>f •J^~=^=j=^*===:afs,i
                           ISiSis'** ^a^3«ssL.=s4?ss;»iKiJi-Si£*.-'


        1998 ANNUAL REPORT
          MARCH 1999

                                                         _:::..  T-~-
                                                       P ill11™1 iPjuiJ*!* rf in1 -n™ •fk. '^^^fin MMiit
                                                       ~~ -*tL	"     I."
** (yj-^i
GOALS	/ .  .  . .  ./:'...  4
                                                       /       /'
                                                       /       /
   The Center for Environmental Information and Statistics	;'	17
   An Index to Gauge Watershed Conditions	18
   Communities Develop Real-Time Reporting Capabilities	18
   New Initiatives Advance the Public's Right-to-Know	20;
   The First National Report on the Quality of America's Drinking Water	21,
   Can an Informed Public Really Make a Difference?	,,,.^^ii.,_J,_J
   A Vice-Presidential Challenge to Improve Chemical Testing	"22
   A Commitment to Improve Stakeholder Involvement	23
   New Tools^Allow Comparisons of Environmental Performance	24
     * ..^j.^.^.*  a»   „„„,._. w^^^^nB.t^™.^^*,^.^^^^ ,  ~^L  ..^^^^                                   ^
                                    rT'^^	25 .

                                      . .  .;	,	26   's
   Working With the States	 ...  . .  J	26
                               i  *,••      i                                         \
                                 Commissioner	28
: •-^-Helping^Communities Revitalize Brownfields	31
   Voluntary Actions. Protect the Environment and Save Money	33
   -Agencies' Unite to Protect Drinking Water	35
 ,  Engaging the Scientific Community in High-Priority Research	36
   Sharing Financial Risk	36

, „,_, Cleaner Air	38
   Another Market-Based Approach for Electric Utilities	39
   Flexible Air Toxics Regulation	39
   Watershed Protection	40
   The Clean Water Action Plan	41
   Pollution Prevention	42
   Presidential Awards Recognize Innovation in the Chemical Industry	43
   An Industrial Sector Approach to Environmental Protection:
     What We Learned From the Common Sense Initiative	44
   Laying the Foundation for Effective Industry Programs	48

                                                    REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
   Project XL Offers Alternatives to Current Regulation	48
   Use and Development of Nettf Environmental Technology	50

    Support for Environmental, Management Systems	53
   Regions Play Key Role in Evaluating\Environmental Management Systems	55
   "Qnline\Assistance—Compliance Assistance Centers	55
    ^     \                  '       \
   Onsipe Assistance	\. . . . \.	57
   EPA's SmalkBusiness Ombudsman . . i '	57
   Sector "Notebooks"—Another Compliance Tool	57
Regulatory Incentives	!....{	58
•BusinessesrHelping-Businesses-ImjpTove Environmental Performance	59
       irfctermon! EPA's New Enforcement Alerts	60
                            ?     I
  -u-       '  *   I
  LlEinanciaLSupport™*. ^	~.~	-,	  ^
   How Well Are Our Programs Working^'		61
     *f   /                 '      /                                        '
   A'Cons'olidated Air Rule fo/ Chemical Manufacturers	64
    .-Streamlined Certification Process for Automobile Makers	64
   Hazardous Waste Management-Reform	64
   Special Help on Drinking Water for Small Communities	66
   Streamlining Registration^Activities for Low-Risk Pesticides	66
   Eliminating'Barriers Tphat Discourage Removal of Lead-Based Paint	67
   More State Management Options for Controlling Air Toxics	67
   Writing regulations People Can Understand	68
   The Plain Language Effect	69




                           -J            * .   r , T-*    "S-j,-	"*  I  SfcS^lM*- J-"- - o ^ T^. «*#•„*••*»-.SOT-i
                      __- ,-  v   —a.-zt, »/iL;**»'-V,m
                   -              -          ^™~.~   *       ^.^^a,—p T   ^ w$Vf>?»~-   ^^y> ^ ^yr^S ^^^?
           L^LE AN  /v IR^ The air in every American community will be safe and healthy to
           breathe. In particular, children, the elderly, and people with respiratory ailments will be pro-
           tected from health risks of breathing polluted air. Reducing air pollution will also protect
                                                       Ml I   nf  4 '          it*     J
           the environment, resulting in many benefits, such as restoring life in damaged ecosystems
           and reducing health risks to those whose subsistence depends directly on those ecosystems.
                                                       ',!*-'                 ,
           CLEAN  AND SAFE WATER'. All Americans will have drinking water that is
           clean and safe to drink. Effective protection of Americas rivers, lakes, wetlands, aquifers,
           and coastal and ocean waters will sustain fish, plants, and wildlife, as well as recreational,
           subsistence, and economic activities. "Watersheds and their aquatic ecosystems will be
                      •" ;	 i,, • '	 „ » '"'!' :"     n      n      _      /y    *
           restored and protected to improve public healdi, enhance water quality, reduce flooding,
           and provide habitat for wildlife.

           w>AFE rOODl The foods Americans eat will be free from ungafe pesticide residues.
           Children especially will be protected from the health threats posed by pesticide residues,
           because they are among die most vulnerable groups in our society.
                                                                      ~l r-      '
           Pollution prevention and risk management strategies aimed at cost-effectively eliminating,
           reducing, or minimizing emissions and contamination will result in cleaner and safer envi-
           ronments in which all Americans can reside, work? and enjoy life. EPA will safeguard
           ecosystems and promote die health of natural communities diat are integral to the quality
           of life in this nation.
t, .  i }*"/i\, M
 *-    4J K unSn^* » n

                                             REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
rvESPONSE: America's wastes will be stored, treated, and disposed of in ways that pre-
vent harm to people and to the natural environment. EPA will work to clean up previously
polluted sites, restoring them to uses appropriate for surrounding communities, and
respond to and prevent waste-related or industrial accidents.

ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS: The United States will lead other nations in success-
ful, multilateral efforts to reduce significant risks to human health and ecosystems from cli-
mate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, and other hazards of international concern.

THEIR ENVIRONMENT' Easy access to a wealth of information about the state
of their local environment will expand citizen involvement and give people tools to protect
their families and their communities as they see fit. Increased information exchange
between scientists, public health officials, businesses, citizens, and all levels of government
will foster greater knowledge about die environment and what can be done to protect it.

the best available science for addressing current and future environmental hazards, as well as
new approaches toward improving environmental protection.

COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW: EPA will ensure full compliance with laws
intended to protect human health and the environment.

EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT: EPA will establish a management infrastructure
that will set and implement the highest quality standards for effective internal management
and fiscal responsibility.

                1998 marked another year of steady progress in the U.S. Environmental Protection
             Agency's (EPA's) efforts to reinvent environmental programs.  EPA began its reinvention
             efforts in 1995 when President Clinton, Vice President Gore, and EPA Administrator Carol
             Browner announced a reinvention agenda to make environmental and public health pro tec-   *?•-
             tion programs more efficient and effective. Since that time, EPA has pursued common sense
             reforms and new ideas that can help us achieve national goals, such as clean air, clean water,   ;
             and better waste management.
                As a result of these efforts., the Agency has cut the annual paperwork burden associated
             With environmental requirements by more than 26.9 million hours a year. We've dramatically
             increased public access to environmental information, enabling citizens to go online and find.,,	
             out about issues of concern. Through an array of environmental stewardship programs, the
              i,   r ',' . ii, JiJIIQi .   , „J«!l!",'li:'  V	'iJii,    '   ' ..       i  ,        "•••i     •   -•..-'-         ' .    y.<^~   . •  '•••      5.^1*4 -Ts'ts-1 ; ;
             Agency has worked with public and private sector partners to voluntarily change their busi-
             ness practices to produce significant environmental and economic benefits—the latest data   __/
             shows these partners saving more dian $1.6 billion a year by eliminating waste, preventing
             pollution, and conserving energy and water. We've launched special programs, such as the .,..  /
             Common Sense Initiative and Project XL, which allow us  to test new approaches for pursu-
             ing environmental and public health protection goals. To boost environmental performance,
             we've created incentives that can lead regulated parties to exceed baseline requirements, and
             offered new tools and assistance so business and communities have what they need to com-
             ply with die law.
                Last year, Administrator Browner made several strategic decisions that should advance
             our reinvention capabilities even further.  She laid out a vision for improving the way EPA
             manages and disseminates environmental information, and called for a new information
             office to be set up—the first in the Agency's history. Harnessing the many lessons learned
             about working effectively widi industry sectors and other stakeholders through the
             Common Sense Initiative, the Administrator approved plans to apply this learning broadly
             within EPA programs. After working on the details for more than a year, she signed an
             agreement witfi the states that provides the additional flexibility and assurance they need to
             proceed with their own reinvention initiatives. These decisions were milestones in a year
             when we followed through and delivered on some of our earliest reinvention commitments.
             But the year also brought new challenges and initiatives with the potential to significantly
             shape how environmental management is conducted in the 21st century.

                                                        ..REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                          With more than 40 million hits on EPA's Web site every month,
                        public demand for high-quality environmental information has
                        never been greater. To meet this and other related demands, EPA
                        began setting up its first information office. In addition to improv-
                        ing data quality and streamlining reporting, this move will advance
                        community right-to-know opportunities for citizens and improve
                        our ability to analyze environmental conditions.
Established a National Center for Environmental Information and Statistics
  A new online center launched in August is putting EPA's vast reserves of environmental
data to work for citizens. The center makes it faster and easier than ever before to retrieve,
compile, and present data stored in numerous environmental databases. Users can request
easy-to-understand reports about drinking water, surface water,  air quality, hazardous waste,
and toxic releases in their communities—just by typing in their zip code.
Developed Real- Time Reporting Capabilities
  To enable citizens to make decisions about their daily lives by taking actual environmen-
tal conditions into account, we worked with select communities on  an environmental
reporting breakthrough—offering real-time, rather than historical, data. This advance offers
answers to basic questions, such as "is the air .quality safe for me to go jogging today"  or "is
the water safe for a swim?"
Pushed for More Environmental Disclosures
  Recognizing the effect  that public disclosure can have on environmental performance,
the Agency took actions to make more environmental information publicly available. We
proposed to expand reporting under the Toxic Release Inventory for persistent, bioaccumu-
lative chemicals, such as dioxin and mercury, by almost 25 percent.  Other actions will give
Americans access to information about the hazards from lead-based  paint when renovating
or remodeling their homes, whether their drinking water meets federal public health stan-
dards, and the potential risks from facilities in their neighborhoods that produce, use, or
store chemical products.
Challenged the Chemical Industry to Make Product Toxicity Data
Publicly Available
  A new program, announced by Vice President Gore, chal- -
lenges the chemical industry to provide missing information
on about 2,800 of the nation's most widely used toxic chemi-
cals to the public. By agreeing to conduct any necessary toxici-
ty testing and to publicly report the results, companies can
help resolve remaining questions about risk levels and avoid
the need for further regulation.

             Offered Citizens Tools for Evaluating Environmental Performance
                New databases were made publicly available that allow citizens to evaluate and compare
             the environmental performance of individual facilities or industry sectors as a whole. A
             database created under the Agency's Sector Facility Indexing project offers compliance and
             other environmental performance information on facilities in six industrial sectors. Another
             database, known as E-GRID, provides extensive data on the environmental performance
             and efficiency of electric utilities—information that might become more valuable as deregu-
             lation gives consumers more choice in determining their energy provider.
                Industries, businesses, community groups and many other organizations are increasingly
             working with EPA as partners to improve environmental performance, cut costs, and avoid
             new regulations. These partnerships are leveraging limited resources and spawning new
             ideas that can produce better results more quickly and more cost-effectively than what
             might be expected through regulatory actions alone.
             Collaborated on Joint Ventures with the States
                With two-thirds of the states now working with EPA under the National Environmental
             Performance Partnership System, special attention was given to creating more meaningful envi-
             ronmental performance measures that demonstrate the results from federal and state programs.
             The year also brought agreement on a process that gives states the flexibility and assurance they
             need to engage in their own regulatory reinvention initiatives and still meet federal standards.
                                      Offered Assistance for Smart Growth
                                        To help more communities avoid poorly planned development,
                                      urban decay, and loss of valuable green space, we supported "smart
                                      growth" through Agency programs. We led a national network to
                                      help expand smart growth tools and information. And by expanding
                                      a $500,000 pilot project into a $5 million national grant program,
                                      EPA offered 45 communities seed money to launch sustainable
                                      development initiatives in agricultural, rural, and urban settings.
             Doubled Support for Brownfields Redevelopment
                By offering $21 million to 107 communities, the Agency doubled its investment for revitaliz-
             ing brownfields—abandoned, idle, or unused properties  tainted by environmental contamina-
             tion. Since 1995, EPA has awarded more than $42 million to 227 communities with a goal of
             supporting 300 brownfield projects by the end of 1999.  In March, Administrator Browner
             joined Vice President Gore to announce that 16 projects would collectively receive an additional
             $28 million and other assistance to create "Brownfield Showcase" communities for the nation.
             Promoted Environmental Stewardship Through Partnership Programs
                To spark interest among potential new members, the Agency compiled and publicized the
             latest annual results on die environmental and economic benefits from participating  in its

                                                         REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL, PROTECTION
voluntary partnership programs. The results showed that about 6,000 partners—ranging from
Fortune 500 companies to small family-owned businesses—saved $1.6 billion through volun-
tary improvements that eliminated 7.6 million tons of solid waste, prevented the release of
79 million metric tons of the pollution linked to global warming, saved nearly 6 million gal-
lons of clean water, and conserved enough energy to light 56 million households for a year.

Shared Business Risks
   In April, EPA offered to become a financial partner with responsible parties under
Superfund that are willing to invest in  innovative cleanup technologies. "We agreed to share up
to one half of the additional cost that would be incurred in cases where an innovative technol-
ogy might fail and necessitate further investment. In so  doing, the Agency reduced the respon-
sible parties' financial risks and bolstered support for new technology use and development.
   Increasingly, EPA is relying on a mix of regulatory and nonregulatory approaches to solve
environmental problems in common sense ways. In some cases, this means offering incen-
tives that prompt voluntary environmental improvements. In others, regulations are needed,
but can be tailored to offer more flexibility in choosing among compliance options.

Offered Flexible, Cost-Effective Program for Reducing Smog
   In September, EPA issued a flexible, cost-effective plan that would allow most areas of
the county to meet the 1997 antismog standards without having to implement costly new
controls. The plan offers compliance options for states, which include an emission trading
program for power plants and other sources  of nitrogen oxide—a primary ingredient in
smog formation. This approach has the potential to drop the per-ton cost of controlling
these emissions from as much as $10,000 to about $1,500.
Launched Clean Water Action Plan
   In February, President Clinton unveiled a comprehen-
sive Clean Water Action Plan to finish the job of protecting
the nations waters. Developed with unprecedented cooper-
ation at the federal level, this plan offers the first-ever, mul-
tiagency budget for clean water programs and specifies
more than 100 actions to address high-priority problems,
such as polluted runoff from livestock operations.
Rewarded Pollution Prevention Achievements
   The Agency supported technical innovations that minimize waste and the use of toxic
chemicals and that help avoid the need for new requirements. This included offering
Presidential  awards for outstanding green chemistry achievement. In 1998, awards were
given to four companies and two university  research teams whose discoveries offer more
environmentally sound alternatives to current products and processes.

