&EPA
         United States
         Environmental Protection
         Agency
             Region 5
             77 West Jackson Boulevard
             Chicago, Illinois 60604
905R93104
         Environmental Sciences Division
Report on the Status of
The Environment
Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Branch
March 1993
                    DDD
                    DD
                    DD
                    ODD
                    DID

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic

Summary	

Environmental Indicators

4    EPCRA/TSCA: Toxic Release Inventory.

      Figure 1	
           2	
           3...	
           4	
           5	
           6	
           7	
           8	

*    Pollution Prevention: 33/50 Program	

      Figure 9	
           10	

4    Pesticides: Ground Water	

      Table 1	
      Figure 11	
           12	
           13	
           14	
      Table 2	

•    Pesticides: Agricultural Clean Sweeps	

      Mapl	
         2	
         3	
         4	

•    Pesticides: Dinoseb Disposal	

      Figure 15	
           16	
Page
  m
   3
   4
   5
   6
   7
   8
   9
  10

  11

  13
  14

  15

  18
  19
  20
  21
  22
  23

  24

  26
  27
  28
  29

  30

  32
  33
                                      -i-

-------
Topic                                                                       Page

Environmental Indicators (Cont'd.)

4    Pesticides:  Endangered Species	                               34

      Table 3	                                    37
      Figure 17	                                   38
            18	                                    39
      Map 5	                                   40
         6	                                     41
         7	                                     42
         8	                                     43
         9	                                     44
         10	                                    45

•    PCBs Control: Supplemental Environmental Projects.                          46

      Figure 19	                                   47
           20	                                    48

•    PCBs Control:  Storage & Disposal	                             49

      Figure 21	                                   50

•    PCBs Control:  Contaminated Sediments	                            51

      Figure 22	                                   52

*    PCBs Control:  Metals Recycled	                             53

      Figure 23	                                   54

4    Asbestos: AHERA	                               55

      Figure 24	                                   57

*    Asbestos: ASHAA	                               58

      Figure 25	                                   60

Baseline Indicators

4    Mufti-Media: Worker Protection	                             62


                                       -ii-

-------
      STATUS OF THE ENVIRONMENT REPORT - MARCH 1993
                 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION
           PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH
                                 SUMMARY

This is the second annual report on the status of the environment with regards to the impact
of pesticides and toxic substances.  Thirteen indicators were chosen on the basis of several
criteria, including geographic targeting, National and/or Regional priority, and potential of
yielding the greatest environmental results.

These are the same indicators on which this branch reported in 1992, with two exceptions.
A multi-media worker protection baseline indicator was added, as was an indicator for metal
recycled under PCB disposal approvals.

SUCCESS STffltTES

Dinoseb disposal: This pesticides disposal indicator will be closed out in 1993, with over
99% of all stocks accounted for.  Since disposal began in 1990, with over 70% of the
nation's stocks being held in the Region, there remain only 86 gallons of dinoseb in the
Region. Sixty of the remaining gallons will be removed through clean sweep programs in
Minnesota in 1993.

Inland Steel Consent Agreement: As part of the settlement of a TRI non-reporter
complaint-the penalty for nonreporting in this case being about $260,000~Inland Steel
Company/Indiana Harbor Works reduced the use and emissions of tetrachloroethylene, a
solvent used in degreasing operations. The Agency also received about $100,000 in cash
from the company.

The emissions reduction is due to the installation of a high-pressure detergent system which
obviates the need for the solvent. The cleaning system described in the agreement cost about
$166,000, and will remove about 200,000 pounds per year of the solvent. In addition, the
company estimates a savings of $500,000 per year.

PCBs - Metal Recycled: In 1992, almost 17 million pounds of metal from PCB
transformers and capacitors were recycled rather than being incinerated and/or landfllled.
Since 1989, the transformers that have been decommissioned through these technologies
would fill over 140,000 cubic yards of landfill space which is equivalent to approximately
two cells at a commercial TSCA approved landfill.
                                       -111-

-------
               PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT flEPCRA)
and TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (CORE TSCA)

Toxic Release Inventory/TSCA §§ 5 & 8:  Premanufacture Notice and Inventory

The Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) started collecting emission data from industry in 1987.
The number of facilities reporting has steadily increased in Region 5 from 5600 in  1987 to
6600 in 1990.  However, the total poundage of chemical releases and transfers has decreased
between those two years from 3.67 billion pounds to 1.64 billion pounds.  In 1991, however
the number of facilities dropped to 6500 and the total releases and transfers went back up to
3.79 billion pounds.

Both statistics can be attributed, in part, to an aggressive enforcement program. Numerous
civil administrative actions were filed against non-reporting facilities between 1987 and 1990.
The increases in 1991 may also be attributable to such enforcement actions as data quality
reviews and inspections, an effective  outreach program, and the addition to the TRI reporting
form of a new section on waste handling and pollution prevention efforts.  During  settlement,
the Agency encouraged violators to consider supplemental environmental projects (SEPs)
pertaining to pollution prevention.  Almost 2,548,000 pounds of chemical  use or releases
were eliminated through SEPs.  This  consisted of chlorinated and other organic solvents as
well as ammonia and includes SEPs also secured by the TSCA §§ 5  and 8 case settlements.

NOTE:  SEPs permit a violator to directly benefit the environment in exchange for some
mitigation of a penalty. The violator's  investment in a SEP must be greater than the amount
of the penalty mitigated.  SEPs are an effective means of achieving environmental protection
beyond the Agency's statutory authority.

33/50 Program

In addition to pollution prevention requirements in settlement of enforcement actions, the
Agency has embarked upon voluntary efforts to reduce the use and release of toxic
chemicals.  In 1991, former U.S. EPA Administrator William Reilly initiated the national
voluntary 33/50 Program.  This program invites companies that reported emissions of any of
17 chemicals reported in TRI in 1988 to voluntarily reduce their emissions by 33 percent by
1992 and 50 percent by 1995.

Approximately 1500 companies in Region 5 received letters asking for voluntary reductions
of their emissions. Over 182 positive responses were received; however,  only  101 contained
enough detail to quantify emission reductions.  Many of the other responses indicated that
additional information would be provided at a later  date.

Based on 416 million pounds of emissions in 1988, the emission goals for the Region are 279
million pounds in 1992 and 208 million pounds in 1995.  The current commitments project
emissions of 408 million pounds in 1992 and 373 million pounds in  1995.  While these are
                                         -IV-

-------
far from the goals within Region 5, it must be remembered that the 50 percent reduction goal
is a national goal and not a regional one.  Also, these are the first commitments in a five-
year program.

On examining the emissions of 101 companies that have currently committed, the projected
emissions will surpass the 50 percent reduction goal of their aggregate emissions by 12
million pounds in 1995.  Therefore, their total emissions should drop from 81 million pounds
in 1988 to 29 million pounds in 1995.  This is an indication that the Agency's national goals
are attainable through voluntary participation.  Only future TRI reporting will demonstrate if
the program's projected goals will be met.

FEDERAL INSECTICIDE. FUNGICIDE AND RODENTICIDE ACT  (FIFRA)

Ground Water

All Region 5 States are in the process of developing generic pesticide State Management
Plans (SMPs). The Pesticides and Ground Water State Management Plan  Guidance has not
been finalized, therefore Regional concurrence with generic plans will be delayed until the
guidance is released.  Pesticide-specific SMPs have not yet been required of the States, but
will be in the future.  Wisconsin has established rules for management of aldicarb and
atrazine, which gives them a head  start in  protection of ground water from specific
pesticides.

Since the Agency goal is to prevent ground water contamination, the indicators will not
measure instances of contamination. This would reflect failure of a prevention program.
Instead, environmental, programmatic, and baseline indicators will be measures taken to
evaluate and protect ground water, as  suggested in the Pesticides and Ground Water Strategy
and the  accompanying guidance.  It is intended that States develop their own set of indicators
in cases where not all States are at the same level of development in the protection of ground
water from pesticide contamination.

