assistance,
facilitation of networking, and
development of training programs.
Region III works closely with EPA
Headquarters on national technology
transfer efforts. Emphasis is also
placed on communications between
Regional program offices and their
state counterparts and on information
exchange with interest groups,
academia, and industry within the
Region.
Institute for
Cooperative Environmental Management
The technical complexity and challenge of managing environmental quality
in the Mid-Atlantic Region greatly exceeds the resources and capabilities of
any single government agency or organization concerned with this challenge.
In addition, not all environmental problems can be solved by traditional
means such as regulation or public works programs. The need for action by
individual homeowners to mitigate radon is a good example.
To better meet this challenge, Region III has proposed the formation of a
pub lie/private association tentatively named the Institute for Cooperative En-
vironmental Management (ICEM). As currently envisioned, the Institute
would be supported and managed by organizations representinggovemment,
business and industry, academia, and a variety of public interests in the Mid-
Atlantic area. By joining forces on a small scale, each participant in ICEM
would benefit through the sharing of information resources and expertise.
The Institute is expected to achieve improved environmental quality in the
Mid-Atlantic area through public and private sector cooperation and im-
plementation of initiatives which address specific concerns of its member-
ship. Types of approaches could include education, technical training, per-
sonnel exchange, reciprocal use of facilities, public forums, and targeted in-
formation transfer.
From EPA'sperspective, the Institute will complement its existing resour-
ces and help to support Regional priorities which are unable to be adequate-
ly addressed through current programs.
57
-------
Innovations for Human Resources Development
Not a fad. Not "buzz-words" for the
'80's. At EPA Region III, human
resources development has been in-
tegrated within the fabric of the work
environment. To maintain the techni-
cal success the Region has enjoyed re-
quires an office atmosphere that sub-
scribes to the theory that people are
our most important resource. It is no
coincidence that the program succes-
ses of the recent past occur at a time
when the Region's human resources
development program has achieved
status as a leader in the Agency.
Region Ill's human resources
program is evident in training and
employee recognition, but these are
basic elements that employees expect
from management. Beyond the
basics, Region III has sponsored many
initiatives in a variety of human
resources programs.
Corporate Culture Study: In Oc-
tober, 1986 a report was submitted by
Dr. Gerald Zeitz, Associate Professor
at Temple University, which sum-
marized employee responses to a
questionnaire designed to examine
various elements of the EPA Region
III "Corporate Culture." The ques-
tionnaire was modeled after a similar
study conducted at a national level by
the National Association of Public
Administration. A follow-up study is
currently being completed to assess
changes in the past two years and also
to specifically evaluate human resour-
ces programs.
Health Unit/Fitness Center: Ar-
rangements are being finalized for the
opening during fiscal year 1989 of an
on site Health Unit/Fitness Center for
EPA employees in Philadelphia. In
cooperation with other Federal Agen-
cies occupying the 841 Chestnut
Building, EPA has completed
negotiations with General Services
Administration and the building
management. The new Health
Unit/Fitness Center will offer space
for Aerobics Classes, Nautilus Equip-
ment, and will become a center for
wellness programs and employee
health evaluations.
Mentoring: In response to sig-
nificant increases in employment, the
Region's Hazardous Waste Manage-
ment Division developed a formal
mentoring program to assist with
orientation of new employees.
Developed in response to employee
suggestions, the mentoring program
begins prior to the actual entry date
for an employee and continues for
several months. Because of the suc-
cesses of this program, a recommen-
dation to adopt this program as a
Regional endeavor is under con-
sideration.
Employee Retreats: From the initial
concept of a planning session for
members of an individual work unit,
the use of employee retreats has
grown to various forums including all
managers in a Division, all Regional
managers, and all secretarial person-
nel within a Division. Secretarial
retreats gained prominence in the past
year following a successful pilot in the
Air Division and support from the
Human Resources Council. The
secretarial retreats have been success-
ful in fostering an interchange of ideas
and providing feedback to manage-
ment.
Career Development Month: In each
of the past three years, a month-long
program of activities has been
scheduled to help employees focus on
managing their careers. Guest lec-
turers, EPA employee panels, and
video presentations have been used to
offer career counseling, a discussion
of private versus public sector employ-
ment, a review of anticipated changes
in the workforce by the year 2000, and
many other subjects.