_	i	£&$*&	assssii .sSoi	:—=	*iSi	wir.'Jai^ieliyiSi	'	S-	i|K	;*:^^                                                                  	:	<
I 	Pi	iiil	jiii	i	iifillii-	i	!•	iiil!iiPi.;i!	»	ji	ilS	ifiiiffi	I,	ti.	jiljiiji	[»|«	iS	life	!	Si!	JjM^ili^	aiiif	I'S^^
                       Focused On the Needs of Industrial Sectors and Other Stakeholders
                          After 4 years of unprecedented collaboration involving many diverse parties,
                       Administration Browner concluded the Common Sense Initiative as an experimental pro-
                       gram for testing a fundamentally different approach, to environmental protection. Lessons
                       learned from working with six industrial sectors and other stakeholders formed the basis of
                       new plans to adopt sector-based approaches more broadly across Agency programs and to
                       improve EPA's ability for involving stakeholders in decision-making processes.

                       Used Project XL to Pursue Innovative Approaches
                          The Agency approved three new projects in 1998, and developed a simplified process for
                       approving additional projects in the future. One participating company is exploring how
                       environmental management systems might be used to  simplify permitting, recordkeeping
                       and reporting requirements. In Massachusetts, the state environmental agency is testing self-
                       certification procedures as an alternative to traditional  environmental permits.
                       Promoted Innovative Technologies
                          Recognizing the financial risks and regulatory  barriers faced by companies trying to
                       develop and market innovative environmental technologies, EPA offered information  and
                       sponsored trade shows and award programs to showcase new technologies. In a new role, we
                       also helped broker discussions between technology developers and representatives from the
                       financial community in order to secure more capital for new  technology development.
                        GETTING TO COMPLIANCE—AND BEYOND
                                           Throughout the year, we looked for ways to help businesses and commu-
                                         nities improve their environmental performance. Often, this meant provid-
                                         ing more information or technical assistance, particularly for the smaller
                                         entities that do not always have the resources they need to understand what
                                         is required. Increasingly, it meant creating incentives that encourage compa-
                                         nies to reach for performance goals that go beyond compliance.
                                         Responded to Growing Interest in Environmental Management Systems
                                           Recognizing the interest and questions still surrounding use of
                                         Environmental Management Systems, EPA launched pilot projects to
                                         test their effectiveness and gather information that will be used in future
                                         policy decisions. In a move that sent an important-signal to the regulated
                        community, we issued  a policy statement  clarifying EPA's support for environmental man-
                        agement systems that "help an organization achieve its environmental obligations and
                        broader environmental performance goals."
                        Opened Five More Compliance Assistance Centers
                          In partnership with other organizations, EPA opened new compliance assistance centers
                        on the Internet to serve five more sectors: the printed wiring board manufacturers, the
                        paints and coatings industry, the transportation sector, chemical manufacturers, and local

                                                         REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
governments. With the four centers opened previously, nine centers are now up and run-
ning. These centers are tailored to serve small and medium-sized organizations, providing
users with round-the-clock access to information about environmental regulations, pollu-
tion prevention techniques, and related issues.
Encouraged Environmental Improvements Through Self-Auditing
   More companies had environmental penalties reduced or eliminated under an incentive-
based policy EPA announced in 1996 that encourages self-auditing, along with quick cor-
rection and public disclosure of any environmental violations. As of December 1998,
318 companies had corrected and publicly disclosed environmental violations at 1,668 facil-
ities, a twofold increase over the number of facilities doing so the year before.
Supported Corporate Environmental Mentoring
   Recognizing that businesses can often help each other improve environmental perfor-
mance,  EPA offered funding to support what could become a new trend in corporate
America—environmental mentoring. These funds are being used to create an institute that
will provide the information and tools needed to support mentoring relationships between
companies that have environmental expertise to offer and those in need of special assistance.
Provided Funding to Improve Drinking Water Compliance
   More than 300 small communities facing new requirements under the  1996 Safe
Drinking "Water Act got special help in 1998 when the Agency began administering the fed-
eral government's first-ever loan program for drinking water improvements.  Rather than
one-time grants to select communities, financial assistance was offered through state revolv-
ing loan programs. All but the most needy recipients repay their low interest loan, enabling
the states to maintain a reliable source of capital for other communities needing assistance.
   Many reinvention efforts had the effect of reducing the regulatory burden imposed by envi-
ronmental requirements in 1998, but die requirements imposed for recordkeeping and report-
ing continued to be a major focal point. By the end of the year, EPA had cut 26.9 million
hours of paperwork burden by streamlining processes, eliminating outdated provisions, or
consolidating duplicative requirements—without sacrificing the Agency's ability to ensure
environmental and public health protection. These reduc-
tions, which surpassed the Agency's 1995 goal of reducing
burden by 25 million hours, offset additional requirements
that have taken effect in recent years to increase environmen-
tal protection and accountability. They should also save busi-
nesses and communities an estimated $807 million a year.
Proposed a. Consolidated Air Rule for Chemical Manufacturers
   A proposed rule that consolidates 16 federal air regula-
tions into a single guideline could save the average U.S.

illin (in i ill in nil 'ii  In ill n |  i  'i  i   '  "   i)  '  HI  < i 'i(' iln " Hi
               chemical plant about 1,700 hours or $80,000 a year in the future. The proposal, which rep-
               resents the first consolidated rule ever under the Clean Air Act, would be voluntary. Plant
               managers could opt to comply with the consolidated rule or continue operating under the
               existing 16 rules.
               Streamlined Certification Process for Auto Makers
                 A streamlined process for certifying that new passenger cars and trucks meet federal stan-
               dards for air pollution emissions is expected to save automobile manufacturers an estimated
               $55 million a year. Under the proposed process, testing would be performed on vehicles actu-
               ally in use on the nations highways rather than on brand new vehicles. In addition to cutting
               burden, the new process creates an incentive for manufacturers to produce more durable emis-
               sions control equipment and gives EPA better data for managing air quality programs.
               Simplified Hazardous Waste Management Requirements
                 The Agency addressed several barriers that have prevented common sense practices in
               managing hazardous wastes.  Reforms to the 20-year-old program for managing polychlori-
               nated biphenyls, or PCBs, are expected to produce cost savings estimated at between $178
               million and $736 million each year. New treatment standards for land disposal of hazardous
               waste will facilitate cleanups of contaminated sites. Another regulation simplifies the
               cleanup and closure of hazardous waste disposal facilities.
                                   Offered Compliance Alternatives to Small Drinking Water Systems
                                     Based on the 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act,
                                   the Agency issued new regulations that will give small community
                                   water systems less expensive treatment alternatives to comply with fed-
                                   eral drinking water standards in the future. Smaller systems can also
                                   request more time to achieve compliance and variances from federal
                                   requirements, as long as such actions do not threaten public health.
                                   Eliminated Barriers that Discourage Removal of Lead-Based Paint
                                     "We proposed a new rule to expedite the removal of lead-based paint
                                   because doing so will help protect children from exposure to lead.
               Based on studies showing that lead-based paint debris could be safely placed in ordinary
               landfills (under the Toxic Substances Control Act), we proposed that this  disposal option be
               provided as an alternative to the traditional, but more expensive disposal currently required
               under hazardous waste regulations.
               Published Plain Language Regulations
                 In 1998, the Agency issued several regulations using plainer language and simpler for-
               mats than ever before. Among them were important  requirements explaining what gas sta-
               tion owners, industrial facilities, and others operating underground injection wells must do
               to protect local drinking water supplies, and what industries must do to respond in a chem-
               ical emergency situation. These improvements were possible because of a pilot program
               began in 1997 to improve the understanding of EPA regulations.

        his report provides an overview of the progress made by the U.S. Environmental
        Protection Agency (EPA) over the past year toward reinventing environmental pro-
        tection. The Agency launched its regulatory reinvention efforts in 1995 when
President Clinton, Vice President Gore, and EPA Administrator Carol Browner announced
an agenda to make environmental programs work more fairly, efficiently, and effectively for
the nation. This agenda was part of a broader Administration effort to reinvent government.
It came at a time when many diverse parties with environmental interests and responsibili-
ties were calling for change.
   The demand for change can be traced to a growing and
common desire for improvements to the nation's environ-
mental protection system. Over the last three decades, this
system, comprised  of environmental programs, regulations,
and policies at the  federal, state, and local level, is widely rec-
ognized as having dramatically improved conditions through-
out the United States. Today, our air, land, and water are
safer and visibly cleaner even with significant economic
expansion and population growth. And yet, even widi this
progress, serious problems, such as polluted runoff to our rivers and streams and emissions
linked to global warming, still exist. The remaining problems reflect gaps and limitations
within the current  system, and they underscore why we must work to improve it.
   Other factors point to the need for change, too. New scientific and technological
advances make it possible to detect and prevent environmental threats in ways that were
simply not possible when many environmental requirements were first adopted. Our citi-
zens, accustomed to living in an information age,  want better environmental information.
And as they become better informed, they also expect a more prominent role in decision-
making.  Environmental expertise and management capabilities have grown more sophisti-
cated. Today, state  and local governments  often need less federal assistance and oversight in
managing environmental responsibilities, and American industries typically have their own
professional environmental  staffs  or consultants. Finally, the basic concept of environmental
protection has evolved beyond pollution control to include broader objectives, such as


    1 '"I
                    ^	 |f |   	^	!!f	'''Jflp^
,lirniiii	ii!l|	iinJisfhi	ii!	l!	J!j!«ii|!j<	, «N	i	ipi! ,ii!ll9|||ipii	ih]	if1::	!«!i|hiiii	.Jlniiii	„IBIS:'	„;',	ii PHI iniililiiiinHi	';	iiiiq	ii1:!	:i!J«rl|!ii»»n»i	,n\>Sf>J'-iiidhyitsiiyiFil^i  ^nit	,:;»;:>.:>.'":,,|f4;4ir|»»: »>!».' '..,;;:»;„,»»„^oKk!;,,!^,^:;!,;^^;:^^   ""' :"''">;:': ""

                         pollution prevention, sustainability, and environmental justice. All of these factors create
                         pressure for change and they challenge EPA to constantly rethink how the Agency pursues
                         environmental and public health protection goals.

                            To guide our efforts, in 1998, the Agency developed a strategic framework for reinven-
                         tion. This framework, shown in the table below,  lays out improvement opportunities along
                         two tracks. On one level, it calls for EPA to improve functions, such as environmental per-
                         mitting, monitoring, and reporting, that represent the core of the nations environmental
                         protection system. Streamlining environmental reporting and similar improvements to envi-
                         ronmental programs can free businesses, communities, and regulatory agencies from unnec-
                         essary paperwork, allowing them to cut costs and focus on higher priorities and risks.

                            On another level, the framework calls for EPA to test innovative approaches that can bridge
                         gaps widiin the current system and advance protection capabilities to new levels. We understand
                         the difficulties and limitations of the current system. "One-size-fits-all" mandates don't always
                         work and some problems aren't being addressed under the current regulatory structure. That is
                         why the Agency is working to find more custom-tailored strategies that better address todays
                         problems and that offer more flexibility for those that implement them.
                         Innovate and streamline
                         within EPA core programs
                                                                       Test and apply more integrative and
                                                                       holistic approaches to environmental
                         — Consolidate and simplify requirements.
                         — Write regulations in "plain English."
                         — Use market-based  incentives to encourage
                            pollution prevention and increase operational

                         — Streamline approval processes.
                         — Harmonize  requirements across programs.
                         — Develop multimedia and facilitywide permits.

                         Vkmitoring and reporting:
                         — Cut unnecessary requirements and allow more
                            flexibility in  monitoring methods.
                         — Reduce requirements to reward excellent envi-
                            ronmental performance.

                         Compliance assistance:
                         — Set up compliance assistance centers to help
                            selected sectors improve environmental per-
                         — Provide incentives for regulated facilities to self-
                           -identi^Land_correct snvironmenfnl
                                                                       Sector- and industry-based approaches:
                                                                       — Test new approaches that integrate environmental
                                                                         requirements for sectors, industries, or facilities.
                                                                       — Promote voluntary environmental stewardship
                                                                         and continuous improvement in environmenta
                                                                         performance by regulated entities.

                                                                       Community-based environmental
                                                                       — Support Brownfields redevelopment.
                                                                       — Develop tools to support local environmental
                                                                         management strategies.

                                                                       Redefine federal/state roles:
                                                                         Expand state participation in the National
                                                                         Environmental Performance Partnership System.
                                                                       — Jointly test innovative regulatory strategies.

                                                                       mprove environmental information:
                                                                       — Establish common data standards and elec-
                                                                         tronic reporting capabilities.
                                                                       — Develop programs and user-friendly computer
                                                                         applications that expand public access to
                                                                         environmentfil dntn.	

                                                         REINVENTING: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
  This dual approach for improving the system allows us to explore new opportunities—
without jeopardizing gains that have been made through environmental programs and poli-
cies over the past three decades. Our commitment to reinventing environmental protection
was evident through many actions during the past year; however, several stand out as partic-
ularly significant:
•  Improving our ability to manage and report environmental information. Every year, states,
   industries, small businesses, and other organizations report data to EPA in accordance
   with environmental laws. In 1998, Administrator Browner made a strategic decision to
   create a new Office of Information to improve the Agency's ability to manage this infor-
   mation. The new office will consolidate information resources and responsibilities, and
   enable us to pursue information management reforms, such as electronic reporting.
•  Providing more tailored approaches for working with industry sectors. A look back at one of
   Administrator Browner's earliest and most ambitious reinvention efforts, the Common
   Sense Initiative  (CSI), revealed important lessons about  how to  make environmental pro-
   tection work  more effectively for industry and other interested parties. For 4 years, many
   diverse parties worked to create a fundamentally different environmental protection sys-
   tem, one that was more integrated and tailored to address diverse societal needs. In
   1998, EPA incorporated the many lessons learned from  this experimental initiative into
   plans that will focus more attention on industrial sectors within our programs and
   improve die Agency's ability to involve the public in environmental  issues.
•  Following through on common sense reforms in core programs. In a sign that reinvention
   efforts are permeating the entire Agency, we announced reforms to cut regulatory burden
   and further improve  some of EPA's most well-established programs.  Following an evalua-
   tion of the 20-year-old program for handling polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, we
   issued a new  rule that is expected to save businesses and communities between $178 and
   $736 million a year without compromising protection. "We proposed changes to the
   process for certifying that new vehicles meet  federal air emission standards that could
   save automobile manufacturers $55 million a year. And we showed how 16 different reg-
   ulations for controlling air emissions  from chemical manufacturers could be consolidated
   into a single guideline.
   Beyond rulemaking,  our Regional staff worked directly with the states, with businesses
and communities,  and with other stakeholders to test new  ideas that offer better solutions
to todays problems. The following sections describe these and many other developments
over the past year. They show an evolution in environmental protection that is bringing us
better environmental information so we can understand conditions, make sound decisions,
and report progress to the public; new partnerships that leverage resources and achieve goals
that could never be met by EPA alone; more flexible, tailored approaches to environmental
management; more assistance to help well-meaning businesses and communities comply
with the law; and finally, greater efficiency so government agencies and other institutions
are freed from unnecessary paperwork and red tape.