Disposal of Pesticides

Agricultural  Clean  Sweep programs have grown and developed, almost doubling the amount
collected since the last report.  The collections reflected available funding. Five out of six
Region 5 States have conducted programs  (Ohio is planning its' first projects in 1993).  With
the publication of the report:  "Agricultural Clean Sweep:  Waste Pesticide  Removals 1988-
1992" the Region saw substantial progress in clean sweep collections and noted the results of
the first investments of Federal dollars in clean sweep.  Over $300,000 in Federal funding
was dedicated to Great Lakes Clean Sweep projects in 1991 and 1992.  By the time of the
report, $181,000 of this amount had been  spent to collect and dispose of 65,000 pounds of
waste pesticides.  Across the Region, nearly 380,000 pounds of waste pesticides have been
disposed of,  with the expenditure of nearly $1,750,000 in State and Federal funding.
                                         -v-

-------
New Storage and Disposal Regulations are being phased in under the 1988 Amendments to
FIFRA.  These are expected to make agricultural clean sweeps no longer necessary.

Endangered Species and Pesticides

By 1993  the Region had 20 endangered species mapped with potential impacts from
pesticides, as compared to 13 endangered species with such impacts in 1991.  There is an
increase in the number of signed landowner agreements and contacts with landowners.  The
objective of the landowner agreements that are in place to date is to protect endangered
plants on private property. Maps have been produced to reflect the progress made in
protection of species in the Endangered Species Protection Program of the Office of Pesticide
Programs.  Some protection activity has taken place for all mapped species (those with
potential impacts- from pesticides) in the Region.  Protection actions range from development
of maps to distribution of Bulletins and Fact Sheets or signatures on landowner agreements.
Each action  demonstrates  progress toward the goal of eliminating exposure of endangered
species to pesticides.

TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (TSCA); PCBs

For the PCB program there are four Environmental Indicators.  First, the SEPs obtained
through the negotiation of the final penalties for enforcement actions.  This indicator shows
the impact of enforcement actions in obtaining companies' commitments to implement
environmental activities which are not required by the regulations, primarily the early
removal from service and disposal of PCB equipment.  Second, the quantity of PCBs
received by commercial storage facilities and commercial disposal facilities within the
Region.  The Notification and Manifesting Rule, which went into effect in 1990, requires
commercial storage and disposal facilities to annually report to the Region their PCB waste
handling  activities.  The annual reports are an indication of the quantity of PCBs removed
from service, placed into  storage for disposal, and disposed. The Region expects these
quantities to increase over the next few years because of the implementation of various
phaseout programs, both regulatory and voluntary. By the end of the decade, the amount of
PCB material remaining in service should be much lower than today and, therefore, the
Region should  see a substantial decrease in the quantity of PCB waste being generated.
Third, the quantity of PCB contaminated sediment removed from the Great Lakes Basin,
including Superfund projects, the Corps of Engineers projects,  enforcement initiated projects,
and voluntary projects.  Tracking the removal of PCB contaminated sediment will indicate
the progress in cleaning up the Great Lakes Basin and reducing the release of a toxic
pollutant into the Great Lakes.  Fourth, the quantity of metal recycled because of PCB
disposal permits issued  by the Region.  According to the PCB regulations, PCB capacitors
have to be incinerated and the casings from PCB transformers have to be landfilled.  In
1989, the Region issued PCB disposal permits to two companies for alternative disposal
technologies to clean the metal from PCB transformers to Agency standards and recycle the
metal by smelting. In 1993 permits were issued to the two companies to use the same
                                         -VI-

-------
technologies to clean the metal from PCB capacitors to Agency standards and recycle the
metal by smelting.

PCBs - Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs)

The PCB regulations became effective in 1978 and the enforcement component of the
program was initiated in 1980. From the beginning of the PCB enforcement, the program
has obtained SEPs for settlement of enforcement actions.  The PCB program began tracking
SEPs in FY'88, and since that time the program has obtained in excess of $20 million of
SEPs through the mitigation of penalties for civil administrative actions. Most of the $20
million represents the removal from service of PCB equipment that was not required by the
PCB regulations to be removed. Other SEPs that have been performed include extensive
cleanup projects and the installation of equipment to prevent the releases of PCBs into the
environment. Starting with FY'92, the pounds of PCBs removed from service and placed
into the disposal process is being tracked and reported. In FY'92, over 190,000 pounds of
PCBs were removed from service through the settlement of civil administrative cases.

PCBs - Commercial Storage and Disposal Facilities

In 1990, the PCB Notification and Manifesting  Rule went into effect.  This rule requires that
commercial storage and/or disposal facilities submit an annual report to the Regions which
summarizes their PCB activities for the prior year. During 1991, 86 million pounds of PCB
waste was received  by Region 5 commercial storage facilities; and 40  million pounds of PCB
waste was received  by Region 5 commercial disposal facilities. The decrease in the quantity
of material disposed in Region 5 was caused by the Chemical Waste Management Chicago
Incinerator operating only one month during 1991.

PCBs - Contaminated Sediments

In FY'92, 30,000 cubic  yards of PCB contaminated sediments were removed from the Great
Lakes Basin.  The Superfund project at Waukegan Harbor was completed during FY'92 and
accounts for the entire 30,000 yards removed.

TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (TSCA); ASBESTOS

Asbestos Control - Federal Financial Assistance

The Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Act (ASHAA) was enacted in 1985 to provide
financial assistance to schools to reduce potential exposure to three types of asbestos-
containing materials (ACM):  (1) plaster; (2) fireproofing; and  (3) pipe and boiler insulation.
Schools receive ASHAA funds to abate ACMs that have been  damaged and can readily
release asbestos fibers.  Since 1985, Region 5 schools have spent over $130 million in
ASHAA funds to reduce the potential exposure of 368,000 school occupants, from seven
hours per day to zero  hours per day.
                                       -vu-

-------
Asbestos Enforcement - Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs)

The Agency encourages violators of its asbestos-in-schools regulations to conduct SEPs in
exchange for mitigation of the penalty proposed in their civil administrative actions.

The 1982 Asbestos-in-School rule (AIS) authorized the Agency to issue civil administrative
actions to school districts which did not comply with the requirements of the AIS. Most
school districts cited for noncompliance were able to receive a substantive benefit by
completing SEPs for asbestos abatement within their schools.  Five years of active
enforcement of the AIS resulted in Region 5 recognizing over $10.45 million in SEPs;
reducing the potential asbestos exposure of over 189,000 school occupants.

In contrast, enforcement of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA),  which
succeeded the AIS rule, focuses on the consultants and contractors ("other persons") who
perform work required by AHERA for schools.  However, other person violators have been
reluctant to conduct SEPs since the Agency is willing to mitigate proposed penalties  against
these violators only on a 2 for 1 basis.  Since 1990, Region 5 has recognized only $80,000
of AHERA asbestos abatement SEPs, which has reduced potential exposure to 3,093 school
occupants.
Worker Protection

The pesticides and toxic substances programs have a very wide span in the industries we
regulate. From huge utilities and manufacturing firms to small construction contractors and
fanners, all have one thing in common, they hire workers.  Although overall safety in the
workplace in regulated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the
Agency also has a role and obligation to manage its program in a fashion that will cause the
least amount of risk to workers in their day-to-day exposure to toxic  substances or pesticides.

Four diverse groups of workers within our regulated universe have been identified, and we
have started the process  of identifying and tracking the benefits of our protective measures.
Since this is the starting  point for these measures, there is little to be reported at this time.

The goal of this new multi-media indicator is to ensure that workers in Region 5 are
adequately protected from adverse health effects caused by exposure to pesticides and toxic
substances.