With a commitment from senior
management, effective advisory assis-
tance from the Regional Human
Resources Council and support from
staff, the human resources develop-
ment program in Region III will con-
tinue to build upon current initiatives
and seek further actions to improve
the work environment in Region III.
The rush of daily
routines often limits op-
portunities to share new
ideas and strengthen
working relationships.
Secretarial retreats
offer a relaxed atmos-
phere away from the job
where people have time
to listen to each other.
58
-------
Avalon All-Managers
Meeting
On November 12-13, 1987, all
Region III supervisors and managers
met in Avalon, NJ to discuss issues and
develop an action plan in four areas:
Expectations of Managers
Human Relations
Work Environment
Recruitment/Develop-
menfRetention of Employees
For the first Region-wide meeting of
supervisors in over ten years, a con-
siderable amount of up-front planning
helped design a successful and
problem-free conference. Prior to the
conference, supervisors were sur-
veyed on problems in the office and
discussion papers were prepared and
distributed for each subject area.
Senior staff employees were trained as
facilitators to assist supervisors during
discussions. A detailed meeting
process was developed and logistics
were carefully planned to ensure the
the convening of over 100 conference
participants and support personnel
went as smoothly as possible.
Eight groups of approximately ten
supervisors each met in separate ses-
sions, two groups for each subject
area. All groups followed a three-
phase approach:
identifying problems and con-
cerns,
envisioning success, and
strategies and recommenda-
tions.
Group reports were presented after
the envisioning success and strategies
and recommendations sessions.
Senior management presented their
perspectives on the output of the
group discussions at the close of the
conference. Over 100 recommenda-
tions were identified during the two
days.
A key component of the Avalon
process was the commitment for fol-
low-up action. Work groups were es-
tablished to continue discussion of is-
sues raised in each of the four subject
areas and to refine the recommenda-
tions. Each group prepared an im-
plementation plan that identified
responsible parties to complete a task
and a target completion date.
While the success of meetings such
as Avalon can be measured on several
levels, the status of the recommended
action items less than a year after the
conference indicates that the time and
resources devoted to the conference
were a sound investment. Of the 90
action items compiled by the follow-
up work groups, 49 have been com-
pleted, 29 deferred, and 22 remain ac-
tive. Through the improvements
made in the Region, the increased
awareness of supervisors to the issues
discussed, and the communications
and interrelationships achieved,
Avalon ranks as a significant mile-
stone for the Region's human resour-
ces program.
Human Resources Council
To help plan and implement human resources programs in Region HI,
a Human Resources Council composed of representatives from all
employee groups was established in July, 1986. Council members assist
human resources management by reviewing national and regional
initiatives, suggesting additional initiatives, and serving as a liaison to
respective offices and employee groups for the purpose of publicizing
human resources programs.
Council membership is for two years. The initial Council recently
completed its tenure which was highlighted by many accomplishments
including:
development of charter for the Council
review of the Region's Awards Program
annual Career Development Programs
recommendation for secretarial retreats
assistance in the development of the Human Resources Manager of
the Year and Secretarial Excellence Awards.
New memberships were selected for the Council term beginning with the
start of fiscal year 1989 and the Council membership was expanded to
include four representatives (and one alternate) from managerial,
technical, and secretarial/support staff. In addition, several human
resources management staff positions also serve on the Council Agenda
items expected to be reviewed by the new Council include child care,
senior workers, and career management.
Like its National Council counterpart, the Region's Human Resources
Council has proven an effective voice in the development of human
resources programs. By involving the target audience of these programs in
the planning, the Region is better informed of the needs of employees and
can better respond to those needs.
59
-------
Managing Our Information Resources
Our ability to communicate with one
another, share information, and make
decisions is dependent largely upon
our ability to manage our information
resources. Information management
in Region III has grown steadily from
the "old days" of punch cards, three
foot stacks of printouts, and general
ADP support to a small staff. Today's
world of on-line data system access,
laser printers, and three and a half
inch diskettes requires a full range of
information management support. In
Region III, an ever growing, more
sophisticated user community is now
serviced in the areas of software
development, voice/data telecom-
munication, microcomputer support,
geographic information systems,
records management, and general
library services. Other support such as
"expert systems" using Artificial Intel-
ligence provide for a continuing, excit-
ing move toward the future.