111 11 11 III 111 111 I II II 1111(1 II III   Ililllll
  >l Ililllll
                      III  Ililllll
                                   .~~. * .^-^-un • k-w., "•*!"' 'iTj I* 'i
                            BETTER  ENVIRONMENTAL  INFORMATION
        etter environmental information will be essential for creating an improved envi-
        ronmental protection system. Many reinvention initiatives described in this report,
        including our efforts to work more effectively with industry sectors and to involve
citizens in environmental decision-making, depend on timely access to the right informa-
tion in the right form.
   High-quality, accurate information is a strategic resource for protecting human health
and the environment. To make the most effective use of this important resource, we need to
strengthen the ways we collect, manage, and share data. Toward this end, in October,
Administrator Browner made a strategic decision to consolidate EPA's information activities
into a new office for the Agency. This new information office—the Agency's first—will be
more than the sum of existing parts, however. It will be set up to provide better service to
our partners and stakeholders, and improve our ability to manage environmental and public
health protection programs.
   The new office will integrate various aspects of information management, policy and technol-
ogy at EPA and strengthen our emphasis on data quality. It will create stronger links between our
data collection, management,  and public access functions. It will also strive to create consistency
across these operations and systems, providing the foundation that will be needed to allow more
efficient transfer of data among public and private sector sources in the future.
   Strong, cooperative relationships with our partners, the states, will  be  key to the success
of this new office. We intend to work closely with the states to identify the information we
both need to manage our programs well, to develop mechanisms for providing this informa-
tion as efficiendy as possible, and to eliminate unnecessary or duplicative requirements.
We'll also work closely with our stakeholders in industry, other agencies,  interest groups,
and the general public to take their issues and concerns into account.
   The Administrator's focus  on improving the Agency's information management capabilities
goes to the heart of reinventing government. Public health and environmental issues are often
highly complex, and the data can be difficult to obtain and interpret. Yet, public involvement
in decision-making—where those involved understand the issues and consequences—is one of
the principles of democracy. This is where the new information office will  play a particularly

                                                      REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                          STDramatic Increase In  Public Demand
                                           :or Environmental Information
                                               On EPA's Web Site	
strategic role. It will be geared to improve
information resources and advance public
access so Americans can play a meaningful
role in making decisions regarding the com-
plex environmental issues that affect them.
  Throughout our history, experience has
shown us that putting information into the
hands of citizens is one of the most effective
tools that can be applied for protecting pub-
lic health and the environment. Statistics on
use of EPA's Web site indicate that the
opportunity to apply this tool has never been
greater. As the right-hand figure shows, pub-
lic demand for environmental information is
exploding. Four years ago, when the Agency's
Internet site was just being established, it
received about 136,000 hits a month. Today,
that figure has grown exponentially to more than 40 million hits a month.
   As we work to provide more and better information to meet this growing demand, we
will create mechanisms to ensure the respectful use of data. This means explaining how data
requested will be used, and developing more efficient ways to correct and update data once
it has been submitted or released. The Agency will also continue to ensure that strong secu-
rity policies are followed to protect proprietary business information, and to prevent use of
environmental data for purposes that could harm public health and safety.
                                  Welcome to the
                                                 One example of the public-oriented
                                              services to be offered through the
                                              Agency's information office is EPA's
                                              new online Center for Environmental
                                              Information and Statistics (CEIS).
                                              Launched in August, this electronic
                                              resource gives citizens reliable, compre-
                                              hensive information on environmental
                                              quality, status, and trends in their
                                              community. Just by typing in a zip
                                              code or clicking on a state or county,
                                              users can access environmental profiles
                               mation and Statistics
                                Website— asinglc,
                               convenient SOUK* of
                                  Information on
                               i   environmental
                                  quality, status
                                    and trends.
  Please move mouse ever team for feature Information.

                                  GAUGE WATERSHED'CONDITIONS
                                         quality offered througlvCElSare,bq_sed,pn O-fecently deyel-
                         .spuK^j_.cpJitaminated,sediments, .wetland,josses, ari3 other conditions in a,

                 LEjiquatic indicators, in  1997 we prrered.a'M^n^^na^^&n^^.a^QW&^sefs—^.
                      Lfirne^ever—to det€
                                                   J Washington  [~]
                                                   'Xai • c f      *   Less Serious
                                              flLajbQutj2jl percent of
, ana 16 percent have goodwater , ,,,  1  '
                                  atea/ of these 15 indicators.
                                                      indicators that
                              to, 16.ej,^,r,atij3gs_iji_nie_iujure

             on air quality, drinking water, surface-water quality, hazardous waste, and toxic releases in
             their area. The profiles, created from data stored in EPA's many separate environmental data-
             bases, are presented through user-friendly reports or maps. In the case of air and water quali-
             ty, users can determine how local conditions rate based on a numeric rating system. By
             providing easy access to this type of information through home or local library computers,
             CEIS is helping citizens gain a better understanding of environmental conditions and boost-
             ing their capability to act as knowledgeable stakeholders.
               While the Center for Environmental Information and Statistics represents a breakthrough
            in integrating and reporting environmental data stored in many different databases, the next
            advance on the horizon will be providing citizens with access to data immediately as it is col-
            lected. In contrast to historical data, "real time" data allows people to make decisions about
            their daily lives taking actual air, water, and other environmental conditions into account. It
            provides answers to questions, such as "is the air quality safe for me to go jogging today?" or
            "is the water safe for a swim?" EPA's Environmental Monitoring for Public Access and
            Community Tracking (EMPACT) program provides grants to help communities  develop
            real-time reporting capabilities. The Administration has pledged to offer real-time data (or
            the most up-to-date alternative) to citizens in 86 metropolitan areas by the year 2001.
            Currently, these capabilities are being developed in 68 communities in 37 states.
               In 1998, eight communities received grants,  valued at between $320,000 and $520,000. As
            die projects on die next page show, these funds  are helping communities meet a variety of
            reporting needs. For example, residents in Roxbury, Massachusetts (a neighborhood of

                                                                REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
        Boston) will receive better information about air quality, an important issue for a community
        that in 1992 had the states' highest hospitalization rate for asthma. The area has more than 15
        bus and truck depots, with more than 1,150 diesel vehicles operating within a mile and a half
        of the immediate downtown vicinity. The new air quality project measures the area's fine par-
        ticulate matter,  ozone, wind speed, and other conditions. Information about air quality and
        related public health recommendations are provided to local residents through a toll-free tele-
        phone hotline,  e-mail and fax services,  a Web site, and a public kiosk.
1998  EMPACT PILOT  PROJECTS  ?'"dso be use~a r°
1                           "                    \5ffprjpcalteachers
   Dayton, Ohio will develop and distribute a multi-
media RIVER INDEX providing information on water
quality, flow stage, habitat, and ecosystem health in
                             the lower Great
                             Miami River Basin
                                                                            curricula and workshops
                            Vermont will estab-
                            lish a community-
                            based environmental
                            monitoring program
                            in this urban ecosys-
                            tem, as part of a
                            larger "sustainable
                            city" program. Data
                            collected through citi-
                            zens' water and air
i                                                '
quality monitoring efforts will help support community-
based priority setting and decision-making
                                                  ***? Tucson, Arizona will translate technical data on
                                                  *• local air pollution conditions and related health issues
                                                  ^fnto* easily understandable Internet presentations, and
                                                  txyitact media and community organizations to help
                                                  'publicize the online availability and significance of this
                                                  f  "Milwaukee, Wisconsin will collect and publicly
                                                  ^disseminate data, on wafer quality, particularly on
                                                   e col/ levels and associated health risks, at 10 local
                                                   beaches  Findings will be posted at the beaches and
                                                   publicized more broadly through a hotline, the
                                                   Internet, and local news broadcasts
                                                  ^»*  Boulder, Colorado will develop an information  ,
                                                  gjjetwork to help citizens understand how their day-to-
                                                  jBay activities affect the condition and sustamability of
                                                       community, and to encourage citizen mvolve-
                                                     enf m related decision-making processes This will
   Boston, Massachusetts will pilot test real-time,   t  M,a.ccomP'lsnec' through use of new environmental
ambient air monitoring and data management tech-   '  monitoring technologies, development of environmen-
                   *J               "               Sr^X?       "W-T*    ™ »«,   «.        -l» -~f V 3? 1^,	ft  ,4,1,  u,
niques in a Boston neighborhood with historically higrT^af indicators^ a^nd new databases that enabb public
asthma rates  To raise public awareness, data  will be    "access to_environmental data ^ ^   ^  f
available through the Internet, a hotline, and other
information outlets
                                                  t j^ Minneapolis, Minnesota will expand use of a
                                                        rerrjote underwater sampling technology for mea-
   Denton-Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas will educate  ^suring and reporting data on lake water quality The
area residents on local environmental trends in water,'' " internet and kiosks will be used to educate the public
land, and air by creating online "movies" of past,
present, and predicted conditions. This information
                                                  *on ^interpreting the data and relating it to community
                                                   decision-making.   ^_        _  __,=_ _  _   	,	
                                                                                        its- *

                        In addition to supporting community efforts, EMPACT is also
                     developing more timely reporting capabilities on a national scale.
                     EPA's AIRNOW "Web site, for example, provides animated, real-time
                     data on ground-level ozone (smog) levels in selected cities and states
                     as well as information on ozone health effects. Users can access
                     "movies" showing real-time changes in smog levels over a particular
                     area and print out maps showing smog patterns at particular times of
                     a day. We are working to expand the site to include information on
                     other air pollutants, health effects associated with the most common
                     air pollutants, protective steps citizens can take on days when the
                     outdoor air is unhealthy, and what they can do to reduce air pollu-
                     tion in their community.
   In June 1998, Vice President Gore announced EPA's new BEACH Watch site for
prospective beach goers, along with a 5-year action plan to develop stronger, faster, and
more accurate beach monitoring programs for states. This EMPACT product  posts the
most up-to-date information available about water quality and monitoring efforts at more
than 1,000 U.S. beaches. For any beach currently in the database, BEACH Watch tells
whether monitoring for bacteria or other pathogens is performed, and whether an advisory
or closure has been issued since early 1997. This site continues expanding as local agencies
contribute beach-water monitoring results.
   While many of the initiatives described in dais section aim to support die public's rignMo-
know about environmental issues, one of the nation's first right-to-know initiatives, the Toxic
Release Inventory (TRI), continues to be one of the most important. In 1986, Congress passed
the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, which established the Toxic
Release Inventory to collect information about routine or accidental releases of toxic chemicals
from industrial operations. Since die TRI database became fully operational in 1989, it has
demonstrated an important strategic use of information—how public disclosure can direcdy
affect corporate efforts to reduce emissions and improve environmental performance. The latest
TRI data released in June 1998 showed that, between 1995 and 1996, total toxic chemical
releases decreased by 4 percent, or about 100 million pounds. Overall, since industry first
began publicly reporting releases in 1988, total releases have dropped by almost 46 percent.
   TRI has been a success wordi building on, and a new rule proposed last year will make it
even more informative in the near future. The proposal would significantly lower the TRI
reporting threshold for several persistent, bioaccumulative toxic (PBT) chemicals, including
dioxin and mercury—diereby increasing public reporting of such releases by almost 25 per-
cent. Currently, facilities must report their PBT releases only if they manufacture or process
more than 25,000 pounds annually or use  more than 10,000 pounds annually. The new

                                                         REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
threshold would be lowered to facilities producing 100 pounds or using 10 pounds annual-
ly, depending on the chemical.
   A new rule proposed in November under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act would make
even more information available about mercury emissions. The rule would require coal-fired
utility plants to begin monitoring and reporting on their mercury emissions. This action was
taken based on a report to Congress indicating that coal-fired utility plants are the largest
remaining source of mercury emissions into the air, producing one-third of all U.S. manmade
emissions. The proposal commits EPA to making this new information publicly available.
   We  took other regulatory actions in 1998 to support the public's right-to-know about
environmental and public health protection issues that affect them.
•  In May, we completed a final rule to provide consumers with  information about lead-
   based paint hazards when renovation or remodeling activities are conducted in their
   homes. If not properly managed, these hazards can be significant, especially to young chil-
                         dren. Nearly a million children under age six have unsafe levels of
                         lead in their bodies, making lead poisoning the number one envi-
                         ronmental health hazard for young children. Starting in June
                         1999, before beginning work, building contractors must give
                         homeowners and tenants information on how to protect their
                         family during remodeling or renovation activities. We developed a
                         pamphlet for this distinct purpose. In addition, in June, we issued
                         a publication, entitled "Lead in Your Home, A Parents Guide," to
                         assist parents in protecting their children from lead in a variety of
    In August, we issued a new rule that
    requires public water suppliers to
    inform their customers about drink-
    ing water quality. The reports must
    include information on the source of
    the drinking water; the susceptibility
    of the source to contamination; any
    contamination levels, as compared
    with EPA's health-based standard for
    the contaminant; the likely source of
    that contaminant; the potential health
    effects of any contaminant detected at
    a level that violates an EPA standard;
    and the systems compliance with
    other drinking water-related  rules.
    These new reports are officially
    required between April and October
 *^S^-^^^:^^4=^^4%^>s^w^                  ^ff^,^^^^^^^^^^ |
      _3jALiTY  OF   -.;•;.;...,;:.;;
.^^.^^^^?g'%:£Cl-'i^                          -'T "" - -'~- J ;
    sptember, EPA issued its owrxreport on.
 ling^"wa|er/The.firsl-ever. nation^.report on  .        ,
  ^lti^V^^V^ik^^iA|a*i^i,r^B^^^iKii3^^                           -k'Ln,".,,.. r*«
  iPAjaciftth^ slgte;s;.:a:re;njeeting the goal ot  	 ,  .  -
  rjf^i. "-y^'&^^^^-^rf',"',^''^'"^-'1*'^^^              l-f^tiy':'''^'^''^'--"-'^ ,>.-,.•••*-»*** ./jn^nis.^'^.-.;]''!;-. v-1
  ^m^f^drinkihgVwdter'supplies^-Nafiohally, it
   l^fesJ^l^^llPX^lBH,-ic^?—^s^e'fT1?-'    ---   -
   "	" fjiSeiy 2T3 million people or
             ^putaHorV*Ha3 no reportecl.
  flons of*fieaftfi-basey^standards. Most health-        .''.'
            !   ' .  "   i'Ji'ip"'!    '. .  ',:  .:,; ',':,,  i	, ,  i ' ,   • :< ''':/„ !, .   ,
           '!	!	!	h'!'!'	I1111;:	;	I!:1;	:""!	I1'	r'1'!!'!!	' '"	:" '	'	'••!	""•;	,	'-•";
                                .v; ii'|;;:.;/; ;;::•_ j,..J: iaj;.,':::,,,v ',;:„	;:,;";" .,";;,: -';,";,!	_*-L_, ;,;;
                  t stJioentsjn Chelsea, Massachusetts, are

            tnefcan! EPA Regional staff in New England have
     formftH n rfrnnn nM.fflcg'fing partnership whereby students
                     ••Sliilliiiita^                       	•
                     .computer tools to evaluate potentia
 jl|||||F" jjiiil jSlSeK

  cpmpanies jn the area to
R plans for use in an actual
          sisiiySrai^y    9,,re^M'" °^'   , pr?]81^',^-'^s0'"