The objective is modification of behavior or exposure within the regulated community to the
extent that human health risks are substantially reduced through program specific measures.
                                         -viu-

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL
  INDICATORS

-------
                   ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

               PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

               ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993
PROGRAM:

INDICATOR:


GOAL:
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and TSCA §§ 5 & 8

Enforcement Settlements with Supplemental Environmental Projects
(SEPs)

Reduction of use or emissions of TRI chemicals to all media.
BACKGROUND/BASELINE:

To date, 34 of 65 consent agreement/consent orders (CACOs) contained SEPs, totaling
2,547,760 pounds per year reduction in use or emissions (Figure 3). All data exclude
delisted chemicals.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:

See chart below.  Figures 5, 6, 7, and 8 show individual and cumulative reductions in ozone
depleters, for an example of what TRI can do to assist other media programs; in this case,
the air program.
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
Figure 1: Number of facilities reporting
Nationally and Regionally.
Figure 2: National/Regional total releases and
transfers in pounds.
Total number of CACOs.
Total number of CACOs with SEPs.
Figures 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8: Amount of
chemical use or emission reduction in pounds
per year.
START-END
1987-91 and
annually
1987-91 and
annually
65
34
FY'90 to Present
and Annually
CONTACT
NAME
Abeer Hashem
Hashem
Hashem
Hashem
Hashem


-------
    FACILITIES REPORTING TO TRI
           REGION 5 AND NATIONWIDE
       THOUSANDS OF FACILITIES
    30.0
    25.0
    20.0
    15.0
    10.0
       1987 1988 1989 1990  1991 1992 1993
                    REGIONS • NATION
TRI = Toxic Release Inventory    Figure 1

-------
TOTAL TRI RELEASES AND TRANSFERS
           REGION 5 AND NATIONWIDE
       Billions of Pounds
    12.00
    10.00
     8.00
     6.00
     4.00
     2.00
     0.00
        1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
                  I REGION 5 m NATION
TRI = Toxic Release Inventory
Figure 2

-------
  REDUCTION  IN TOXIC CHEMICAL USE OR RELEASE
       REGION 5 - EPCRA SECTION 313 AND TSCA §§ 5 & 8 SEPs
          Thousands
     3,000
     2,500
     2,000
     1,500
     1,000
       500
          FY'90 '90-91 '90-92  '90-93 '90-94  '90-95
              EH Accumulated Reductions H Current FY Reductions
SEPs - Supplemental Environmental Projects   Fiaure 3

-------
  REDUCTION  IN TOXIC CHEMICAL USE OR RELEASE
        REGION 5 -EPCRA SECTION 313 AND TSCA §§ 5 & 8 SEPs
          Thousands of Pounds
      2,000
      1,500
      1,000
       500
           '90  '90-91 '90-92  '90-93 '90-94 '90-95 '90-96
         LJChromium Reductions 9Lead Reductions HAH Other Reductions
SEPs - Supplemental Environmental Projects
Excludes 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, Freon-113, Methylene Chloride H9ure 4

-------
  REDUCTION IN 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE USE OR RELEASE
                   REGION 5 -EPCRA SECTION 313 SEPs
                               Ozone Depleter
         Thousands of Pounds
          FY'90 '90-91 '90-92  '90-93  '90-94 '90-95
                LJ Accumulated Reductions K Current FY Reductions
SEPs - Supplemental Environmental Projects  Figure 5

-------
   REDUCTION IN METHYLENE CHLORIDE USE OR RELEASE
                   REGION 5 EPCRA SECTION 313 SEPs
                              Ozone Depleter

        Thousands of Pounds
        FY'90  '90-91 '90-92  '90-93 '90-94  '90-95 '90-96
               D Accumulated Reductions 12 Current FY Reductions
SEPs - Supplemental Environmental Projects _.

-------
REDUCTION IN FREON-113  USE OR RELEASE
           REGION 5 - EPCRA SECTION 313 SEPs
                       Ozone Depleter
      Thousands of Pounds
      FY'90 '90-91  '90-92 '90-93 '90-94 '90-95 '90-96
                      I Current FY Reductions
SEPs - Supplemental Environmental Projects p:aure 7

-------
 CUMULATIVE  REDUCTIONS IN USE OR RELEASE
             REGION 5 -EPCRA SECTION 313 SEPs
                         Ozone Depleters
         Thousands of Pounds
     500.0
     400.0
     300.0
     200.0
     100.0
           '90  '90-91 '90-92 '90-93 '90-94 '90-95
              EH Accumulated Reductions IS Current FY Reductions
SEPs - Supplemental Environmental Projects Figure 8

-------
                    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

                ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993
PROGRAM:       33/50 Program

INDICATOR:      Company   Participation  in   Emission   Reductions   of  17
                  TRI Chemicals.

GOAL:           Voluntary Reductions in Emissions of TRI Chemicals to all Media.

BACKGROUND/BASELINE:

Figure 9 shows the actual amounts of emissions of 17 chemicals listed for voluntary reductions
reported in TRI for 1988 (Base Year). It also shows the program emission goals for 1992 and
1995 for all companies in Region 5, as well as the projected emissions for the 101 participating
companies which have quantifiable commitments. About 421 million pounds of the 17 chemicals
were emitted in 1988.

Figure 10 compares the aggregate emissions of the 101 companies for the base year with their
emission goals and their projected emissions for 1992 and 1995.  About 81  million pounds of
the 17 chemicals were emitted in 1988 and their reduction commitments total 17 million pounds
by 1992 and another 35 million pounds by 1995 for a cumulative total of 52 million pounds.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS

Figure 9 also has fixed values for the 1988 emission data and the emission goals for Region 5.
The projected emissions will decrease  with increased participation, and  as  more detailed
commitment information becomes available.  The cumulative effect of these emission reductions
indicates that our goals are attainable.

Figure 10 also monitors the achievements of participating companies relative to their aggregate
emissions. All of the emission values will change with more participation and are cumulative.
Actual emission values for the 17 chemicals will be placed in the figure starting with 1991 when
the complete data become available.  A comparison between reported and projected emissions,
which are based on commitments, will then be evident.

Mapping of the participating companies  in Region 5 will be done in the future. This will be
done relative to the Great Lakes Basin and other specific areas of concern.  The map will be
used to show the program's impact in geographical areas as a function of time.
                                       11

-------
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
Total company participation in 33/50 program
Companies with quantifiable commitments
Company commitments to reduce emissions in
millions of pounds per year (1992/1995)
Reduction in emissions based on TRI reports in
pounds per year.
START-END
182
101
17/52
FY'90 to Present
CONTACT
NAME
Abeer Hashem
Hashem
Hashem
Hashem
12

-------
33/50 PROGRAM: AGGREGATE EMISSION REPOR1
     EMISSIONS OF ALL COMPANIES AND FACILITIES IN REGION 5
        Millions of Pounds Released (Millions)
     500
     400
     300
     200
     100
       Base Yr'89  '90  '91  '92  '93   '94   '95
       DEMISSION GOAL HPROJECTED EMISSIONS • ACTUAL EMISSIONS
                            Figure 9

-------
33/50 PROGRAM: PARTICIPANTS EMISSION REPORT
  EMISSIONS OF PARTICIPATING COMPANIES AND FACILITIES IN REGION 5
       MILLIONS OF POUNDS RELEASED (Millions)
    100
      Base Yr'89  '90   '91   '92  '93  '94  '95
      DEMISSION GOALS HPROJECTED EMISSIONS •ACTUAL EMISSIONS
                             FIGURE 10

-------
                    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

                ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993

PROGRAM:       Pesticides: Ground Water

INDICATOR:      Prevention of Ground Water Contamination by Pesticides

GOAL:            Reduce/Eliminate and Effectively Prevent Contamination of Ground
                   Water by Pesticides

BACKGROUND AND CURRENT STATUS:

Following is a selection of environmental, programmatic and baseline indicators for
protection of ground water from pesticide contamination. These can be used on a nationwide
basis and adapted to Regions and States to suit individual requirements. Based on the
inherent flexibility in the Pesticides and Ground Water Strategy, which emphasizes the need
for each State to develop appropriate ground water protection measures, each State will select
a variety of activities which can be tracked.  For this reason,  one or more of each of the
following indicators may be followed for each Region 5 State.

             Indicators
           Pesticide usage tracked over time
           Tracking the use of pesticides known to leach
           Monitoring ground water for pesticides known to leach
           Monitoring of ground water for pesticides required to have Pesticide Specific
           Plans
           Tracking the use of pesticides required to have Pesticide Specific Plans
           Tracking the use of pesticides that replace those that require pesticide specific
           plans
      •   Elimination of pesticide use in vulnerable areas.  If the use of a pesticide were
           eliminated invulnerable areas of a state, this could be reported as progress in
           "cleaning up" the environment even though it is  preventative in nature.

Programmatic Indicators

      •   Number of States with generic state management plans
      •   Number of States with Pesticide-specific management plans which include
           environmental indicators
                                        15

-------
Baseline Indicators

       •    To obtain a baseline for monitoring, use the National Pesticide Survey,
            Pesticides and Ground Water Data Base, and other State monitoring data as an
            approximation or point of departure for selection of pesticides to look for in a
            monitoring program.

       •    Monitoring should be targeted to areas of pesticide use and medium to high
            vulnerability to pesticide contamination.  Pesticides should be selected on their
            potential to leach into ground water.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS

The attached grid (Table 1) shows progress each Region 5 State has made in development of
generic State management plans.  Most States are in the development of their monitoring and
vulnerability assessment programs.  Two States, Minnesota and Wisconsin, have submitted
generic plans for Regional review.