State/EPA Data
Management
EPA's capacity to manage for en-
vironmental results depends on our
ability to identify and examine en-
vironmental trends and to report on
our performance as well as that of the
States. To effectively perform these
activities, it is essential that EPA have
a timely and accurate data sharing
program with the States. For this
reason, EPA has launched a national
State/EPA Data Management
Program designed to achieve the fol-
lowing:
To provide a direct com-
munication link to the State and
to the EPA data network
To have direct access to the
data in the national data sys-
tems
To have a state policy statement
on data integrity and protocols
To implement data integration
tools to pinpoint environmental
problems
To set priority on environmen-
tal problems on a risk-reduction
basis
To manage activities to maxi-
mize environmental results.
Four specific benefits envisioned for
the program are:
Efficiencies in data collection
which will result in significant
gains in data handling and
routine program operations
More accurate, timely and reli-
able data to guide program-
matic decisions and support
program oversight
Improved data integration to
more effectively target
regulatory and compliance ac-
tivities on risk reduction, and to
enhance the capability to
manage for environmental
results
A more productive working
relationship between EPA and
the States to focus on environ-
mental management and mini-
mize data disputes.
In Region III, formal agreements to
implement State/EPA Data Manage-
ment Plans are in place for Virginia,
Delaware, and West Virginia. It is an-
ticipated that Maryland and Pennsyl-
vania will enter into formal agree-
ments with EPA concerning data
management during 1989. Direct
telecommunications links have been
established with all Region III States
and the National Comupter Center.
This allows any state user to communi-
cate directly with EPA's major data
systems at their respective work sta-
tions. All Region III States par-
ticipated in the recent State/EPA
Data Management Conference held
in Raleigh, North Caroloina. Two
productive region/state caucuses
were held with conference repre-
sentatives. These meetings centered
on the need for continuing com-
munication, and the involvement of
senior level managers within EPA and
the states.
60
-------
Region HI Information Resource Center
Basing decisions on sound science is a fundamental
EPA goal. The purpose of the Region III Information
Resource Center (IRC) is to keep Regional staff well-sup-
plied with up-to-date,
reliable scientific and
legal information. The
IRC houses an ever-
growing collection of
books, technical reports,
microforms, Agency
directives and journals.
Now numbering about
95, WO items, the collec-
tion covers the gamut of
environmental sciences
such as biology,
chemistry, toxicology,
geology and pollution
control technologies;
environmental condi-
tions within the Region III geographical area are em-
phasized. Special collections have been established for
law, hazardous waste, and wetland ecology. A Self-Study
Center has been added with the cooperation of the Train-
ing Office.
In addition to its collection of printed and audio-visual
materials, the IRC has access to over 300 databases which
assist the staff in identifying and obtaining pertinent infor-
mation from non-EPA
sources. For example, the
National Library of
Medicine's TOXNET is
tapped frequently for toxicity
data. A variety of online in-
dexes makes it possible to
produce a list of references
on virtually any topic within
minutes.
Although primarily geared
to the information needs of
EPAstaff, the IRC serves the
public as well. The facility is
open for reference use on
weekdays from 8:00 a.m. to
4:00p.m. Review materials, such as the National Priority
List Public Docket, are available for viewing. Loans are
made to other libraries throughout the U.S. and oc-
casionally elsewhere - the IRC recently filled its first loan
request.from an African library!
Geographic Information
Systems
A Geographic Information System
(GIS) consists of integrated hardware
and software systems that provide
data entry, storage, manipulation,
analysis and display capabilities for
spatial data. Basically, this system al-
lows the user to visually display on a
map all the data available for a specific
geographic area. For example, a
series of overlays could be constructed
that indicate permit issuance data,
water quality data, drinking water
data, ground water data, and existing
Superfund sites on one composite
map of a given geographic area.