                                        wjth requirements

                    5Qcy Planning and Community Right-to-
                                                                 REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
        we have focused on identifying and evaluating the highest volume chemicals—those either
        produced or imported in volumes that exceed 1 million pounds per year. Having identified
        roughly 2,800 existing chemicals that meet this threshold, in early 1998, we evaluated the
        public availability of the chemicals'  test data. We found that only 7 percent had a full set of
        basic health and environmental test data, and 43 percent had no test data on toxicity.
          As  part of an initiative announced by Vice President Gore in April, EPA is working with
        the Chemical Manufacturers' Association, the American Petroleum Institute, the
        Environmental Defense Fund, and other interested parties on a voluntary program to
        increase the public availability of data on widely used chemicals. Under the agreement, par-
        ticipating companies identify the chemicals they will sponsor and in what year—from 1999
        through 2004—they will make the  data on these chemicals publicly available.  They pledge
        to assess and publish existing information and to conduct the testing necessary to fill any
        data gaps. The goal is to rapidly complete a set of baseline data and to make it publicly
        available, chiefly through the Internet. The Agency will use rulemaking, under TSCA, as a
        backstop for those chemicals not sponsored through this voluntary program.
      of the efforts described in this section are.
 designed to give people more access to information
  "they can understand environmental and public
 neajth issues and, jf they choose, become more
"involved in environmental decision-making  Clearly,     .
 f                  s    ~e*  &  i*j                  j(2fcs£3g|j
 having  participants that understand the issues is
 pisentiaj, for meaningful, productive dialogue But as
 an agency that has reached out to involve the public
                                                         overcome these and other difficulties, in 1998,
                                                       looked to the Agency's consensus-based
                                                iktiComrnon 'Sense Initiative TCSI) as a sounding board
                                                j||g|3tog53|jg  ^^,^5^ J£,4,~)hta *J#*H!. ^    *L  ''i, **«       «£W      *•
                                                 ^-fc^dentifytng and analyzing problems in how we
                                                   .taYQJye citizens in decision-making processes With its
                                                 yife^SiiOir" ^    /"~" ^ *  * **    *i'*jf"  ^   V  „                 "j
                                                 , Jruqhly diverse membership, this federal advisory com-
                                                     >fr-  i /r* " r "  ***" "**   *•    * ~
                                                     Tffee found  that the Agency needs to do a better job
                                                      Dearly planning to determine what kind of public
                                                   involvement is most appropriate and use effective
                                                   mechamsmsjo reach target dudiences They conclud-^
                                                                greatest need"is to better link stokehold- ^
                                                      involvement activities with deasion-makmg
                                                                                                        ii ^^  ^ ^ Vi* KS I
 pn numerous issues, we have learned that other fac-  „ ifttoja.-...	 	  	
tfc t.                                             ^f^^"^ ~»  ^  -  *T* *•.«*   "s***^ ,1   *  .*
Jfors can be just as important for determining whether t  processes To do this, they recommended that we
 Involvement efforts produce meaningful results      *   impVove'understanding among participants about
Slffcf   *                                                   t*.  3,«    *    l« t «,!   jh f      J*|
 Determining which citizens and interest groups to      jIQ611" ro'e during discussions, and that we develop
 fnclude, for example, can be especially challenging   f
 !»™A J5    ^               ii                         3§8S^*
.Within any constituency, different individuals often
IP*       '           i'          *-               ,
 hold a range of opinions Difficulties can also arise if
*Jhe qoals and ground rules of citizens' involvement
j» ||teipi !3         \3                        ^
J&Te not clear and fully understood Because citizens'
 |jme ang! resources are limited^they might have to
%ithdrawjrom particigatiojn if a decision process bogs™
   wn for_any reason.,,   _ T_ _ _^
                                                     o1s"to nelp us define what type of stakeholder
                                                     rocess would be most effective in different situations
                                                     e  ~-         *.       f  I  I      III
                                                     qajly, they recommended that we build more inter-
                                                      f                "
                                                          I eJjerngF capacity for conducting stakeholder
                                                     vojyement processes  Taking these recommenda-
                                                    gpSs info'accounf, we developed a Stakeholder     ^
                                                       ifvemenf Action Plan in 1998 to begin making the
                                                   .,-.~*w*r,, ^   ' ^  -     ^    *.         -       i
                                                   snecessary imptovBtnents  _^.
                                                            «!^ *, V „ S» ? g*   -~-C

                          EPA also expanded right-to-know opportunities by making information abourspecific
                       industry sectors available online for the first time ever. In May, we announced the Sector
                       Facility Indexing Project (SFIP), a new database that provides compliance and other envi-
                       ronmental performance data over the Internet on more than 650 facilities in five industrial
                       sectors—automobile assembly, pulp manufacturing, petroleum refining, iron and steel pro-
                       duction, and the primary smelting and refining of aluminum, copper, lead, and zinc. The
                       database also offers demographic data about communities near the facilities.
                          Like TRI, this database has multiple uses. Environmental and community groups can use
                       it to learn about the environmental performance of individual facilities or an industry overall.
                       Corporate managers can benchmark their own regulatory performance against similar facili-
                       ties. Government agencies can use the data, which is regularly updated, as a planning tool.
                       During the first 9 months of operation in 1998, this new database received more than a
                       quarter million hits. Late in the year, the Agency began an evaluation of the project to assess
                       public awareness of its existence, customer satisfaction with its capabilities, and its general
                       utility as an effective regulatory compliance and analytical tool.
                          In December, EPA announced the online availability of another sector-oriented data
                       base, one which could influence consumers' future decisions when selecting an electric utili-
                       ty provider. A new consolidated data base called the Emissions and Generation Resource
                       Integrated Database (E-GRID) contains data on virtually all electric power plants in the
                       United States. It integrates data from 12 federal databases in order to provide information
                       on emissions per unirof-electricity—enabling consumers to compare pollution levels from
                       different power sources. It also allows users to compare the amount and percentage of
                       power from different fuels, such as coal, natural gas, or nuclear sources. E-GRID presently
                       offers reports on carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxide emissions; however,
                       reporting on additional pollutants will be considered in the future. E-GRID provides a par-
                       ticularly timely right-to-know tool, for according to the U.S. Department of Energy,
                                                                18 states have adopted policies allowing con-
                                                                sumers to choose among competing electricity
                                                                suppliers. By helping consumers evaluate the
                                                                environmental performance of electric compa-
                                                                nies, E-GRID could lead to the development
                                                                of cleaner electricity resources. E-GRID infor-
                                                                mation should also help EPA and the states
                                                                monitor trends in power plant emissions as the
                                                                electricity industry becomes increasingly com-
                                                                petitive through deregulation.
   Aggregate Data Summary: Pulp Manufacturing

TV £Hj«Wf tjAtft pitttitt Ittf uivnttf wltKS r
                                                                 REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
I   At EPA, part of meeting the information challenge.
has meant working collaboratively with the states to
solve certain technical problems and generally
upgrade hardware and software to take advantage of
new technological developments. Since 1996, we
have been supporting information reform projects in
the states through the "One-Stop" program—named
for the vision of a fully integrated, seamless informa-
tion system that allows reporting and retrieval through
a single, universally accessible data base. States on
the cutting edge of information management and
technology are given $500,000 grants to bolster and
^leverage their own information technology invest-  .._
ments. In 1998, we awarded grants to eight states—
Arizona, Florida, Indiana, Maryland, Oklahoma, New^
Hampshire,  New York, and Wisconsin. This brings the
total  number of states receiving support to 21, and
the total federal  investment, to date, to $10.5 million.
Our  goal is to offer this level of support to all
50 states by the end of 2003.
    In order to cut costs that stem  from duplicative,
repetitive reporting and improve the information we
provide to the public, we are also working together
on ways to allow data to be shared among multiple
environmental databases. In the past, sharing and
aggregating data has been difficult because of a lack
of consistently recognized data standards. The prob-
 lem developed largely as a consequence of the way
 in which the U.S. environmental protection system
 evolved. In general, Congress passed separate laws
for specific environmental problems, such as  air pol- ,
 lution or waste management. EPA followed by devel-
 oping separate regulations, and  regulatory officials  at
 all levels of government set up numerous databases
 to collect and manage the information these  regula-
 tions required.
    To overcome the shortcomings of this structure, we
 are working to establish common environmental data ,
 standards, as well as other information reforms, which
 are needed to facilitate information sharing. In 1 998,
 we adopted the first environmental data standard with
 the states. The seemingly simple  standard—which
specifies how to%j§njijy regulated facilities, such as
factories and munfcjpal facilities in environmental
databases—will allow us to extract, aggregate and
analyze all the available data on a single facility
much more easily and cojmpletely.

   Within the Agency, we also are in the process of
".upgrading  databases to take advantage of new infor-
mation technology. In September, we announced
availability of an updated versfon of our oldest and
largest database system, the STOrage and  RETrieval
(STORET) water quality database. Started by EPA's
predecessors at the U.S. Public Health-Service in the
1960s, STORET has  evolved into a national repository
•for water quality and biological monitoring data—one
with .a value estimated at more than $2 billion.:.Data ,.
e'ntry, however, has traditionally been restricted-tp   . ..
state officials. As a result, valuable information from  .
other sources, such as university research projects .or..:.
community volunteer monitoring efforts, has been   ^
   The new STORET  makes it simple and easy for
these groups and others to submit data on chemicals,
biological species, sediment toxicity, and aquatic habi-
tats. In  1999, we expect to open access to this previ-
ously exclusive resource by making it publicly available
over the Internet. Local government officials and other
interested parties will be able to draw upon this addi-
tional data when evaluating watershed  conditions and
 making planning and management decisions.

         nvironmental protection requires action by states, local government, industries,
         small businesses, communities and many other people beyond our doors. Not long
         ago, we tended to regard many of these organizations and interests as groups to be
regulated. Today, we are just as likely to call them our partners. EPA has created many part-
nerships to achieve environmental results in more cooperative ways. "We are joining forces
with states, for example, to better define environmental problems and find innovative solu-
tions. We are forming partnerships with industry to prevent pollution, save energy, and cre-
ate a more sustainable environment and economy. We are joining with communities to  clean
up abandoned properties. These and other partnerships help us tackle environmental prob-
lems with more resources, more hands-on expertise, and more good ideas than ever before.
   Of all our partnerships, the most critical is our relationship with the states, who share
responsibility for implementing environmental programs. Under many federal laws, we rely
on states to monitor environmental conditions, issue permits, and enforce requirements. To
strengthen this partnership, EPA signed an agreement with the states in 1995 to form the
National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS).
   Under this system, states and our 10 Regional offices create tailored Performance
Partnership Agreements (PPAs) that define the goals in each state and how each partner will
work to reach them. States also may combine some or all of their federal grants into
Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs), giving them additional flexibility in managing and
spending federal dollars. By the end of 1998, the Agency had PPAs with 33 states, and
43 states had PPGs.
   EPA and the states created this new system to focus programs more on environmental
results and to provide more flexibility in how environmental problems are solved. We also
sought more involvement by the public in planning and priority-setting. Although such
changes are sometimes difficult, we achieved progress on several fronts during 1998.
   Top priority was given to refining a set of core performance measures that would allow
us to jointly evaluate the results from environmental programs. In the past, federal and state

                                                            REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL ; PROTECTION
      agencies have typically measured progress in terms of program activities, such as the num-
      ber of permits issued or enforcement actions taken. While these actions are important, they
      tell us little about actual conditions. During 1996 and 1997, we focused on developing
      more meaningful measures so we could do a better job of benchmarking progress, reporting
      results to the public, and identifying the problems most in need of attention. These early
      measures have been incorporated into PPAs—at the same time we have continued working
      to refine them. Refinements made in 1998 will enable EPA and states to measure and
      report on progress even more effectively in the future.
        In addition to supporting the development and refinement of core measures for issues of
      national importance, some states have developed their own measures to address specific pri-
      orities. In the mid-Atlantic area, for example, our Regional staff worked with Maryland
      officials on a PPA that measures progress toward the goals, "Achieve adequate submerged
      aquatic vegetation habitat on all Chesapeake Bay tidal waters" and "Rebuild the American
      shad population in the upper Chesapeake Bay." In neighboring Delaware, state officials are
      focused on tracking how well they "eliminate 100 percent of all known failing septic tanks"
      and "expand drainage, flood protection, and water management for an additional 6,000
      acres of agricultural and residential land. "
The Nofionar~Environmental  Performance Partnership System
States  With Agreements and Grants in...	
                                                                                    Grant Only
                                                                                    Agreement Only


                                                                                          V ITC'S'Ci'Tp^', 'I*,.';?: !,?^ I
                                                   The state-EPA performance partner-
                                                ship system has also led to more innova-
                                                tive problem-solving. In Southwest Utah,
                                                for example, EPA Regional staff in
                                                Denver collaborated with state and local
                                                officials to protect ground water. A
                                                ground-water study showed that new sub-
                                                divisions in the (Cedar Valley)
                                                Washington County area could cause
                                                ground-water problems if too many septic
                                                systems were installed on the area's mar-
                                                ginal soils. So we worked together and
                                                with local officials to create a local ordi-
                                                nance that will limit the number of septic
                                                systems installed. This ordinance could be
                                                an especially useful model for other com-
                                                munities in Utah, given that 90  percent
                                                of the drinking water in the state's rural
                                                areas comes from ground water.
   Public involvement in environmental priority-setting also  is improving. Illinois and EPA
Regional staff in Chicago, for example, jointly sponsored focus group sessions in 1997 and
1998 to discuss goals and objectives, priorities, and strategies for protecting the state's envi-
ronment. Separate sessions, coordinated by the stakeholders themselves, were offered for
public interest groups, local government groups, and business organizations. Ideas from the
sessions were used in drafting the final PPA and improving environmental program manage-
ment. These developments provide a significant contrast to past years when priority-setting
and decision-making were more exclusive activities, handled  by regulatory officials alone.
   As the Agency has worked more closely with the States in recent years, it  has gained a
better understanding of many different issues. An increasingly important one has been
many states' interest in pursuing environmental regulatory innovations. Because they are on
the front lines implementing many environmental programs, state officials are  often in the
best position to see what works well and what does not. These realizations create interest in
finding ways to achieve desired results more efficiently and effectively. EPA understands,
shares, and strongly supports diis interest. The challenge is to find ways to innovate without
jeopardizing the national baseline of protection that federal requirements provide.
   After more than a year of negotiating how state and federal interests could be accommo-
dated, in April, EPA and the states agreed on a process that clears the way for states to pursue
regulatory innovations that promise equal or better protection. The agreement was signed by
Administrator Browner and the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), the national