Pesticide use data can be used to determine monitoring  needs and the effectiveness of a
preventive program.  Surveys done in Region 5 States from 1985 to  1991  found a downward
trend in usage  of three pesticides known to contaminate ground water, and which are heavily
used in Region 5 for com  and soybean production: alachlor, atrazine, and metolachlor as
shown in Figures  11, 12, and 13.  Tracking the use of these three pesticides is important
because their future use may depend on states developing pesticide-specific State management
plans.  Also, if pesticide-specific plans are required for these pesticides, the use of
replacement pesticides should be tracked to get an understanding of the environmental effects
of possible increased use of replacements.  Figure 14 shows that the use of cyanazine has
been stable for 1990 and 1991.  (Cyanazine is a replacement pesticide for  atrazine.
Restricting  the use of atrazine will increase the use of cyanazine.)

Storage and containment regulations for pesticides will help prevent ground water
contamination.  All Region 5 States have storage and contaminant regulations for pesticides
(Table 2).
                                          16

-------
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
START-END
CONTACT NAME
NUMBER OF STATES RECEIVING
REGIONAL CONCURRENCES WITH
GENERIC STATE MANAGEMENT
FLANS
FY92-FY94
BRUCE
WILKINSON
NUMBER OF STATES WITH
APPROVED PESTICIDE SPECIFIC
MANAGEMENT PLANS WITH
ACTIVE MONITORING PROGRAMS
AND REPORTED RESULTS
FY92-FY95
BRUCE
WILKINSON
PERCENT VULNERABLE COUNTIES
WHERE BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES FOR PESTICIDES HAVE
BEEN APPLIED
FY92-FY95
BRUCE
WILKINSON
        VULNERABLE COUNTIES
WHERE PESTICIDE USE HAS BEEN
RESTRICTED
FY92-FY95
BRUCE
WILKINSON
                            17

-------
                   PESTICIDES AND GROUKD WATER

              GENERIC STATE MANAGEMENT  FLAN PROGRESS
BMP COMPONENTS IL IN MI MN OH WI
1. PHILOSOPHY AND GOALS
2. STATE AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES
3. LEGAL AUTHORITY
4. RESOURCES/TECHNICAL EXPERTISE
5. ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
6 . MONITORING
7. PREVENTION ACTIONS
8. RESPONSE TO DETECTIONS
9. ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS
10. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
11. DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION
12. RECORDS /REPORTING
Z
Z
Z
D
Z
Z
Z
D
D
D
D
D
Z
Z
Z
D
Z
D
Z
D
D
D
Z
D
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
D
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
D
D
D
D
D
Z
D
D
D
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z = HAVE DRAFTED THIS COMPONENT OF GENERIC STATE MANAGEMENT PLAN OR
HAVE AN ONGOING PROGRAM

D = ARE DEVELOPING THIS COMPONENT OF A GENERIC STATE MANAGEMENT
PLAN
                                                      Table 1

-------
                     ALACHLOR  USE
                            REGION 5
                                         7.6
                                        4.6
                                  3.4
                                    1.2
                                             7.1
                                               6.9
                                                 5.8
                                                    I.8
                                                      4.1
                                                         3.9
                                                            1.8
                                                              1.3
                 IL
                        78'90'91
IN
 0'91  WQI  78'82186'90'91  '85'90'91

Ml     MN     OH        Wl
Data unavailable for years not shown
Alaehlor Drinking Water Standard: Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) = 2 ppb ; MCL Goal (MCLG) = Zero
                                Figure 11

-------
                    ATRAZINE USE
                          REGION 5
                  10.6
                             3.4


                             I
         2.6
             1.9
               1.7
                                                      5.3
                                  2.1
           82'85'88'90'91  78'90'91  78'90'91  '90*91  78'82'86'90'91
               IL
IN
Ml    MN
OH
'85'90'91

 Wl
Data unavailable for years not shown
Atrazine Drinking Water Standard: Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) = 3 ppb
                            Figure 12

-------
                METOLACHLOR  USE

                          REGION 5
                        3.6
                      0.8
                                            4.4
                               2.7



                               ^
                                     2.8
                             0.1
       VV
       VV
       V V
       \N\N
          0.3

          V&
                                              3.9
                                                4.1
                                                  4.3
                                                      1.6  1.6
                                                        0.9
           )82'85188'90I91  78'90'91  78'90'91  '90'91   78'82I86190'91  '85'90'91
                IL
IN
Ml    MN
OH
Wl
Data unavailable for years not shown

Metolachlor Drinking Water Standard: Health Advisory Level = 100 ppb

                             Figure 13

-------
                  CYANAZINE USE

                         REGION 5
        12
        10
      ca
      o>
      >»
      »-  8
      0)
      a

      CO
      •o
      o
      a.
      CO
      c
      o
             4.28
                   1.91
                      1.51
                           0.61
                              0.8
                3.56
                                      1.69
                                            1.76
                                              1.68
                                                    1.7 1.71
           '90 '91
            IL
•90 '91


 IN
'90 '91


  Ml
-90 '91


 MN
•90 '91


 OH
'90 '91


 Wl
Data unavailable for years not shown

Cyanazine Drinking Water Standard: Health Advisory Level = 10 ppb

                            Figure 14

-------
*** POLLUTION PREVENTION ACTIVITIES ***
STORAGE AND CONTAINMENT REGULATIONS
       PASSED BY REGION V STATES

OHIO
1984

f wis •
OHIO
1985
*?!$ I
OHIO
1986
m$
OHIO
1987
"tfZS ^'
OHIO
1988

KXK
- «I$^'
v
OHIO
1989

ILL
;
KIN
' «IS
.'i«
1990

INI>
nat
HUf
wxs
OHIO
1991
MICH
llfc.
IM«
HI»
•c
in»"
1 OHXO '
1992
  FOR CONTROL OF PESTICIDESIN GROUND WATER
                                    Table 2

-------
                     ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

                 ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993

PROGRAM:  Pesticides: Pesticides Disposal/Agricultural Clean Sweeps

INDICATOR: Track removal of waste pesticides which represent a high risk when stored
        for long periods of time—over 20 years in some cases. For complete removal,
        experience has indicated each county should be "swept" three times. When this
        process is complete, nearly 75% of the amount estimated to exist will have been
        removed.

GOAL:    Reduce Risk of Exposure to Canceled, Suspended Pesticides

BACKGROUND/BASELINE

In 1991 collection programs conducted by 4 Region 5 States had disposed of nearly 200,000
pounds of waste pesticides for just under $1 million dollars. The programs reported almost
half of the pesticides brought to clean sweeps were suspended and canceled and included a
number of surprises; for example, one ton of DDT and large amounts of Lead arsenate.

Through the involvement in Great Lakes initiatives, Federal dollars were dedicated to
agricultural clean sweeps in Lake Michigan and Lake Superior. Clean sweep programs
represent an opportunity to reach out to holders in the fanning community, to send a
message that clean sweeps are an opportunity to remove waste pesticides and to educate
holders about storage, disposal and pollution prevention.

By 1993, all Region 5 States have either conducted agricultural clean sweep projects or are
planning to do so in the near future (Ohio).  The amounts collected have grown to nearly
380,000 pounds for $1.75 million dollars, almost  double the reported amount in December
1991. The States have developed sophisticated procedures for planning and conducting
agricultural clean sweep programs, including matching funds on the county level,
infrastructure which includes local organizations and grass roots support.

Substantial progress has been reported in the Great Lakes Basin, the location for more than
half of the removals. Due to the sensitivity of the Great Lakes ecosystem, collections were
focused on removal of persistent pesticides as one way to begin to reverse the cycle of
persistent toxic substances entering the lakes through  nonpoint sources and accumulating in
sediments and eventually in wildlife tissue. In the 1992 agricultural clean sweeps in the
Great Lakes Basin, persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides, including DDT, toxaphene,
dieldrin and chlordane, represented 18 percent of the collection (14,000 pounds of
chlorinated  hydrocarbons of 74,500 pounds collected).

                                       24

-------
Overall, suspended and canceled pesticides represent 26-75% of the amount collected in
agricultural clean sweeps.
When the goal of three sweeps per county is achieved, the States would hold agricultural
clean sweeps on an as-needed basis. The States would like to continue holding clean sweeps
until this goal is achieved.  By the third event the majority of large holders have been
contacted.