Region III is one of four EPA pilot
efforts related to GIS activity. As a
result, the Region has acquired addi-
tional hardware and software specific
to GIS support, and has formed a per-
manent GIS support group to service
Regional staff. To date, this is the most
sophisticated means of determining
cross-media impact on a geographic
area using automated technology.
Two studies currently underway in the
Region are a Radon Data Analysis
Study in Maryland, and an Inland Bay
Study in Delaware. Region III is con-
tinuing to expand its GIS capability
and expects to have a state-of-the-art
GIS support function in place in the
near future. This function will serve as
the center for all Regional cross-
media data integration and analytical
activities.
61
-------
OUR ORGANIZATION
Hazardous Waste
Enforcement Branch
Bruce P. Smith
Superfund Branch
Thomas C. Voltaggio
Waste Management
Branch
Robert L Allen
Toxics & Pesticides
Branch
Larry S. Miller
Air Programs Branch
Jesse Baskerville
Air Enforcement
Branch
Bernard E. Turlinskl
Environmental Monitoring
& Surveillance Branch
Robert G. Kramer
Central Regional
Laboratory
Orterio Villa, Jr.
Environmental Assessment
Branch
John R. Pomponio
Permits Enforcement
Branch
Joseph T. Piotrowski
Construction Grants
Branch
William M. Bulman
Drinking Water/Ground
Water Protection Branch
Jon M. Capacasa
Water Program Mgmt.
& Support Branch
Richard V. Pepino, Acting
Regional Administrator
James M. Self
Deputy Regional Administrator
Stanley L. Laskowski
Hazardous Waste
Management
Division
Stephen R. Wassersug
Director
Abraham Ferdas
Deputy Director
Air Management
Division
Thomas J. Maslany
Director
Roland W. Schrecongost
Deputy Director
Environmental
Services
Division
Greene A. Jones
Director
James W. Newsom
Deputy Director
Water
Management
Division
Alvin R. Morns
Director
Robert Mitkus
Deputy Director
Chesapeake Bay Program
Charles Spooner
Office of
Congressional &
Intergovern-
mental Liaison
Lawrence A. Teller
Director
Office of
Regional Counsel
Marcia E. Mulkey
Regional Counsel
Michael Vaccaro
Deputy Regional Counsel
Office of
Public Affairs
Janet Viniski
Director
Office of Assistant
Regional Admin-
istrator for Policy
and Management
William T.Wismewski
Director
Elaine B. Wright
Deputy Director
EEO Manager
Betty Inge
EPA
REGION III
Center for Environmental
Learning
Bonnie Smith
Air & Toxics Branch
Vacant
Hazardous Waste Branch
Neil Wise
Water & Management
Branch
Benjamin Kalkstem
Administrative
Management Branch
John J Krakowiak
Human Resources
Management Branch
Andrew P Carlm
Planning and Analysis
Branch
Mary A Sarno
Office of Comptroller
Robert G. Reed
Information Resources
Management Branch
A. J. Hamilton
Grants Management and
Audit Branch
Henry J. Sokolowski
October 1988
62
-------
OUR FINANCES
Fiscal Year 1988
APPROPRIATION
EXPENDITURE
Personnel Compensation
And Benefits
Travel
Operating Expenses
Interagency Agreements
Program Contracts
Grants To States
Wastewater Treatment
Construction Grants
Total
Salaries
and
Expenses
Superfund
Leaking
Underground
Storage
Tank
Abatement
Control and
Compliance
Wastewater
Treatment
Construction
Grants
Total
EPA
Region III
$19,961,500
$823,000
$3,416,300
$8,813,200
$691,500
$2,600,700
$2,542,100
$82,758,700
$5936,000
$219,500
$18,000
$60,900
$3,489,400
$5,003,200
$40,385,000
$28,994,200
$1,532,500
$6,077,900
$2,542,100
$87,761,900
$49,810,400
$156,275,413 $156,275,413
$24,200,800 $103,342,200