                                                          REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
organization representing state environmental agencies' interests. It is based on seven shared
principles: a willingness to experiment, improved environmental performance, smarter
approaches to solving environmental problems, stakeholder involvement during design and
evaluation, measuring and verifying results against agreed-upon goals and objectives, ensur-
ing appropriate accountability and enforcement, and promoting state-EPA partnerships.
   The agreement allows innovations to be tested in a way that does not compromise pro-
tection provided through federal requirements. It encourages the states and EPA staff to use
existing options for providing regulatory flexibility to a degree we have never done before,
as long as doing so makes environmental and economic sense. These options can include
exercising the variances provided under some environmental programs, or writing rules that
allow innovative projects to be tested and perfected under limited circumstances, such as at
a single facility. EPA developed guidance for its Regions, who will take the lead in working
with the states under this agreement.
   This past February, Wisconsin became the first State to put these new principles and the
new process to work. Several states, including Wisconsin, have recently passed laws to
reward companies with outstanding environmental records or to create incentives to
improve compliance among poorly performing companies. We are working with these states
to implement these laws in a way that creates more flexibility within their delegated federal
programs. The agreement with Wisconsin provides a process for the state to offer flexibility
in a way that conforms with the principles established by EPA, the Environmental State
Commissioners, and Wisconsin's own legislature.
   Another example of how the EGOS agreement will be used can be seen in Texas. There,
our Regional staff in Dallas are working with the state to address their interest in reducing
resources spent recertifying air inspectors for their ability to measure opacity, or the dense-
ness, of smoke plumes. Under Clean Air Act regulatory requirements, all air inspectors must
be certified on their ability to make these determinations. So, every 6 months, they are
trained and tested. Because Texas has recently reduced its reliance on these readings in
enforcement cases, the state  proposed extending the recertifica-
tion requirement to 2 years. Texas and EPA officials are now
discussing options that would balance state interest in reducing
resources required for recertification with the need to maintain
well-trained and up-to-date  inspector capability. Through these
and other state experiments, we hope to find ideas to improve
environmental protection that can be transferred to other states
and facilities
    The agreement with the State Environmental
Commissioners expands opportunities for testing innovative
regulatory approaches that may not meet the requirements for
Project XL. As described in the next section of this report,
Project XL is a unique reinvention initiative that allows testing

                    of new ideas in situations outside of the traditional regulatory construct. In 1998, we
                    approved the first state project under Project XL, this one with Massachusetts on an innova-
                    tive alternative to permitting.
                      Today poorly planned development and urban decay threaten environmental health, eco-
                    nomic opportunities, and quality of life in many communities. At the same time, growth
                    and redevelopment is critical; it can revitalize communities by adding new services and cre-
                    ating new job opportunity. Broad coalitions—including farmers, developers, business lead-
                    ers, neighborhood organizations, and government officials—across the country are now
                    putting aside years of distrust and coming together to create a new vision that goes beyond
                    the debate over growth versus no growth. This vision focuses on promoting growth and
                    redevelopment activities that enhance the livability of our communities.
                      EPA recognizes that decisions related to growth and  development should reside with
                    local and state officials. And yet, many of our programs can help communities grappling
                    with the" question of how to revitalize and grow without risking their quality of life gained
                    through environmental and public health protection programs in the past.
                      In an action uniquely suited to EPA, we are exploring whether innovative local land use
                    activities, such as more compact development, revitalizing urban industrial sites, and locat-
                    ing office buildings closer to residences to shorten commutes can improve air quality. If so,
                    the Agency might be able to offer local governments that promote these activities credits
                    under Clean Air Act requirements. Preliminary estimates suggest these credits could be sig-
                    nificant, providing communities more options for growth and redevelopment, while pro-
                    moting cleaner air and enhanced economic vitality.
                      We also offered financial support by expanding a $500,000 pilot project into a $5 mil-
                    lion national grant program to support community-based sustainable development activi-
                    ties. These grants are offered to help launch community-based projects that promote
                    environmentally and economically sustainable practices; build working partnerships among
                    community members, businesses, and government agencies; and help attract public and pri-
                    vate investments so  community projects can continue without relying on EPA for support.
                    In May 1998, 45 projects from all areas of the country were selected for funding. They
                    ranged widely from urban redevelopment and revitalization efforts to ecologically sound
                    agricultural practices to natural resource and watershed  protection efforts.
                      EPA also led the  Smart Growth Network, a coalition of government, businesses, and
                    civic organizations concerned about haphazard, unplanned growth and development. The
                    network supports neighborhoods, communities, and regions across the country in their
                    efforts to avoid this trend in several ways. It serves as a clearinghouse of knowledge about
                    "smart growth." It facilitates information sharing on best development practices and acts as

                                                       .REINVENTING-ENVIRONMENTAL. PROTECTION
a catalyst for implementing new ideas. In just
2 years, 21 national organizations, such as the
International City/County Management
Association and the National Trust for Historic
Preservation, have joined based on their con-
stituents' concern about smart growth issues. In
addition to providing their constituents with infor-
mation, these national organizations are taking
action in support of smart growth by convening stakeholder discussions and developing
special planning and management tools. Joining these national organizations are more than
300 individual members who have signed up based on a desire to promote smart growth
within their own community, organization, or business. The network's rapid increase in
membership signifies the growing interest in smart growth, as do attendance figures at the
network's national conferences—last year's gathering attracted more than 1,100 people  from
nearly all 50 states.
   Through a coordinated approach, EPA's support for these and other activities enhance
the livability of communities, while creating places that foster strong conditions for healthy
environments, economic progress, and community well-being.
   One of EPA's greatest opportunities for supporting smart growth is the Brownfields
Economic Development Initiative. Brownfields are abandoned, idled, or under-used proper-
ties tainted by environmental contamination. They are a blight in many inner cities, repre-
senting lost jobs, decaying neighborhoods, and unused potential. While brownfields sit idle,
industries often expand into undeveloped green spaces.
   The Brownfields Economic Development Initiative is helping to revitalize those neglect-
ed sites in ways that make sense for each community. In 1998, we awarded $21 million to
help 107 communities begin the process of redevelopment. These grants help assess proper-
ty contamination, involve community residents in land use decisions, and resolve liability
concerns. "There is no greater example of the environment and the economy working hand
in hand to benefit the American people," said Vice President Gore.
   To date, we have awarded more than $42 million to 227 states, cities, towns, counties
and tribes, based on a commitment to supporting 300 pilot projects by the end of 1999.
Communities have used their grants to leverage nearly $ 1 billion more for cleanup and
   Funding to support cleanup and redevelopment is essential, but bringing neighborhoods
back to life requires something more—a vibrant, sustainable, local economy. That's why we
are also helping communities develop solutions to social and economic problems linked to

                                i in
                                  Brownfield Pilots  &  Showcase  Communities
                                             227 Awarded as of December 1998
                                                                 Pilot Project
                    Baltimore, MD
                    Connecting the
               city's Economic	
               Empowerment Zone and
               brownfield redevelop-
               rhent activities.

                    Chicago, IL
                   1Showing how a city
               can lead on brownfield
               issues through the collab-
               oration and partnership
               of a community-based
               Brownfields Forum.

                    Dallas, TX
                   , A flgjionaj leader, in
               leveraging federal envi-
               rbnmental cleanup and
               economic development
                    East Palo Alto,
                    CA Showing how a
               bypassed, historically
               agricultural community
             ;;., c||n^sycceSsfulilyiclegni up
               brownfield areas and
             !;'!!!'•':" broaden its economic
     Florida A five-
county partnership to
revitalize an urban core
and alleviate develop-
ment pressures around
the imperiled Everglades.

     Glen Cove, NY
     A small Long Island
community successfully
involving local citizens in
uniting redevelopment
efforts along the waterfront.

     Kansas City, KS
     and MO Showing
     how cities, states,
and federal agencies can
join together to solve
brownfields problems
crossing state lines.

      Los Angeles, CA
      how a sprawling
metropolis can revitalize
brownfields through a
concentrated transporta-
tion corridor project.
     Lowell, MA
     A classic northeast-
ern manufacturing xity
focusing on revitalizing
its former industrial sites.
                              Salt Lake City, UT
                              Working to recon-
                         nect parts of the city now
                         separated by a blighted
                         industrial district.
     Portland, OR
     Using the trans-
portation system to spur
brownfields cleanup and
maintain controlled, sus-
tainable growth.

     State of Rhode
Working together to
improve conditions in the
Woonasquatucket River
watershed, with a focus on
greenway development.

     St. Paul, MN
     Using its Port
Authority to concentrate
economic revitalization
and redevelopment activi-
ties with support from .a
strong state cleanup
program:  ~ •
                               County, WA
                         Showing how a major
                         city and rural county can
                         work together in a
                         regional approach  to
                         brownfields development.

                              Stamford, CT
                              A small, northeast-
                         ern industrial city plan-
                         ning to  reclaim its harbor
                         area through brownfields

                              Trenton, NJ
                              Successfully partner-
                         ing with a neighborhood
                         community development
                         corporation to involve the
                         community in brownfields
                         redevelopment activities.
[           	jiii	1^^	I	in;'!;;	ifliiiiii	;	puffl	'jjjr-mi	jiii'i	jiiM"	ajjii;	g	^gmit^	J|" '''
                 , !' (Illif

                                                       REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION,
brownfleld sites. We estimate that the Brownfields Economic Development Initiative has
created more than 2,000 jobs, with tens of thousands more jobs projected for communities
once revitalization efforts come to fruition. To further promote job opportunity, in August,
we awarded $2 million for job training related to the assessment, cleanup and redevelop-
ment of brownfields in 11 communities. One grant recipient, East Palo Alto, California, for
example, has partnered with a nonprofit job training center to offer hazardous materials
training. The first 34 graduates have been trained in contamination removal and most have
been hired by local companies.

  Our efforts to address brownfields are part of a broader federal partnership that involves
more than 20 federal agencies. In March 1998, Vice President Gore designated 16
Brownfield pilot projects as "Showcase Communities" and announced that federal agencies
would collectively target an additional $28 million in federal assistance to these areas to
create national models of innovative environmental cleanup and redevelopment. These
Showcase  Communities face a variety of challenges. In Southeast Florida, for example,  a
five-county partnership  is revitalizing an urban center to alleviate development pressures on
the Everglades. Salt Lake City is reconnecting neighborhoods now separated by a blighted
industrial  district. And Lowell, Massachusetts is showing how manufacturing cities can revi-
talize their former industrial sites.
   Partners who join EPA's voluntary environmental programs are improving their environ-
mental performance while also improving their financial status. As of January 1998, busi-
nesses, government agencies, hospitals, universities, and other organizations reported annual
savings of $1.6 billion from their efforts to cut pollution, improve efficiency, and conserve
natural resources.
   Known collectively as "Partners for the Environment," these nonregulatory programs
encourage and recognize environmentally friendly actions.  WAVE, which stands for water
alliance for voluntary efficiency, for example, helps hotels conserve water by changing cer-
tain practices and installing water-saving devices.
The Waste Wise program encourages partners to
reduce, reuse, and recycle waste material. The
Pesticide Environmental Stewardship program
encourages integrated pest management and
reduces pesticide risks in agricultural and urban
settings. Design for the Environment helps busi-
nesses incorporate environmental considerations
into the design of their products and processes.

 ssficide Environmental
 limate Wise
    sportation JPartners
    m Jfttlne JEmti ronment

           tal Accoi
-ommon_Sense Initiative
  jiect XL

   These partnerships have yielded impressive results. The latest
data, based on results from 1997, showed that partners collectively:
• eliminated 7.6 million tons of solid waste.
• prevented the release of 79 million metric tons of carbon diox-
   ide, the primary pollutant linked to global warming.
i/ saved nearly 6 million gallons of clean water.
• conserved enough energy (more than 1 quadrillion BTU's ) to
   light 56 million households for a year.
   Partners range from Fortune 500 firms to small, family-owned
operations. Three world renowned buildings—the World Trade
Center and Empire State Building in New York and the Sears
Tower in Chicago—joined the ENERGY STAR Buildings Program in
1998  to reduce energy use and cut the pollution that  leads to
global warming.  Other ENERGY STAR partners include such diverse
small  businesses as Colonial Grocery in Mt. Ida, Arkansas; Blue
Body & Paint in Billings, Montana; and Jones Electric, a home-
based business in Statesboro, Georgia.
   These voluntary programs are attractive to partners for several
reasons. First, because they focus on cutting waste and improving
efficiency, they typically lower a  participant's manufacturing and
operating costs. They offer technical information and, in some
cases,  onsite technical assistance. Many programs offer special
recognition that can be used advantageously  in the marketplace.
Computer and electronics companies participating in our ENERGY
STAR program, for example, can  apply the special ENERGY STAR
seal to distinguish their products. Other programs might offer
recognition through awards programs  that generate positive press.
In 1998, we hosted awards ceremonies to recognize leaders in vari-
ous partnership programs. In September,  we  hosted the first
awards ceremony for our WasteWise partners, recognizing partners
who are leaders in preventing and reducing solid waste. In
November, we honored outstanding Climate Wise partners at
another first-time ceremony to recognize achievements that reduce
air emissions linked to global warming.
   Climate Wise, which receives  technical support from the
Department of Energy,  has proven to be an effective part of the
nation's Climate Change Action  Plan.  Under the program, compa-
nies look across all aspects of their operations from industrial

                                                     ^REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
operations like boiler systems, to lighting, to water
usage to increase energy efficiency and reduce green-
house gas emissions. In 1998, program membership
rose by more than a third to 459 companies. These
new members alone represented more than 1.4 per-
cent of the U.S. industrial energy use. Together, they
committed to reducing emissions by 620,000 metric
tons, the equivalent of taking 2.2 million cars off the
road. As an incentive for participation, Climate Wise
offered technical assistance, such as a new software
tool that helps companies track their emissions and
quantify the emission reductions from dieir actions.
This and an expanded version of the software to be
launched in 1999 is already changing the way com-
panies think about energy efficiency. Many companies don't know what their annual energy
bill is, much less what projects they have in place to improve efficiency or how these pro-
jects are actually performing. Climate Wise also began working with British Petroleum,
Chevron, and other major corporations to develop new products deemed "climate neutral."
This concept refers to the complete elimination of greenhouse gas emissions, either through
energy efficiency or through offsets from projects that are climate friendly.
  "WasteWise is proving to be
an  excellent industry/govern-
ment voluntary partnership.
We are managing our busi-
ness in the way that is most
effective for  us while produc-
ing results that help to
achieve the  long-term envi-
ronmental goals that  govern-
ment has  set.  Everyone wins!"
  Terry Bedell, Manager of Environmental
         Programs, the Clorox Company.
   In November, we announced a partnership with other federal agencies to help state and
local governments protect their drinking water.
   Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, states, tribes, and localities are responsible for over-
seeing drinking water sources and taking action to curtail potential contamination problems.
This requires them to define ground-water and surface-water protection areas, identify and
map potential contamination sources, and inform the public about drinking water safety.
   This task is not always easy, especially for small governments without a lot of technology
and expertise. To help them, EPA and eight other federal agencies agreed to share informa-
tion with states, communities and tribes. Federal electronic databases, geographic informa-
tion systems, and other information will help these governments map potential problems
and protect their drinking water sources for future generations.
   In addition to EPA, other federal partners include: the U.S. Departments of Agriculture,
Commerce, Defense, Energy, Interior, and Transportation; the U.S. Postal Service; and the
Tennessee Valley Authority. Regional forums will be held in 1999 to help build these feder-
al-state-local partnerships so we can respond to communities'  information needs.