New storage and disposal regulations, as required by amendments to FIFRA in 1988, will be
gradually phased in. The regulations will include storage and containment guidelines as well
as requirements for data on disposal of pesticides.  The circumstances which created the need
for agricultural clean sweeps will be changed and there will no longer be a need for these
programs.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:

See Maps 2 through 4.
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
Map 1
Number of clean sweeps/county in Region
5
Map 2
Number of Ibs./year/State
Map 3
Federal v. State expenditures
Map 4
Total Ibs. removed v. expenditure per
State
START-END
1988-92
1988-92
1988-92
1988-92
CONTACT
NAME
Margaret Jones
Jones
Jones
Jones
                                         25

-------
CN
O)
00
CO
 CD
 CD


CO

 c
 CO


O
 O
LO
 O)
 CD
DC

-------
CN
05
O)


00
00
"O
 0

 O


 (I)
01

 (O
"O
 c
 D
 O
Q_

 Q.
 
-------
CN
0>
O)

 i
00
00
O)
 CO
 CD
 CD
 Q_
 X
 CL
 (D
 0)
 c
 CD
_0>

0
 O


I

LO

 C
 0)
oc
                                          IS
                                          O
 o E
 ""> H
 21 SL
                                                                              01


                                                                              PM
1

J

-------
CM
OO
00
 CL
 CD
 CD


CO
 CO
_CD
o
 CD
 :5
 o
 c
 o
'a)
 CD
DC

-------
                     ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

                 ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993
PROGRAM:   Pesticides:  Pesticides Disposal

INDICATOR:  Removal of All Known Stocks of the Suspended and Canceled
              Pesticide, Dinoseb, from Region 5.

GOAL:        Reduce the Risk of Dinoseb Exposure

BACKGROUND:

At the outset of dinoseb disposal in 1990, Region 5 States held 71% of the nation's stocks,
totaling nearly 2 million gallons. This amount was held by 136 holders.  By January 1992,
73% of the stocks had been shipped to disposal facilities in Sauget, Illinois and Port Arthur,
Texas. Intensive efforts were made by the Region and States to contact all remaining
holders.

To date, there are 6 known holders remaining in the Region,  with a total of 86 gallons. Of
this amount, 60 gallons will be collected at agricultural clean  sweeps in Minnesota during the
summer months.

Of the total amount of dinoseb, 99% was shipped  to decanning facilities in Tennessee and
from there, either to Sauget, Illinois or Port Arthur, Texas for disposal. Less than 1% was
disposed of through agricultural clean sweeps.

This indicator will be closed out as the U.S. EPA disposal program ends.  The Agency
considers the disposal program to be complete and highly  successful.

It is expected  there will be continuing small amounts of dinoseb discovered from time to time
and, where possible, these will be collected and disposed of through agricultural clean sweep
programs.  Since there was a disposal program for dinoseb, it is not expected that there will
be large amounts of this pesticide uncovered in the future, as  with pesticides such as DDT
and Lead arsenate, for which there were no disposal programs.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS

See Figures 15, for reported dinoseb holders, and  Figure 16,  for reported  dinoseb  quantities
in Region 5.


                                       30

-------
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
TOWARD GOAL
Figure 15
Total number of holders reduced
Figure 16
Total quantities removed
START-END
1990-93
1990-93
CONTACT
NAME
Margaret Jones
Jones
31

-------
REPORTED DINOSEB HOLDERS IN REGION 5
                  No. OF HOLDERS
    3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q
     90  |   91    I   92    I 93
        CALENDAR QUARTER/YEAR
              FIGURE 15

-------
REPORTED DINOSEB QUANTITIES IN REGION 5
        THOUSANDS OF GALLONS
    2,000
    1,500
    1,000
     500
       0
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
       3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q
        90 I    91    I    92    I 93
          CALENDAR QUARTER/YEAR

-------
                     ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

                 PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

                 ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993

PROGRAM:  Pesticides:  Endangered Species

INDICATOR: 100 percent of Federally listed endangered species in Region 5 that are
        jeopardized by pesticides are protected under the Federal Endangered Species
        Protection Program (ESPP) or an individual State Initiated Plan

GOAL:     Reduce the Risk of Endangered Species to Pesticides Exposure

BACKGROUND/BASELINE

Thirteen species were mapped in 68 counties in Region 5 in December 1991. Two States
had active programs: Minnesota was in the process of developing a State Initiated Plan (SIP)
based on Landowner Agreements and Michigan was in the process of distributing Bulletins
and Fact Sheets in 11 counties in Michigan.

All Region 5 States are now involved in the protection of Federally listed endangered species
from potential pesticide impacts. The degree of protection afforded each species by the
individual  state varies. The two means for protecting endangered species are:  (1) the
Federal Endangered Species Protection Program which relies on county bulletins to inform
pesticide users in a county of the limitations on their pesticide use to avoid adverse impacts
on the species and; (2) SIPs developed on the idea of landowner agreements between State
Departments of Agriculture and the individual landowner (where species habitat) to establish
pesticide use limitations to avoid adverse impacts on the species.  Table 3 highlights the
program(s) each State is using to protect species.  Under both programs, the Agency's goal
is to prevent adverse impacts upon listed species.  Indicators will not measure the instances
of adverse impacts, for this would reflect a failure, but rather the various steps taken to
avoid adversely impacting species due to pesticide  exposure.

Minnesota: Actively involved in the development and implementation of its SIP since
FY'89, Minnesota has received over $130,000 in Federal funding over the last four years.
To date, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) has been concentrating its
protection  efforts on its plant species (Prairie Bush Clover, Western Prairie Fringed Orchid,
Minnesota Dwarf Trout Lily), having obtained IS signed landowner agreements and 25
verbal agreements, both include pesticide practice plans. Many of the counties in Minnesota
identified on the attached map contain multiple population occurrences of listed species;
therefore, the MDA has consulted with various landowners in each county.   The
individualized nature of Minnesota's SIP allows for a great deal of latitude for negotiating
pesticide use limitations in areas habitated by listed species.  The goal of Minnesota' s34

                                        34

-------
protection program, and Wisconsin's also, is to work collectively with landowners to bring
species into the protection program.  This approach differs markedly from the county-wide
command and control nature of the Federal Program.

Michigan:  The Michigan Department of Agriculture participated in a Federal pilot project
in FY'91 to protect the Kirtland's Warbler from potential pesticide impacts in 11 counties.
U.S. EPA Interim Bulletins, which contain general program information as well as species
locations and pesticide use limitations, were distributed to pesticide users in the affected
counties. When the Federal Program becomes final, these use limitations will be enforceable
and pesticide users  required to use products consistent with the bulletin's provisions.
Currently the bulletins act as an outreach mechanism to inform pesticide users of the location
of species and the pending program.  The Interim Bulletins continue to be made available to
pesticide users in these 11 counties, even though the pilot is over.

Many more counties in Region 5 will be affected by the ESPP, as new listings are made
final.  There may be many more potential impacts from pesticides as time goes on.

There will always be an element of uncertainty to the program.  We may never know with
certainty if recovery of a species was due to our efforts to eliminate exposure of species to
pesticides or due to other factors.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:

See Table 3, Figures 17 and 18, and Maps 5 through 10.
                                         35

-------
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
Table 3
Species Protected/State
Figures 17 & 18
Distribution of Endangered Species in
Region 5 (cumulative)
Maps 5-10
Distribution of Endangered Species by
State
START-END
1991 through
present
1992-93
1991-92
CONTACT
NAME
Margaret Jones
Jones
Jones
36

-------
TYPE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES PROTECTION
  PROGRAM CHOSEN BY REGION 5 STATES
ENDANGERED SPECIES PROGRAM
(Type of Species)
Federal Program
o Plants
o Mussels
o All Species
State Initiated Plan
o Plants
o Mussels
o All Species
IL







X
IN



X




MI



X




MN


X


X


OH



X




WI


X


X


                                       TableS

-------
DISTRIBUTION OF ENDANGERED SPECIES IN REGION 5
      WHAT AND HOW MANY WE HAVE IN THE PROGRAM
                  MUSSELS 28
                      54%
  SNAILS 1
     2%
                                          PLANTS 3
                                             6%
FISHES  1
   2%
                     BIRDS  19
                       37%

                     1992
                                      FIGURE 17
*Species values equal the number of counties with occurrences
*Specific species do not populate the entire county; however,
there are occurrences of multiple species in a single county