$3,787,800 $45,388,200 $156,275,413 $332,994,413
PROGRAM CONTRACTS
(26,4%)
GRANTS TO STATES
(15.0%)
BY
EXPENDITURE
INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS (0.8%)
OPERATING EXPENSES (1.8%)
TRAVEL (0.4%)
PERSONNEL COMPENSATION
AND BENEFITS (8.7%)
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
CONSTRUCTtON GRANTS
(46.9%)
SUPERFUND (31.0%)
LEAKING UNDERGROUND
STORAGE TANKS
(1.2%)
ABATEMENT CONTROL
AND COMPLIANCE
(13.6%)
BY
APPROPRIATION
SALARIES AND
BENEFITS (7.3%)
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS
(46.9%)
63
-------
FURTHER INFORMATION
If you would like further information on the subjects covered in this report, please feel free to
contact any of the following individuals:
OUR PEOPLE
EEO
Training Programs
Awards
OUR PARTNERSHIPS
Center for Environmental
Learning
Delaware
Distict of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Public Information
AIR QUALITY
Pollution Transport
Ozone
Radon
Air Toxics
Air Enforcement
Asbestos
Steel Industry Regulation
WATER QUALITY
Water Quality Standards
NPDES
National Municipal Policy
Contruction Grants
Pretreatment
Toxic Pollutants
Drinking Water
Ground Water
Underground Injection
Clean Lakes Program
Nonpoint Source Program
Chesapeake Bay Program
HAZARDOUS WASTE
CONTROL
Area Codes: 215-597-xxxx
304-232-xxxx
301-266-xxxx
Betty Inge
Eileen Burrows
Lillian Smith
Bonnie Smith
Evelyn MacKnight
Larry Teller
Evelyn MacKnight
Dan Ryan
Rich Kampf
Ray George
Janet Vmiski
Eileen Glen
Rebecca Taggart
Bill Belanger
Israel Milner
Glenn Hanson
Ron Patterson
Jim Hagedom
Bob Koroncai
Dale Wismer
Carol Amend
Bill Bulman
John Lovell
Tom Henry
JeffHass
Stu Kerzner
George Hoessel
Randy Waite
Hank Zygmont
Charles Spooner
Superfund Program Tom Voltaggio
Superfund Enforcement Bruce Smith
RCRA Jim Webb
RCRA Enforcement Vicki Binetti
Underground Storage Tanks Wayne Naylor
597-3601
597-8924
597-4127
597-9076
597-9807
597-9072
597-9807
597-9816
597-9817
232-5585
597-9370
597-8379
597-9189
597-4084
597-9090
597-6554
597-9393
597-9858
597-0133
597-6539
597-9047
597-9460
597-6279
597-8243
597-9873
597-8826
597-9928
597-3425
597-3429
922-2285
597-8132
597-1720
597-3159
597-3039
597-3177
Larry Miller
Pauline Levin
John Ruggero
Larry Miller
FIFRA and TSCA
Asbestos Program
PCB Program
SARA Title III
ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING AND
ASSESSMENT
Central Regional Lab
Bioassays
Compliance Inspections
Air Monitoring
Water Quality Monitoring
Near Coastal Waters
National Estuary Program
Wetlands
NEPA
Federal Facilities
ENVIRONMENTAL
INITIATIVES
MERITs
Risk Assessment
Comparative Risk Project
Technology Transfer &
ICEM
HUMAN RESOURCES
INNOVATIONS
Corporate Culture Study Roger Devin
Health Unit/Fitness Center Lillian Smith
& Career Development
Month
Mentoring, Employee Larry Merrill
Retreats, All-Managers
Meeting, and Human
Resources Council
INFORMATION
RESOURCES
Ort Villa
Gary Bryant
Bob Kramer
Ted Erdman
Chuck Kanetsky
Brigitte Farren
Mania O'Malley
Barb D'Angelo
JeffAlper
Fran Mulhem
Patricia Wilbur
Diana Esher
Patricia Wilbur
Tom Slenkamp
State/EPA Data Mgmt.
Information Resource Ctr.
GIS
OUR FINANCES
Wendy Bartel
Diane McCreary
Bob Braster
Larry Wliitson
597-8598
597-8683
597-9937
597-8598
266-9180
232-4055
597-8330
597-1193
597-8176
597-3361
266-9180
597-9301
597-9302
597-1168
597-9857
597-1196
597-9857
597-9861
597-9864
597-4127
597-8925
597-3532
597-7904
597-4831
597-3603
64
------- |