               In order to improve the science behind our decisions, in 1998, we continued reaching
             out to the best and brightest in the scientific research community. Through the Science to
             Achieve Results (STAR) program, we supported scientific research to complement the work
             of our own scientists. Since its inception in 1995, this program has provided grants to sup-
             port high-priority, peer-reviewed research projects. And by coordinating this effort with
             other federal agencies, we are able to avoid duplication and leverage federal research dollars.
               A number of important scientific findings and accomplishments are being seen from this
             program as some of the earliest grants come to completion. Several examples below illustrate
             their significance:
             •  Researchers at the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California developed a cell
               culture assay for detecting Cryptosporidium in source water and treated drinking water
               supplies. This organism, which has been linked to deaths in some areas, is a major public
               health concern for drinking water suppliers.
                                              •  How do you place a dollar figure on the value of
                                              an ecosystem? This question is one of the most chal-
                                              lenging EPA faces when estimating the costs and
                                              benefits of new policies and regulations. A series of
                                              grants in economic research are being used to devel-
                                              op or improve current methods for making these
                                              •  At the University of Colorado, researchers have
                                              developed two innovative air modeling techniques to
                                              predict the peak, ground-level concentrations of toxic
               pollutants released from tall stationary sources. This predictive tool is expected to have
               near term application for developing regulations under the Clean Air Act.
               Finding environmentally benign alternatives to toxic organic solvents has been a major
               focus of grant support.  Research grants on the use of liquid carbon dioxide has led to
               promising developments, including one approach developed at the University of North
               Carolina and already commercially available that offers dry cleaners an alternative to
               New environmental technologies can be financially risky, but the innovative solutions
            they offer are essential for advancing environmental management capabilities. In April, we
            agreed to share the risk of trying innovative technologies for one of our most pressing

                                                          REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTION ^
environmental problems—cleanup of the
nation's worst hazardous waste problems at
federal Superfund sites. Superfund cleanups
can cost millions of dollars, creating a dire
need for more cost-effective cleanup technolo-
gies. However, responsible parties often are
reluctant to try new techniques because they
fear having to "pay twice" if the innovative
approach fails to produce the required level of
Courtesy of Parsons Engineering-Science, Inc. and
Resources Conservation Company
   Now, if projects are accepted by an EPA
technical review panel, the Agency will share
up to 50 percent of the cost of the failed innovative technology if further cleanup is
required. In doing so, we hope to encourage the testing and use of innovative technologies,
boost cleanup efforts at Superfund sites, and encourage responsible parties to take a more
active role in new technology development.

 '!.••'  •   ",    '"in	•   1 ,  I :—™~>. ^m iVv'»''"."" ,1- I r*"Mi-^ S5f-'3II~2'!!» -f^™'^
 1 "'i|'	'	 	is	:lni -	i	'»	' I r1'1^	&'"• 1||!"	""	"L	'•'	• f*"1"	•;	•	»•""'""	^ * "'iii!|lii"l4!' **>	-	*
:::::.:!	'	:;::;;::	•-:•::•"	:	"	;	:	!J:	t	•	'HMoR-F^AtrDRFD^
                                     F..      .
                            urther gains in environmental and public health protection will come in one of two
                            ways—through new regulations that require higher standards of environmental per-
                            formance, or through voluntary actions where businesses, communities, or individu-
                      als commit to addressing problems by changing certain practices or taking specific actions.
                      Regulations are essential to protection efforts, and setting environmental standards contin-
                      ues to be one of EPA's most important responsibilities. But improving environmental pro-
                      tection requires more than just issuing scientifically and technically sound mandates. "We
                      must first determine whedier regulations are appropriate. Depending on the issue and the
                      circumstances, incentives that prompt voluntary action may be more effective in getting the
                      desired result. When regulations are needed, we need to offer regulated parties more choice
                      in how they comply. During the past year, we worked with industry and other interests to
                      better understand the specific issues that affect environmental performance capabilities. We
                      also worked to provide more flexible regulatory approaches for addressing some challenging
                      environmental problems. The result was a mix of regulatory and nonregulatory solutions
                      that are more tailored for the challenges daey aim to address.
                      CLEANER  AIR
                        In September, we issued a plan to ensure that Americans will breathe cleaner, healthier air
                      in the next century. The plan offers flexibility to states—and indirectly to power plants—in
                      meeting federal air quality requirements for smog. The standards were issued in 1997 to pro-
                      tect the public from asthma, bronchitis, and other respiratory problems, and to guard against
                      damage to crops and forests. Our plan to reduce these harmful pollutants calls for the District
                      of Columbia and 22 states in the eastern United States to cut their emissions of nitrogen
                      oxide (NOx), a primary contributor to smog formation, by more than 1.1 million tons annu-
                      ally, or 28 percent overall, by the year 2007. States can decide how these reductions will be
                      achieved, but we recommended they focus on controlling emissions from large power plants.
                      Why? Because the technology needed to reduce NOx reductions from these sources costs
                      approximately $1,500 per ton compared to costs of $2,000 to $10,000 per ton for control
                      measures on other NOx sources, such as automobiles,  small businesses, and factories.

                        To further ensure cost-effectiveness, we recommended that a trading program be created
                      to give the power industry more flexibility in meeting the necessary targets. Under this

                                                                   REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
         approach, the states would establish a
         cap on total NOx emissions; power
         plants and other sources that reduce
         more emissions than required could sell
         the excess as "credits." Facilities not able
         to reduce emissions as quickly or as cost-
         effectively could buy credits to meet
         their allotment.
            Overall, this plan offers a flexible,
         cost-effective program for reducing
         smog. It should enable most counties in
         the East not currendy meeting the new
         smog standards to come into compliance
         without having to implement additional,
         cosdy controls. And by emphasizing
         market strategies, it offers power plants a
         practical, workable alternative for achiev-
         ing their allotted emission targets. As an
         article in the Boston Globe pointed out,
         "... less targeted, more invasive regulato-
         ry methods could easily have doubled or
         even quadrupled the cost."
      ier clean air action affecting1
r,T--c_;«.^.- "'"''„.- • ' -".''"' -1"- ••X^'" "'" " "  ' '' *-"""    *"•
glnclustry in 1998: a New'Source
:i»«SlsH»r •=.;'-  - .V    .  -' .,'• .
                                                                                          ip'ed shape
          (NSPS) that also appli
  ities with steam generating uniti
 y^hich Controls NOx emissions
 ihey undergo expansion or construct
 'projected growth in emissions from n
  approximately 42 percent from levels
  have, be~en  allowed under the previQ
  An economic incentive mdudedjn,the;
 "encourages energy efficiency apd sho
  reduce emissions even more In the pc
  dard.was based on the amount pfTueli
  result, given two facilities of equal production      . •
  frapaaty, the less efficient facility would be altowfecf '
                                                       -to emit more NOx because ittusedjmore
                                                        generate the same amount of electricity *The*new'*
                                                       •**                          {f  • "^J^-l_/^-%y^
                                                       'standard is based on the ampurifof energy gener-
                                                       ?»                         IK   ^(te^tlr -   |C»\I
                                                       :5jed  Thus, considering the same two plants, the "*
                                                        gss efficient plant would have tcj reduce  its emiS;
                                                             more to comply This addftional expense—not
                                                        :„ „"                   " I*/      ^  I   /5 T««*
                                                        torred by more efficient competitors—would cre-
                                                        ^^5r,vrf'      ' *      f /        v.1 -A
                                                        tean^onomic incentive to reduce tueL
                                                         ™,       __^^        __  _   _      ^
                                                      e tocus trom pollution control to improving produc-
                                                         processes This standard requires plants to signifi-'
                                                Js~ ^tgntly reduce the toxic air emissions from their
                                                          .,- <,*•***'-        ,  ,      ,    .
 *~ A final rule issued for the pharmaceutical industry
 m July demonstrates EPA's commitment to making
'pollution prevention an integral part of regulatory
 pctions whenever possible and to providing flexibility
 jn^ho/yv regulations are met The rule is expected to
"jr&duce toxic emissions from the industry by 24,000
 Ions a year Manufacturers can meet the air toxic
                                                   "Aoperafions by recovering or recycling solvents or simi-
                                                     lar process ^improvements
                                                       The new rule also^contains ajnarket-based provi-
                                                    * ion, "emissions averaging," which gives facilities the
                                                       ixibility to choose where in their operations to focus
                                                       ""Vi-Ar-sn    ,   ,              ** r  i
                                                          :>n controls  In some situations, facilities might
                                                               1 * J-u f,  i <&"!&•      >»    .;
                                                        ,it more cost-ejfective to overcontrol process vents
^standard by installing new emission control equip-   f^ «f|r storage fanks fn one_area and to undercontrol
 "rrlent Or,jhey can opt to comply through an alterna^ iflesi| sources in others  This flexibility can nelp them
 live, poliujjon prevention-based standard that shifts  '   «aSueve greater emission reductions at less cost
                                                                      4n *
                                                                                *    ,
                                                                              V   •> %
                                                                                                          *   ZJ&i *•»£

                The same market-based forces that have been used to drive air quality improvements are
             also being harnessed to improve water quality. In several watersheds, effluent trading is
             being used as a market-based approach for pursuing water quality goals in a more flexible,
             cost-effective manner. The need for such an approach has intensified in recent years, in part
             because of Clean Water Act requirements that are being applied to improve conditions in
             waterbodies not supporting their designated uses, such as fishing and swimming.
                                                Under the Clean Water Act, states must provide a
                                              quantitative method for allocating pollutant discharges,
                                              or loadings, among sources. This is done by developing
                                              the total maximum daily load (TMDL), the sum of the
                                              pollutant load coming from point sources, nonpoint
                                              sources, and the natural environment. (It also includes a
                                              margin of safety to account for any lack of knowledge
                                              about  the relationship between the pollutant loads and
                                              the quality of the receiving water body). Based on this
                                              assessment, the allotment process may take a variety of
             factors into account, but is not necessarily done on an economic basis. As a result, industri-
             al, municipal, and agricultural sources with the ability to reduce loadings at the lowest cost
             have not always been encouraged to make reductions when assigned relatively high allot-
             ments. Meanwhile, other sources whose cost of making reductions is very high can face sig-
             nificant reduction requirements when assigned a relatively small allotment.
                The latest water quality assessments from die states show that these allotment processes
             are needed in many parts of the country, for about 40 percent of monitored waters are not
             meeting water quality goals. In these areas, effluent trading among sources within a water-
             shed offers a market-based approach for determining who will actually reduce loadings and
             by how much. While regulatory authorities assign allotment levels to all of the sources, by
             allowing buying and selling, these agencies rely on die market to determine how the allot-
             ments will actually be met. Sources able to cut their loadings beyond what is required can
             sell the excess to those unable to meet their allotments in a timely, cost-effective manner.
             This ability to buy allotments can be especially beneficial for sources that need to expand,
             for it can help them avoid having to invest in expensive new pollution control technologies.
                In 1998, we gained more experience with effluent trading programs through pilot pro-
             jects in several communities. In Idaho, for example, a trading program is being created for
             the Lower Boise River in anticipation of new phosphorous reductions that are expected to
             be needed based on the forthcoming TMDL. Following an initial study to determine how
             much phosphorous reduction was needed, work began to develop a market and analytical
             framework for managing trades involving  municipal and agricultural sources. Trading
             should begin on a limited scale in 1999 or 2000, with larger trading volumes expected in
             subsequent years.

                                                        REINVESTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ^ I  4i
  Another trading program was launched to reduce loadings of ammonia and organic mat-
ter for the Puyallup/White River'watershed in northwest Washington. There, trading was
seen as a way to help accommodate future economic growth stemming from the nearby
Seattle-Tacoma metropolitan area. Initial trading will occur between point sources, but
point-to-nonpoint source trades will be considered in the future.
   In February 1998, President Clinton unveiled a Clean Water Action Plan to finish the
job of restoring the nations waters. This plan includes more than 100 specific actions that
EPA and other federal agencies will take to strengthen and expand protection of rivers,
lakes, wedands, and coastal waters. It builds  on the solid foundation of the Clean Water Act
and related core water programs and provides the first-ever multiagency budget to direct
federal funding for clean water programs.
   The collaboration involved in developing this plan was unprecedented. In the past, EPA
and its federal partners within the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Interior, and
Defense have carried out numerous programs to improve and protect water quality. And
yet, too often, they have not done so in a coordinated way. Water quality in any given
watershed can be affected by numerous factors, including actions by federal agencies. Thus,
rather than continuing to execute water quality programs independently,  the federal agen-
cies committed to a unified plan that will allow them to focus and coordinate their efforts
more effectively and efficiently. This involves integrating traditional water pollution control
programs such as permitting water pollution discharges with efforts to protect wetlands,
aquatic habitat, and drinking water sources.
   One problem area being addressed is polluted runoff from large livestock operations, also
known as animal feeding operations. Without proper controls, polluted runoff from these
operations can deplete or reduce dissolved oxygen in surface water, cause harmful algal
blooms or fish kills, and contaminate drinking water with nitrates and pathogens. Scientists
and researchers have also linked these pollutants to outbreaks of dangerous microbes such as
Pfisteria piscida which have been found in the Chesapeake Bay and in North Carolina. The
latest data on the quality of the nation's rivers  shows that of the 694,000 river miles sur-
veyed, 35,000 are adversely affected by animal feeding operations.
    In September, Administrator Browner and Agriculture Secretary Glickman announced a
joint strategy to reduce impacts from these operations through a variety of voluntary and
 regulatory approaches. Under this strategy, 95 percent of the nation's 450,000 livestock
 operations would be encouraged to implement voluntary waste management plans while
 about 5 percent (15,000 to 20,000) would be required to obtain permits under the Clean
 Water Act. Regulatory actions would be targeted to address the largest and most concentrat-
 ed operations (i.e., those with 1,000 animals or more), those discharging directly into

                                         .   •           ;        :
                   waterways, and those known to be the most significant sources of impairment within a
                   watershed. Designed to help the industry remain financially strong while reducing water
                   quality threats, the strategy encourages industry leadership in providing operators with edu-
                   cation opportunities, financing, and technical advice.