-------
DISTRIBUTION OF ENDANGERED SPECIES IN REGION 5
      WHAT AND HOW MANY WE HAVE IN THE PROGRAM
         SNAILS 1
            1%
MUSSELS  31
    34%
 BIRDS 21
    23%
    FISHES 1
      1%
                              PLANTS  38
                                 41%
                     1993
                                       FIGURE 18
*Species values equal the number of counties with occurrences
*Specific species do not populate the entire county; however,
there are occurrences of multiple species in a single county

-------
      Federally  Listed  Endangered  Species  with  Potential
         Pesticide  Impacts  and  Actual  Protection   Actions
                                         Indiana
Legend
      County  Boundary

      State  Boundary

      Endangered Species Protection Program
      Office  of Pesticide Programs

      1991  Protection Actions*

      1992  Protection Actions*
MUSSEL, FAT POCKETBOOK
PEARLY MUSSEL, WHITE CAT'S PAW
TERN, INTERIOR LEAST
 8
1 4
1 8
                           '-tap?™  I	1 - -*- - -t
(18): Species 18 entered ESPP in 1991
14: Species  14 entered ESPP in  1992

* Protection Actions include one  or more of the following:
  map preparation, Bulletin and Fact Sheet  distribution or
  State Initiated Plan development for counties included
  in the Endangered Species Protection Program.
Date of Retrieval: April 1993
                                                                        USEPA REGION V
                                                                    Environment)! Sciences Division
                                                                    Geographic Information Systems
                                                                       Management Otfice	
                                         MAP 5

-------
    Federally  Listed   Endangered  Species  with  Potential
       Pesticide   Impacts  and   Actual  Protection  Actions
                                        Illinois
Legend
      County Boundary

      State Boundary

      Endangered Species Protection Program
      Office of Pesticide Programs

      1991  Protection Actions*

      1992  Protection Actions*
 MUSSEL, FAT POCKETBOOK
 PEARLY MUSSEL, HIGGINS' EYE
 PEARLY MUSSEL, ORANGE-FOOTED
 PEARLY MUSSEL, PINK MUCKET
 PLOVER, PIPING
 SNAIL, IOWA PLEISTOCENE
 TERN, INTERIOR LEAST
115,17): Species 15 and 17 entered ESPP in 1991
11: Species 11  entered ESPP in 1992

* Protection Actions include one or more of the following:
  map preparation, Bulletin and Fact Sheet  distribution  or
  State Initiated Plan development  for counties  included
  in the Endangered Species Protection Program.
Date of Retrieval: April  1993
    USEPA REGION V
Environment!) Sciences Division
Geographic Information Systems
    Management Office
                                       MAP  6

-------
    Federally  Listed  Endangered  Species  with  Potential
       Pesticide  Impacts  and  Actual   Protection  Actions
                                        Ohio
                               i	L	1,
                               WVMOOT iOMNFOMl I
Legend
      County  Boundary

      State  Boundary

      Endangered Species Protection Program
      Office of Pesticide Programs

      1991  Protection Actions*

      1992  Protection Actions*
MADTOM. SCIOTO                    6
MONKSHOOD, NORTHERN WILD          7
PEARLY MUSSEL, PINK MUCKET         1 3
PEARLY MUSSEL, WHITE CAT'S PAW     1 4

(13): Species 13 entered  ESPP in 1991
6: Speoes 6 entered ESPP in 1992

* Protection Actions include one or more of the  following
  map preparation, Bulletin and Fact Sheet distribution or
  Slate Initiated Plan development for  counties included
  in UK Endangered Species Protection Program.
Date of  Retrieval: April 1993
                                                                     USEPA REGION V
                                                                 Environmental Sciences Division
                                                                 Geogrjphic Information Systems
                                                                     Minageaent Office
                                       MAP 7

-------
    Federally  Listed   Endangered  Species   with  Potential
       Pesticide  Impacts  and  Actual  Protection  Actions
                                     Michigan
Legend
      County  Boundary

      State  Boundary

      Endangered Species Protection Program
      Office of Pesticide Programs

      1991  Protection Actions*

      1992  Protection Actions*
PLOVER, PIPING           15
WARBLER,  KIRTLAND'S       20

(15): Species  15 entered ESPP in 1991
20: Species 20 entered ESPP in 1992

* Protection Actions include one or  more of the following:
  map preparation, Bulletin and Fact Sheet distribution or
  State Initiated Plan development for counties included
  in the  Endangered  Species Protection Program.
Date of  Retrieval: April 1993
                                       MAP 8
                                                                     USEPA IEGION V
                                                                 Environmental Sciences Division
                                                                 Geographic Information Systems
                                                                    Management Office

-------
     Federally  Listed  Endangered  Species  with   Potential
        Pesticide   Impacts  and  Actual  Protection  Actions
                                      Minnesota
                                                          County Boundary

                                                          State  Boundary

                                                         Endangered Species  Protection Program
                                                         Office of Pesticide Programs

                                                          1991  Protection Actions*

                                                          1992  Protection Actions*
BUSH-CLOVER, PRAIRIE
LILY, MINNESOTA TROUT
ORCHID, WESTERN PRAIRIE FRINGE
PEARLY MUSSEL, HIGGINS' EYE
PLOVER, PIPING
ROSEROOT, LEEDY'S

(10): Species 10 entered ESPP in 1991
16: Species 16 entered ESPP in 1992
Date of Retrieval: April  1993
 1
 4
10
1 1
15
16
* Protection Actions include one or more  of the following:
  map preparation, Bulletin and Fact Sheet distribution or
  State Initiated Plan development for counties included
  in the Endangered  Species Protection Program.
                                                                       USEPA KEGION V
                                                                   Environmental Sciences Division
                                                                   Geographic Information Systems
                                                                      Management Office
                                        MAP 9

-------
     Federally  Listed  Endangered   Species   with  Potential
       Pesticide  Impacts  and  Actual  Protection   Actions
                                     Wisconsin
        Legend

      County Boundary

      State Boundary

      Endangered  Species Protection Program
      Office of Pesticide Programs

      1991 Protection Actions*

      1992 Protection Actions*
BUSH-CLOVER, PRAIRIE                1
IRIS, DWARF LAKE                   3
LOCOWEED, FASSETT'S                5
MONKSHOOD, NORTHERN WILD          7
ORCHID, EASTERN PRAIRIE FRINGE        9
PEARLY MUSSEL, HIGGINS' EYE         1 1
THISTLE, PITCHER'S                  1 9
<1):  Species 1  entered ESPP in 1991
7: Species 7 entered ESPP in 1992

* Protection Actions include one or more of the following:
  map preparation, Bulletin and Fact Sheet distribution or
  State Initiated Plan development for counties included
  in the Endangered Species Protection Program.
Date of  Retrieval: April 1993
                         USEPA REGION V
                     Environmental Sciences Division
                     Geographic Information Systems
                        Management Office
                                      MAP  10

-------
                  ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

              PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

              ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS -  MARCH 1993

PROGRAM:   PCBs Control

INDICATOR:  Enforcement Settlements with Supplemental
       Environmental Projects (SEPs)

GOAL:    Reduce the Risk of PCBs Exposure

BACKGROUND/BASELINE:

The final penalty for a Civil Administrative Action may be mitigated for SEPs. The dollar
value of the SETs has been tracked since FY'88. In addition, starting in FY'92 the quantity
of PCBs in pounds removed from service and properly disposed is being tracked.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:

See Figures 19 (for dollar value) and 20 (for quantity of PCBs removed).
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
DOLLAR VALUE OF EXPENDITURE
REPORTED
AMOUNT OF PCBs REMOVED FROM
SERVICE AND PROPERLY DISPOSED
IN POUNDS PER YEAR
START-END
FY'88 TO
PRESENT AND
ANNUALLY
FY'92 TO
PRESENT AND
ANNUALLY
CONTACT
NAME
J. CONNELL
J. CONNELL
                                   46

-------
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS
             REGION 5 - PCB SECTION
        FY '88 '88-89 '88-90 '88-91 '88-92 '88-93 '88-94
       Accumulated amount D Current FY amount
                     Figure 19

-------
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS
            REGION 5 - PCB SECTION
     250
        FY'92 92-93 92-94 92-95 92-96 92-97 92-98
               Accumulated amount
                    Figure 20

-------
                  ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

              PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

               ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993
PROGRAM:   PCBs Control

INDICATOR:  Quantity of PCBs Received by Commercial Storage Facilities and Received
             by Commercial Disposal Facilities

GOAL:    Reduce the Risk of Improper Disposal of PCBs

BACKGROUND/BASELINE:

The Notification and Manifesting Rule requires that commercial storage and commercial
disposal facilities submit annual reports to the Region by July 15th summarizing their PCBs
activities for the prior calendar year.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:

See Figure 21.
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
RECEIVE ANNUAL REPORTS FROM
STORAGE AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIES (JULY 15TH)
REVIEW ANNUAL REPORTS
THE POUNDS OF PCB MATERIAL
STORED AND DISPOSED WILL BE
START-END
1991-PRESENT
ANNUAL
REPORTING
FY'92 TO
PRESENT AND
ANNUALLY
CONTACT
NAME
J.CONNELL
J. CONNELL
J. CONNELL
                                   49

-------
  PCBs RECEIVED BY STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES

                 REGION 5 - PCB SECTION
       200
       150
     W
     •o
     c
     3
     O
     O.
     •5 100
           1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
    COMMERCIAL STORAGE U COMMERCIAL DISPOSERS
                                                 V
Data for 1992 due June 15,1993.
                      Figure 21

-------
                 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION
             PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH
              ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993
PROGRAM:
INDICATOR:
PCBs Control

  Quantity of PCBs-Contaminated Sediment Removed from the Great
  Lakes Basin and Disposed of Properly
GOAL:      Reduce the PCBs Loading to the Great Lakes

BACKGROUND/BASELINE:

The major source of PCBs contamination into the Great Lakes is migration of the
contaminated sediment.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:

Cumulative total of PCBs-contaminated sediment in cubic yards is presented in Figure 22.
 INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
 PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
                    START-END
CONTACT
NAME
 DISPOSAL APPLICATIONS
 REVIEWED
                    ON GOING
J.CONNELL
 DREDGING INITIATED AND THE
 CUBIC YARDS OF PCB SEDIMEN1
 DISPOSED WILL BE REPORTED
                    FY'92 PRESENT
                    AND
                    ANNUALLY
                                                J. CONNELL
                                 51

-------
o
UJ
O
5
UJ
DC

Hmmm
z
z2
m o
5?
HI CD
Eg
Q -
Uj in
So
z 5
•P» UJ
^ DC
p



,
:\
0 \
CO \



•


\
^

\.
\

V
\

\
xx^
\
\
^V




CO
: : : : : 8
; ; ; ; ; O

\\

\
8 \\ \ \ \ \ \ ^
CO co

O)
>
"•
(O
O)
^
in
u.
rt- CM
s i
>• 3
U. 5»
LL
CO
g>
>
CM
O)

"-
^«
O>
U.
o in o in o in o
CO CM CM i- T-
O spjeA oiqno jo spuesnom
Q.


-------
                  ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION
              PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH
          ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993
PROGRAM:   PCBs Control

INDICATOR:  Quantity of Metal recycled under PCBs disposal approvals.

GOAL:    Reduce the amount of metal being landfilled •

BACKGROUND/BASELINE:

PCBs capacitors and transformers have to be either incinerated or landfilled. The program
has issued approvals to two companies to clean the metal casings to the Agency's prescripted
levels and allow metal to be sent to smelters for recycling.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:

See Figure 23.
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
RECEIVE ANNUAL REPORTS FROM
APPROVED DISPOSAL FACILITIES
REVIEW ANNUAL REPORTS
THE TONS OF METAL RECYCLED
WILL BE DETERMINED
START-END
1989-PRESENT
ANNUALLY
1989 TO
PRESENT AND
ANNUALLY
CONTACT
NAME
J.CONNELL
J.CONNELL
J.CONNELL
                                   53

-------
  15

0)

c
3
o
a

o 10

C
o
       METAL RECYCLED

      REGION 5 - PCB SECTION
             17.11 17.12 16.91
    FY'89 '90 '91  '92 '93  '94 '95
              Figure 23

-------
                    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

                 ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993
PROGRAM: Asbestos Enforcement - Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) under the
             Agency's asbestos-in-schools  enforcement  program;  the  Asbestos  Hazard
             Emergency Response Act (AHERA) and the Asbestos-in-Schools rule (AIS).

INDICATOR:      Project the number of persons within Region 5 schools who have had their
                   potential exposure to asbestos-containing materials (ACM) reduced as a
                   result of asbestos abatement SEPs.

GOAL:      Encourage violators of the AHERA regulation (the Agency's current asbestos-in-
             schools regulation) to perform needed asbestos abatement and receive credit
             as an SEP in exchange for mitigation of the penalty proposed in their civil
             administrative complaint.

BACKGROUND:

Violators of the Agency's asbestos-in-schools regulations are encouraged to perform asbestos
abatement SEPs in exchange for mitigation of the penalty proposed in their civil administrative
complaint.

The initial asbestos-in-schools rule (AIS),  enforced from  1985-1989, authorized the Agency to
cite only school districts for regulatory violations. Further, the Agency was willing to mitigate
proposed civil penalties against school districts dollar for dollar to encourage the implementation
of SEPs.  Consequently, many of the school districts cited completed SEPs,  mainly on asbestos
abatement, since the abatement provided their schools with a direct substantive benefit.

In December  1987, the AIS rule was  succeeded  by AHERA,  with active  enforcement
commencing in 1990.   Under AHERA, the Agency's enforcement now focuses on the
consultants and contractors ("other persons") who performed the work required by AHERA for
the schools.  However, other person violators have been reluctant to negotiate SEPs since the
Agency is willing to mitigate proposed penalties against these violators only on a 2 for 1 basis.
Since the school receives the  environmental benefit of a SEP, and the contractor must spend
more of bis own money than we  are willing to mitigate, the amount and value of SEPs has
declined significantly.
                                        55

-------
BASELINE:
In many instances, only a portion of the ACM within a school is abated during an abatement
project.  Consequently, overall potential asbestos exposure to the building occupants is reduced
but may not be entirely eliminated.  Between 1985 and 1989 under the AIS rule, Respondents
expended over $10.45 million on SEPs while reducing the potential asbestos exposure of over
189,000 school occupants.  However,  under AHERA, Region 5 has  realized only $80,000 of
abatement SEPs which has reduced the potential asbestos exposure of 3,093 school occupants.
AHERA data is illustrated on Figure 24.

GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:

See Figure 24.
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
Figure 24 illustrates by year: (1) the number of
persons occupying school buildings whose
potential exposure to ACM has been reduced by
SEPs through AHERA enforcement; and (2) $
spent on SEPs beyond complying with AHERA.
START-END
90-Present
CONTACT
NAME
Restaino
                                       56

-------
 SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS

REGION 5 • PERSONS WITH REDUCED ASBESTOS EXPOSURE
                                        3,500
     $100
      $80
(0

JS

"5


*S

CO

c
CO
(0
      $60
      $40
      $20
                    90-91


                   AHERA
                           90-92
         'Accumulated dollars D Accumulated persons
                     Figure 24

-------
                     ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

                 ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993
PROGRAM: Federal financial assistance under the Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Act
             (ASHAA) loan and grant program.

INDICATOR:      Assess the number of persons within Region 5 schools who have had
                   their potential exposure to asbestos-containing materials (ACM) reduced
                   under the ASHAA program.

GOAL:      Eliminate the potential exposure of school building occupants to friable ACM.

BACKGROUND:

The Agency has estimated that more than 44,000 school buildings contain friable asbestos-
containing building materials; exposing more than 15 million school children and 1.5 million
school employees to potential health hazards. The ASHAA program was enacted in 1985 to
provide financial assistance in the form of grants and long-term, no-interest loans to schools
to eliminate the potential hazards from asbestos-containing plaster, pipe/boiler insulation and
fireproofing.  ASHAA is authorized until 1995.

BASELINE:

Schools are awarded ASHAA funds to reduce potential exposure to three main types of
asbestos-containing materials (ACM); (1) plaster, (2) fireproofing and (3) pipe and boiler
insulation. Only ACM that has been damaged and can readily release asbestos fibers
(identified as being friable) is considered appropriate for funding.

The ASHAA program also calculates the total hours of potential exposure to ACM  by school
occupants over the course of an average school week. This  calculation assumes a seven hour
school day and a five day school week.  By dividing out the seven hour day and five day
week, it is possible to project the total number of school occupants whose potential  exposure
to a specific ACM, would be eliminated from seven hours per day to zero hours per day.