                     The environmental impact of pork production, in particular, has come under scrutiny in
                   recent years, in part because of the growth of large scale operations and because of several
                   significant waste spills. Faced with the need to reduce such spills and protect water quality,
                   in November, EPA announced an agreement with the National Pork Production Council
                   whereby participating pork producers can have their operations voluntarily assessed for
                   Clean "Water Act violations by certified independent inspectors. Producers who promptly
                   disclose and correct any discovered violations from these audits will  have any related
                   enforcement penalty reduced or eliminated. They will also receive seals from the Council
                   for public display recognizing their environmental stewardship. This approach provides an
                   incentive for pork producers to take the initiative to find and correct Clean Water Act viola-
                   tions and prevent discharges to waterways without compromising the ability of EPA or
                   states to enforce environmental requirements.
                   POLLUTION  PREVENTION
                     Pursuing innovations that create more cost-effec-
                   tive, environmentally friendly alternatives to existing
                   products, processes, and services is one way to
                   improve environmental performance—without hav-
                   ing to impose new regulatory requirements. Today,
                   many EPA programs promote pollution prevention
                   through research and development, technology
                   transfer, financial assistance, or voluntary initiatives.
                     In our national laboratories, scientists are doing
                   applied research in strategic areas to support pollu-
                   tion prevention advances. Some are working to
                   refine methodologies for "Life Cycle Assessments" to
                   help facilities estimate the total environmental
                   impacts  of their processes and products. Others are
                   also developing computer-based decision tools to
                   help companies make process design changes and
                   raw material selections that minimize waste and
                   facilitate recycling.
                     The voluntary environmental programs,  described in the previous section, also foster pol-
                  lution prevention. Design for the Environment, for example, helps selected industry sectors
                  incorporate environmental considerations into their operations. Through partnerships with
   "At Don la r, we strongly sup-
port and  hail the Green
Chemistry Challenge,  put forth
by President Clinton and EPA.
By working together and form-
ing partnerships, chemical
companies and federal agen-
cies can find innovative  chemi-
cal processes that maximize
the benefits of  pollution
               Larry P. Koskan, President,
                   Donlar Corporation,
    and 1997 Green Chemistry Challenge
                        Award winner.

                                                          REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL. PROTECTION     43
the industry sectors and interested parties
in public interest and labor groups,
research institutions,  and other govern-
ment agencies, we evaluate environmen-
tally friendly alternatives to current
processes and products and find incen-
tives to encourage continuous environ-
mental improvement. New information is
gained and shared on the environmental,
economic, and performance implications
of traditional and alternative manufactur-
ing methods and technologies.
   Our experience working with industry-
through tliis program spawned a related
initiative to find more environmentally
sound alternatives to chemical products
or processes. The Green Chemistry
Challenge program, launched as part of
EPA's initial reinvention agenda, recog-
nizes public and private sector research
and development achievements that min-
imize pollution. Specifically, it promotes
the design of economically competitive
chemical products and manufacturing
processes that minimize the release of
toxic substances into the environment.
The program consists of Presidential
awards for  outstanding green chemistry
achievements and academic research
grants for studying or applying  green
chemistry principles. As the box to the
right describes, 1998 brought a host of
innovations that can be harnessed to
improve environmental and public health
protection  capabilities.
                                                                                                 .,- ,,;j:,,,:^:,,1'-£r,^-';iift
                                                    -a*r*  "**
                                                   ESIDENTIAL Avy^J|DS,^,,v_
                                                   :COj3J\ygE;]^^                  ._
       Academic: ,r]rQ_fe,ssoi;s,,rlCQren Draths gncf John
        at (vlichiggn Stpte University used microbes
    _jSropiMffejIy .Tae'nign. catalysts^ in synthesizing
   ^J|>0rtant industrial chemicals. They were able to
    ""^ace tqxic, nonrenewgrjle feedstocks with non-
         reneWpBle sugar;.to use water as tfteir sol-
         gnj|;,|o jjgnificantly reduce the amount of
       cademic:  Professor B,arry Trpst from Stanford

     niversity developed a new theoretical approach
  tror assessing the efficiency of syntheses used in
  3fe* ^"V-  ^S-^-Ka.^  ,  -4 '  ~   -             ,*
  " * " ufactunng processes  Ufing his criteria, manu-
    gcturers can estimate ancTcompare the expected
            of product and waste when considering
     £--••           i  l~.   ""*'"*
    verall process_viability

      Smal[5iiS{nestfCategory: PYROCOOL
    eveloped an environmentally responsible fire
     tjnguishment and  cooling agent Their technolo-
     JWT f. »       x.^f ^^f Jtf t  '    ?"l * ~|
    y"aemonstrated that selective use of biodegrad-
    bje substancgs^can dVarnpticgJIy enhance the
    pectjyenejsjgfjsjmple water, while eliminating the
     '&# «- _ wtnS^t, „*    ,4 *f   iiSsW. Sa^WSa? pur            n-r
     jjSdMror more toxic gcfinguisnmg agents
        Iternative Synthetic Pathways: Flexsys
      /eloped a new process for synthesizing chemicals
           rubber manufacturing. The new process
   -Dramatically reduces the amount of chemical waste
   "and waste water generated, eliminates use of
    T^^~          33&f^    **   ^-     T
    jajjjiful chemicals, and improves worker safety
    "^5£- -             ._!"   -r - " r
      Alternative Reaction Conditions: Argonne
    _,.	.^Laboratory developed an economically
 Jj viable process for producing lactate esters, com-
    pounds that provide a nontoxic and biodegradable
        lative to toxic solvents^JThe new process could
              to many industries, replacing approxi-
     iafely 80 percent of the 3 8 million tons of sol-
              in the Ijnited States each year
              •"•','•  "L.  "??**'   *                   *
      Safer Chemicals^ ?9nnl and Haas Company
     esjgned an environmentally safe insecticide that
  C*offers farmers,  consumers, and society safer,
     oFe effective options for controlling insects in
*»•«-,    .   *~   >
fe turt and crops


               One of EPA's earliest and most ambitious efforts to reinvent environmental protection
            began in 1994 when Administrator Browner announced the Common Sense Initiative
            (CSI). This experimental program was designed as an inclusive forum for testing a funda-
            mentally different approach to environmental protection. For more than 4 years, diverse
            interests representing the Agency, state and local governments, environmental and other
            public interest groups, worked to create a more integrated environmental protection system.
            Their goal was to move the current system beyond the compartmentalized structure that
            has evolved under the nations separate environmental laws and to find ways to make the
            system work more effectively for specific industry sectors and other stakeholders. In all,
            more than 300 individuals came together to analyze problems, test solutions, and make rec-
            ommendations for improving environmental management capabilities.
               Six industry sectors were chosen to represent a broad array of environmental manage-
            ment challenges facing American industries. Automobile manufacturing, iron and steel, and
            petroleum refining represented three large, highly regulated industries with long, and some-
            times controversial, relationships with EPA. The metal  finishing and printing sectors were
            chosen to represent the challenges facing small businesses. And the computers and electron-
            ics industry was selected because of its relative newness and rapid growth; many of its
            processes were not in existence when environmental laws were written and basic require-
            ments set years ago. When CSI was launched, these sectors comprised 11 percent of the
            U.S. gross national product; employed more than four  million people; and accounted for
            more than 12 percent of toxic releases reported by industry.
               One of the less tangible, but more important results from CSI was the improved under-
            standing and cooperation that was gained among participants. Individuals who were more
            accustomed to interacting as adversaries worked together to achieve consensus on complex,
            controversial issues. The process was slow, sometimes tedious, and always challenging. But it
            forced participants to listen to others' views and to consider others' special needs and priori-
            ties. Over time, it opened minds and spawned ideas that will affect the way that we as regu-
            lators and industry do business in the future. Several examples are discussed below.
            Metal Finishing Sector
              The most dramatic results from CSI can be seen in the metal finishing industry. In January
            1998, EPA joined the industry and other stakeholders in launching the National Metal
            Finishing Strategic Goals Program, a sector-based environmental stewardship program. Under
            this program, participating facilities voluntarily pledge to meet new environmental performance

                                                                REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Participants  Comment  ojLJEPAs  Common  Sense lrtitia%f
                                      ^"developed for'bri
                                       lo educate each otl
                                       Vj^r*--*-^^^ ^  ^ *    |
                                     Siveri all the stakehol
"I see the CS1 process as the best aven
irrg all of thejvarioul stakeholders togetj
I believe that this education process h
a better understanding of each others'
processes. Thfs understanding cannot help buf lead to a bette'
ulatory framework in the future."         _                „ - -
              David S. Marsh, Chairman, Marsh Plating Company
                                      [ivtduoj goals ,pnd tl
"CS! demonstrated the value of cross-cutting pollution prevention"6^pdftunitiesZlftqf:s;ould
                  ~                     ^                   "Tiw™ ^^i^'s^z^K?''*.''^-?-:.,',:"*:. I?
fit multiple industries and businesses  For example, the 'Access to Capitar Seffijnar
       *                                ,£-,„.''              73^=sd  l^-.-.'Vg^'!. ^i j, =.-•=¥•"'
business owners fn the metal finishing and printing sectors engage^^^gj^lg^i
bankers, highlighted the barriers to pollution prevention  investmer^^^%ri.^^yj:s|6essesj
pro[ect, the bankirig and insurance industries are forming new pan^^^^ps vs'i.thjbese in
access to financial capital for pollution prevention investments."
                                           John H., Adams,
  leaner, cbe,gperj
  rds I could a
  Ijornpany... but
fief bthe.rs"an opp
• .fl'.f-f .-•>-;-• sr-i.« --&, rr
                                goals within 5 years. These goals, which will be pursued through
                                innovative pollution prevention opportunities, include reducing haz-
                                ardous air emissions by 90 percent, utilizing 98 percent of metals on
                                products (thereby reducing metal wastes), cutting water use by half
                                and energy use by a quarter. In addition, the industry pledged to
                                achieve compliance with all environmental requirements at all of its
                                facilities and to support tough enforcement action against facilities
        that routinely fail to meet their regulatory obligations.
          EPA, along with other stakeholders who worked with the industry in developing the pro-
        gram, committed to certain strategic actions to support them in reaching their goals.  For
        EPA, these actions included offering special incentives and tools to encourage environmen-
        tal improvements and removing regulatory and other barriers that can hinder their improve-
        ment efforts. For example, we are now taking regulatory action to improve metal finishers'
        waste management options under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. During
        CSI discussions, EPA and other participants learned that current regulations discourage
        recycling and inadvertently lead most operations to choose land disposal for disposal  needs.
        Under a new proposal just issued in February 1999, metal finishers would be allowed to
        accumulate waste for 180 days—twice  as long as before. The extension would allow them

        Metal Finishers' Strategic
        Goals Program—First Year
        Report  Card*

         : One year after tHe Strategic Goals Program
  ;      was launched in January 1998, mote, than
  ;:  ;    270 metal finishing companies, 17 states/ .'.gnd
        34 local waste-water facilities (which treat
        effluent frpnvmetal finishing facilities) are par-
        ticipating. Public interest groups are involved
        in several key locations. Milestones from the
        year include:
        * Developing tailored, local programs that
          reward the achievements of participating
          Jacilities in several states and.rnetropolitan
         / areas, including Chicago; Los Angeles;
        ip  Providence, Rhode Island; New York/New ^
	     /    Jersey; Indiana; Pennsylvania; .and Texas.    "
 ' 	   J     '                         -           ;„. '7" „'
;    ,/   • Offering  customer-oriented technical'assis-••'/_.
  f       tance tools, such as the online National
          Metal Finishing Resource Center, and the  ;,
          new metal finishing environmental guid- :
          ance manual.
        • Testing a promising, low-cost technology to  ;
          help small chrome plating shops comply
          with Clean Air Act requirements.
        • Designing an "Access to Capital"  pilot pro- ._.
          ject in California, in cooperdtion with the  ,,
          Small Business Administration, to help    '
          metal finishing firms secure financial capital
          for environmental improvements.
        • Providing tracking systems to help all inter-   '
          ested stakeholders monitor progress toward,
          environmental improvement goalsV- ;
        * Evaluating and making regulatory changes  "•*
          to encourage resource conservation and
          pollution  prevention.
        • Developing the first sector-based research  —
          and development agenda in which all
          stakeholders were involved in setting priori-
          ties for the research needed to reduce  envi-
          ronmental risks from metal finishing
to generate waste in volumes sufficient for
cost-effective recycling and it would help
them avoid expensive costs associated with
transporting and disposing relatively small
volumes to an offsite location.

   In the Great Lakes area, where many
metal finishing firms are concentrated, envi-
ronmental officials at all levels see this pro-
gram as a major opportunity to promote
recovery of metals from waste water. Studies
show that the regions more than 2,000 metal
finishing shops contribute 50 percent of all
metal waste flowing into sewage plants for
treatment. As part of their commitment
under the program, officials in Chicago are
working with local stakeholders to consider
tax credits, public recognition, and other
incentives for metal finishing firms striving
to meet waste water and other environmental
performance goals.

   The core of the Strategic Goals Program is
the metal finishers' strong commitment to
pursuing innovative pollution prevention
opportunities, matched by regulatory officials
and other stakeholders' willingness to take
actions that directly support the industry's
efforts. As this flexible, sector-based program
expands to include more facilities, states, and
localities, it will provide a replicable model
for promoting voluntary stewardship across
an entire industry.
                                                        Iron  and  Steel
                                                           As a result of CSI, the iron and steel
                                                        industry will  also benefit from upcoming reg-
                                                        ulatory changes. Under Clean Air Act regula-
                                                        tions (for New Source Performance Review),
                                                        facilities are required to install a pressure sen-
                                                        sor in their furnace or in the furnace's

                                                         REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
connecting duct to support monitoring activities. Maintaining
these sensors under the high temperatures has always been
extremely difficult. Based on discussions and pilot testing under
CSI, we agreed to an alternative monitoring scheme that over-
comes this operational challenge. We plan to issue a direct final
rule allowing this option in the Spring of 1999.
   CSI also led the iron and steel industry to consider how they might work with commu-
nity members to understand and address issues stemming from their operations. This type
of outreach has typically not been done by most mills, yet the industry understood that
many communities did have concerns. One  company, Bethlehem Steel, agreed to set up a
special citizens advisory committee. They chose their Burns Harbor facility in Indiana
because of the significant influence the 4,500 square acre facility had on the surrounding
community. The committee features diverse membership with representatives from the
company, unions, environmental groups, and government agencies along with school teach-
ers, local business leaders, and private citizens. In its first 2 years of existence, this group has
worked on issues such as noise, odor, and transportation problems. They've also worked
with the company to control releases from solid waste management units at the site. An
effort has been made to fast track corrective  action for a currently unused portion of the
property which adjoins the Indiana National Lakeshore. The group is exploring options for
preserving the area which is home to a heron rookery. Based on the success of this commu-
nity advisory committee, the company is establishing a  similar committee for a facility in
Maryland. In so doing, they are setting an example for  other companies in their industry
and in other industry sectors.
Computer and Electronics Sector
   The computer and electronics sector found a solution to a major solid waste manage-
ment challenge for its industry—how to handle mounting volumes of outdated computer
                        and electronics equipment. In the past, recycling this equipment  ,
                        has been difficult because the cathode ray tubes used in most dis-
                        play monitors and televisions typically contain lead. Because of
                        this content, the components fall under the hazardous waste regu-
                        lations required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
                        This means they must be transported and processed as a haz-
                        ardous waste. In June, we committed to change this rule so that
                        the glass can be recovered and reused as raw material in cadiode
ray tube manufacturing. In addition to cutting costs and reducing regulatory burden, this
change will prevent lead releases into the environment. We expect to propose this change in
a rule later in the fall of 1999.