Since  1985, Region 5 schools have spent $130.5 million in ASHAA funds to reduce the
potential exposure of over 368,000 school occupants to specific ACMs, from seven hours per
day to zero hours per day. This data is presented on Figure 25.
                                       58

-------
GRAPHIC/VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PROGRESS:
See Figure 25.
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING
PROGRESS TOWARD GOAL
Figure 25 illustrates by year: (1) the projected
number of school occupants who have had their
potential exposure to ACM reduced under the
ASHAA program; and (2) the amount of ASHAA
funds spent to achieve this reduced exposure.
START-END
1985-1995
CONTACT
NAME
Restaino
                               59

-------
•"EDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO SCHOOLS
REGION 5 - PERSONS WITH REDUCED ASBESTOS EXPOSURE
      $200.0
    CO
    i_
    JS
    "o
    •o
    CO
    c
    o
      $150.0
      $100.0
       $50.0
                                             400
f-f   350
                                             300
    250
    200
     150
                                             100
CO
C
o
CO
I_
0)
a
CO
•o
c
CO
CO
3
O
            85 85-86 85-87 85-88 85-89 85-90 85-91 85-92
          Accumulated dollars D Accumulated persons
                       Figure 25

-------
 BASELINE
INDICATORS

-------
                    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DIVISION

                PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES BRANCH

                ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS - MARCH 1993


                  Multi-Media, Asbestos and Worker Protection

                  Reduce the inhalation of asbestos fibers by abatement workers, by
                  assuring that proper respiratory protection is available and utilized at all
                  appropriate times.

                  To ensure that all asbestos workers in Region 5 are protected from
                  asbestos exposure.

                  Conduct AHERA and ASHAA inspections at in-progress abatement
                  projects to determine: (1) the total number of abatement workers
                  employed at these projects; (2) the number of abatement workers who
                  are wearing proper respiratory protection; and (3) the total number of
                  hours that these workers wear their respirators.

BACKGROUND:

Federal law requires that all abatement activities in public, commercial and school buildings
must be conducted by workers who are accredited. However, because the Agency is still in
the process of promulgating the regulations for public and commercial buildings, the P&TSB
cannot project how many abatement projects will be conducted this year within Region 5.
The Region 5 TSCA Program has recently revised its inspection targeting strategy and will
now conduct a significant number of AHERA compliance inspections at in-progress
abatement projects. During these compliance inspections, and during our routine ASHAA
"work-in-progress" inspections,  our inspectors will obtain the information necessary to
complete this indicator.
PROGRAM:
INDICATOR:
GOAL:
MEASURE:
                                       62

-------
PROGRAM:

INDICATOR:
GOAL:
MEASURES:
BACKGROUND:
 Multi-media, PCBs and Worker Protection

 (1) To reduce PCB exposure through compliance with the PCB
 regulations.

 (2) To promote voluntary phase out of PCB electrical equipment.

 (3) To implement safety measures for worker protection through the
 permitting process for commercial, storage and disposal facilities.

 To ensure that workers associated with PCB storage and disposal are
 provided protection from occupational exposure to PCBs

Pounds of PCBs removed through the Supplemental Environmental
Project (SEP)

 Pounds of PCBs removed through the voluntary phase out initiative

 Number of commercial storage/disposal permit issued that would
 include specific safety measure requirements for workers protection
Region 5 is currently in the process of encouraging voluntary phase out of PCB containing
electrical equipment in the Great Lakes basis, there is an additional deadline for phasing out
lower secondary network transformers in or near buildings.  As these pieces of equipment
are removed, so too is the potential risk of worker exposure to the PCB fluids.  As
inspections are made at facilities with PCB storage/disposal permits,  special attention will be
made to assure the implementation of safety measures, as required by the permit.  In the
settlement of PCB administrative complaints, P&TSB and the Office of Regional Council will
pursue Supplemental Environmental Project (SEPs) that will lead to fewer person hours of
exposure to PCBs.
                                        63

-------
PROGRAM:

INDICATOR:
GOAL:
MEASURES:
Multi-Media, Pesticides and Worker Protection

(1) Promoting reduced farmworker exposure by compliance with the new
WPS regulations.

(2) To assess the effectiveness of outreach, training, and/or education of
the regulated community.

Reduce human exposure to pesticides through change in the behavior of
agricultural employers, agricultural workers, and agricultural handlers who
are affected by the New Worker Protection Standard (WPS).

(1) State inspectors will utilize the WPS inspector checklist, to be
developed by the U.S. EPA Headquarters, to collect data on and to track
the employer's knowledge of, and compliance with, all provisions of the
WPS.  This data will be collected during targeted inspections at
agricultural establishments.

(2) According to the draft Pesticide Compliance Monitoring strategy for
the WPS, the State Lead Agencies (SLAs) are to conduct use inspections
to monitor compliance with specific requirements of 40 CFR Part 170.
Data may be accumulated  from the States on the number of sites
inspected,  the number of inspections where violations were identified, and,
on follow-up, the number  of sites where the violations were corrected.

(3) SLAs are projected to  develop a system for tracking and responding to
WPS tips and complaints as outlined in the draft WPS Compliance
Monitoring Strategy.  These data on the number of tips/complaints
received, the number actually investigated, and the number found in
violation of the WPS  will  provide an indirect measure of the success and
effectiveness of the Rule.

(4) During FY'93, States will be developing State Implementation Plans,
in which they will project  the estimated universe of agricultural
workers/handlers.  It  is anticipated that this number may range from
200,000 - 500,000 workers. Since outreach and communication to  these
individuals is a priority in FY'93, the Pesticides Section will be
conducting and assisting states in numerous outreach efforts.
                                        64

-------
BACKGROUND:

The WPS requires that employers involved in the production of agricultural plants on farms,
forests, nurseries, and greenhouses have the responsibility to make sure that protection for
pesticide workers and handlers are provided.  Although a few label-specific WPS
requirements must be complied with after April 21, 1993, many of the generic WPS
requirements will not be enforceable until April 15, 1994.  Through coordination with the
Pesticides Section State Project Officers, the SLAs will be notified of Region 5's need for
data pertinent to the WPS checklist, use inspections, and tips/compliant investigations for our
use as measure of the success of the WPS and for incorporation into an annual environmental
indicator report.  The Pesticides Section will collect and analyze all three types of field data
summarized above.
                                          65

-------
PROGRAM:

INDICATOR:



UNIVERSE:



GOAL:
MEASURES:
Multi-Media, TSCA § 5(e) and Worker Protection

To ensure the protection of workers through compliance with consent
orders signed by EPA Headquarters and chemical manufacturers and
importers in Region 5 under the authority of § 5(e) of TSCA.

All chemical manufacturers, importers, and processors in Region 5 who
manufacture, import, or process chemicals for which § 5(e) orders
containing worker protection term(s) have been signed.

To ensure that all workers in Region 5 are adequately protected from any
known or reasonably suspected adverse health effects caused by exposure
to those TSCA-regulated chemicals which, as determined by EPA, would
present an unnecessary risk to human health if they were manufactured,
imported, or processed in an unrestricted manner1.

Region 5 inspectors will conduct TSCA compliance inspections at facilities
which have signed § 5(e) consent orders with EPA Headquarters, using
the following strategy:

(1) Each inspection will include a thorough investigation of the facility's
compliance with each term of the §  5(e) consent order, especially any and
all worker protection terms.

(2) Inspectors will track the number of employee work hours affected by
these S(e) orders.  The number of hours of prevented or controlled
exposure, added in a cumulative fashion, is an indication of the
significance  of these orders in achieving control,  reduction, and/or
elimination of exposure to the 5(e) chemicals.

(3) Follow-up inspections will be conducted at facilities where §  5(e)
consent order violations have occurred, as  soon as possible after the
termination of any enforcement actions resulting from those violations, to
verify that the violations have been corrected and that additional violations
have not since occurred.
    1  except of course those chemicals whose regulations are enforced by the PCB Control
and Asbestos Control Sections, e.g. PCBs, hexavalent chromium, asbestos and lead.

                                         66

-------
BACKGROUND:

This activity will cover only the manufacturers, importers and processors with whom U.S.
EPA has signed TSCA § 5 (e) orders. These orders are attached to regulated chemicals
which are known or suspected to cause adverse reactions in human health and the
environment, in lieu of more time-consuming rule-making.  The chemicals which EPA
Headquarters chooses to regulate with § 5(e) orders represent the toxic or potentially toxic
new chemicals within the TSCA jurisdiction.
                                         67

-------