	I	iii	!	iii	i	i	'!
    j"i	"I!"	H	i™	ij	i	|	I?!1
                      Much of the conceptual groundwork for the sector-based work conducted through the
                   Common Sense Initiative came from EPAs Sustainable Industry Program. This program was
                   established in 1993 to study the feasibility and effectiveness of sector-based approaches to
                   environmental management. We set out to work in close cooperation with select industry sec-
                   tors and their respective corporate decision-makers to better understand the reasons why busi-
                   nesses embrace or resist particular actions to protect the environment. Learning to understand
                   these "drivers and barriers" enables EPA to work with the industry and other stakeholders to
                   create policies that can most effectively promote environmental progress. Experience with the
                   metal finishing, batch chemical, and photo-processing industries has shown that this approach
                   can create a strong and productive foundation of trust and cooperation.
                      Our collaboration with the chemical industry in New Jersey, for example, led to several
                   innovations during 1998, including a first-ever trade of industrial effluent between chemical
                   companies discharging into the Passaic Valley Sewerage District. The trade will reduce overall
                   pollutant discharges while allowing companies flexibility to choose the most cost-effective
                   way to meet local discharge limits. Another outcome is a customer-designed compliance
                   assistance workshop and Web site for chemical companies, cosponsored by the New Jersey
                   Department of Environmental Protection.
                      During 1998, we also began working with additional industries that were identified as
                   having high potential for better environmental performance through  sector-based innova-
                   tions. EPA analyses of drivers and barriers facing the meat processing, specialty chemical
                   manufacturing, travel and tourism, shipbuilding, and metal foundry and die casting sectors
                   will support more pilot testing of new ideas in the coming year.
                      "If you have an idea that offers better results than what would be achieved under current
                   requirements, then we will work with you and other interested parties to put those ideas to
                   the test." This unprecedented offer, which EPA made to industry in 1995, is breaking new
                   ground for environmental regulatory reform. In 1998, we approved innovative tests at two
                   more companies and a state agency. To date, 10 projects are being tested, and negotiations
                   on additional proposals are underway with 20 more potential project sponsors.
                      One innovative project, and the first with a state partner, tests self-certification proce-
                   dures as an alternative to traditional environmental permitting. In Massachusetts, the
                   Department of Environmental Protection developed the Environmental Results Program to
                   streamline permitting and reporting requirements for up to  10,000 small businesses in the
                   state. This program uses industry-wide performance standards and self-reporting

                                                            REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION    49
^^^^^^^^^•^^^'^fv^^^^^^i^''- i«S»
Qa^^^fRCwQriesi .to simplify the. process  -
B!S£S?ifeJi-Ma;K*S;te''S;3;?^«S*5&;;:;>:4:CK> """jC! '<•." -'-'-^ O."!-'••»•: •;¥;•:,...-/; :*.
;:Jgpsproying,1nriovative. testing .under Project XL.
    i the Administration  annoiijiced this prece-,..:
spt^sejting/program in Parch  i.9:95,._it set;a goal^
"""' ^y'' ^Spjf projects tfiaf'woulcl reveal ways to
     3"fe'fi§fr6!nrnerital reguldtions. But there
   *rtd'lT5;3de,ls to "draw  upQn.;AII of the parties
   red-^—EPA^tgff, project sponsors, states, and
   f^*^^™ji^^^S:fe™pM&^^^                                           |
   holders—Fad to  nearri:.by doing." After   " .'" •	
               :e"v5fith projects, the Agency had
        Sfaric -cdrtcept, of "what a. guality propos- .
 s'|o^ld^coSQlo3^M-lipwrdecisions that affect  	._,
 ^B^feS9^i^SS!wSl»iKg^^^s^^^feS!^^^rrWMp^«!saEafSs9!is;:,;K!i3S4p«i;:3«53iS I
                                           'i:iK;s-arf^ssSSW.K^;is^^®g^^ I
IBaTis now faster, more predictable, and more.
'"'"" '""'"''"*• all parties.involved. The.A9e.ncy
            rie^. process should allow.agreement
          jedjjp most pro[ects in o months to>a
               I to to months or longer underthe .
       cess. Evidence of an: improved .process has    ,
       ; Been se;en ifri several projects currently
         "il'Tr^^^^^'s^i-^^^^S^^^^^'v™ *aV-rfwM-^-j^ii^Ks.^w^^:'^ ft'^tflisiKj; r-»i-
         vgJgpTnent ,Jh.e Atlantic, Steel project in
         5rtJ^^.^^\V™V.^.V^^^^.^«^                                ]
     .._.	„._, . _  example, is on track/to have
                                               "• •
    p'glpro|ectagreement signed oymonths after
    "' *pr6.j'e*ct discussions '
     ?fA ''«.!/.>. I--.-.-..,. •.,. i .•-="-.-•!-,_-•;•. J'-.'!S«™.,-,«"'i,J I
                                                  ^Wtof*^,^^^!^ I

             "What I see in Project XL is a real
          paradigm shift. The old  way of doing
          business was that government dictates
          every move a business must take to
          protect the environment. The new sys-
          tem, as  envisioned by Project XL, is to
          work cooperatively and focus on the
          results: a cleaner environment; a
          faster,  less costly system; and more
          input from the community."
                     Gordon Moore, Chairman Emeritus, Intel
                                                     equipment to control toxic organic air
                                                     pollutants well ahead of what is required
                                                     under current Clean Air Act requirements.
                                                     As an incentive, we agreed to defer new
                                                     controls of toxic organic air emissions
                                                     from the facility's hazardous waste surface
                                                     impoundments, which are required under
                                                     RCRA. The new installation will allow
                                                     OSi to eliminate 98 percent (by weight),
                                                     or 309,000 pounds, of the toxic organic
                                                     compounds from its productions. This
                                                     result is better for the environment, as
                                                     similar reductions would not be expected
            from controlling emissions from the surface impoundments.
                   New environmental technologies are another way of improving flexibility in the nations
                 environmental protection system for they provide more options for how environmental
                 standards are met. In 1998, we promoted environmental technology use and development
                 in a number of ways. Through EPA's Small Business Innovation Research Program, we
                 made awards to small firms for research and development of cutting edge technologies.
                 Through the Agency's Environmental Technology Verification Program, we conducted inde-
                 pendent assessments of innovative new environmental technologies, using quality-assured
                 test data. The  results, which are made available to potential purchasers and to regulatory
                 officials, provide assurance about performance and expand opportunity for use and accep-
                 tance in the marketplace.
                   With its Center for Environmental Industry and Technology, EPA's Regional office in
                 New England  has been a particularly strong proponent for new technology. In March, they
                 cosponsored a conference with the "White  House that brought together 500 environmental
                 and business leaders to discuss barriers facing technology use and development. Throughout
                 the year, they also sponsored trade shows and award programs to showcase technology
                 advancements, and through a  regional pact, they evaluated new technologies and shared the
                 results to gain  greater acceptance for their  use in permitting and other environmental man-
                 agement situations.

                   In Chicago, the EPA regional office sponsored a roundtable to promote financial invest-
                 ments in new environmental technology. Securing the necessary financing can be difficult
                 for technology developers because investors often don't understand environmental require-
                 ments or the related market potential. To overcome  these challenges, the Agency provided a

                                                               REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

   In 1998, parties interested in Intel's environmental
results under Project XL could go to the company's
home page on the Internet. There they could find sim-
ple, easy-to-understand graphs, such as the two
shown below, explaining the environmental perfor-
mance at the company's Chandler, Arizona manufac-
turing plant.
   Recognizing the challenges associated with manu-
facturing rapidly developing electronics technology, in
1997 EPA reached agreement with Intel on an innova-"
five strategy to reduce regulatory reviews that have
   Solid Waste Recycle
Year-End Goal
55 Percent

Year-End Goal
40 Percent
         hampered the plant from making process changes in
         a" quick, timely manner. This was accomplished by
         replacing the facility's multiple permits for controlling
         air toxics~with  a single permit that caps the plants'
         total hazardous ajr emissions. The company is allowed
         to proceed with operational changes without regulato-
         ry review as long as the total emissions stay under this
         cap. As part of this arrangement, Intel agreed to
         numerous environmental improvements, including
         recycling 95 percent of waste water, and cutting solid
         waste and hazardous waste by more than 50 percent.
         Intel also set a precedent for making environmental
         information publicly available. Based on local citizen
         concerns, Intel agreed to put all of the facility's envi-
         ronmental data up on the Internet  so citizens as well
                 as regulatory officials would be able to rou-
               __ -linely monitor progress toward the specified
               J^enyirQntpJBnfpj corrtmifraents7 This firet-ever^
               H  action Vias proven so effective and  informa-
                 _^0^fS-£_-^^  *     ^     ^      i
               "  "five that we have  adopted similar reporting
                 as a requirement for all XL project agree-
               *•  rpents. This step might help open the door
                 and  gain acceptance for such reporting by
                 many more companies in the future.
             Ql       Q2       Q3
               Solid Waste Recycle
                 Q1 -Q31998
                                                Slon-Hazardous Chemical Waste Recycle
                                            Year-End Goal
                                            50 Percent

                                            Year-End Goal
                                            25 Percent
                                                        Non-Hazardous Chemical
                                                             Waste Recycle
                                                             Ql - Q3 1998

: sc?

          One outcome of reinventing environmental protection is more flexibility in how
          regulated entities comply with environmental regulations. But reinvention does
          not alter the imperative to comply. Indeed, a strong enforcement component in
our regulatory system is essential for ensuring that all of our citizens receive equal protec-
tion no matter where  they live.
   Fortunately, enforcement actions are not a routine occurrence for most businesses and
communities in  the United States today.  In contrast to the early years of EPA's existence,
most regulated facilities are generally more sophisticated in managing their environmental
responsibilities and are better able to comply with environmental requirements. As a result,
managers and staff are now just as likely  to be thinking beyond compliance about higher
performance goals, such as cutting waste, increasing efficiency, and improving overall com-
petitiveness (or in the case of government facilities, saving taxpayer dollars). As these goals
become more common, the Agency is working on new ways to help regulated facilities
achieve them. At the same time, EPA is focused on bringing all facilities into compliance by
offering technical information and assistance, financial support, and regulatory incentives.
   Environmental management systems (EMS), are one way for facilities to improve com-
pliance and other measures of performance. These management tools, which apply standard
business principles to environmental decisions, can help an organization boost efficiency
and cut waste. They can help improve worker safety. They also can bring attention to envi-
ronmental matters that  are not directly addressed through regulation, such as habitat pro-
tection for wildlife or water and energy use.
   EMS use has accelerated since 1996 when the International Organization for
Standardization adopted a standard for EMS evaluation. Commonly referred to as ISO
14001, this internationally recognized standard provides a basis for facilities to  gain ISO
certification. This distinctive certification can be especially valuable in a global  market
where many companies are beginning to make it a prerequisite for doing business.

                      In 1996, EPA signaled support for EMS use by issuing guidance on EMS development
                    for federal facilities. In March 1998, we followed this action with a position statement, of
                    interest to all facilities, public and private, that confirmed the Agency's support for systems
                    that "help an organization achieve its environmental obligations and broader environmental
                    performance goals." We committed to promoting use of systems that have these elements
                    and we encouraged their use as a way of identifying pollution prevention opportunities. In
                    addition, we encouraged organizations to involve stakeholders in EMS development, and to
                    make information on EMS performance available to the public and to regulatory agencies.
                      "We also announced a major, multiyear  effort in partnership with states and the University of
                    North Carolina (UNC) to gather data on  EMS results, costs, and benefits. The research will
                    establish the environmental baseline of participating companies and then look at how the com-
                    panies perform over time on compliance and other key performance measures. Presendy, facili-
                    ties with an EMS, including those with ISO 14001  certification, do not receive any regulatory
                    advantages. But this research is designed to answer questions diat could change that in the
                    future. Depending on the results, environmental policies might be developed that would offer
                    regulatory incentives to encourage EMS use. Key questions to be addressed in the study include:
                    •  Environmental performance. Do EMSs improve  overall environmental performance,
                      including unregulated as well as regulated aspects?
                    •  Compliance. Do EMSs improve compliance with legal requirements?
                    •  Pollution prevention.  Do EMSs lead  to changes in products or processes that reduce pol-
                      lution beyond what is required by law?
                    •  Environmental conditions. Do EMSs lead to perceptible improvements in the environ-
                      mental conditions surrounding the facility?
                    •  Costs and benefits to facilities. How expensive are EMSs to set up and maintain? Do
                      they lead to  cost savings or other economic benefits for users?
                    •  Stakeholder  confidence. Are stakeholders  often involved in the development of EMSs?
                      Does the existence of an EMS improve public perceptions of the facility?
                                                         We provided grants to nine states to establish EMS
                                                       projects for study.  The states  include: Vermont, New
                                                       Hampshire, North Carolina,  Indiana, Illinois,
                                                       Wisconsin, Arizona, California, and Oregon. We are
                                                       now working with these states and the UNC
                                                       researchers to  develop a set of research protocols to
                                                       ensure that  data gathered is uniform and comparable.
                                                       The data will be included in a master database that
                                                       will be made publicly available.

                                                                          REINVENTING "ENVIRONMENTAL. PROTECTION
    Rng iON    >L AY. KEY
   .ae.l-,.iLK):-.Kff'.•:?&:"••(* - '-..  • '•'•-(',' ' V-i'I--"!"*'•• "V? .''••*^v".*-vw^:r"',KV.¥\"'.-'«."*,rwr'5«L'l.r3B5&- ,v  •;•,••, -   •,".n«7f.-?'j-s«j!.lVrVrirYVontrit .VMaV4»-irmrYn>^}' rarw*vi-f,LKi-ic-ei>l Xo''A-A/h^f+Ka\7t!^s^^:$M:-_ "^_ ^1 •'•:'"'.'-._ L5i^'^-"-_'(".'-.''r!-  I :'-,!-'•'-	":--,_ '.IT \ ,-'~" ...T ~ ^'-" ,.'A ' a " • ~-Z£ 'ijg2?i «%%'-• - '.',:  .,•-"
   n!(»BJ?rT^':.r"r~-"l|.T--^;.'^'TJt - ' !•" " "r T -s "yi-;—- •= .--• -,"-.; -•«
                                               . - . .• .--f "; vf T™ •tS.'V -.**.;,• •'-;,- ^ ^ -;-*B!'- •  -,--•' %;--- ~~*s<$--,'' ••?&.& ^aw, t, - .'  - "•;,-» -:-=.%!»- . 'K^JKSSS,1: -i.-'t " •••:-, ,.mi^'iScJ!r^r TKJ j= , :a .3

                                               ian+i\>pie":"ii-lrtiC-xv,i.x l«:4.:«4.:<;«\-'tU«' — _:^_-.;a-_t_~j.-:;i~ :; --- .Cli/ic ;a.l^-- -  •-:  Sj-i :;L.L'. i.-^_
                             rrnm lm~\nrle* niinhr" rf^f~.f\r\- —;&^afel«i« x:«^'~«:~Il.,- £.—	i_l ir^i^L.-:.	£r^	:_  ^\iL^.r VJ	;_..' ?; "-i^A.,?:--^   ,v;- j^i,
             1 processe"s."-;
 •.••. ;yp»s«pS'.C'':*S",",v. • -iSs™;!*;
,-'^!"-.~ Sp:far,'eight New Et
   "-,i  -  ~a "-*?i» . .--:•„ -• '.—i, ," sr,-',-»,-"
 :"; batecf. One of .these
 ,";: Attleborp, Massachusetfs]
 •  -:$^'~:'---'•.-".  .. •-; ^^-^^ ."  "-^
 ;  ^yegrs. The^cbr
      jificdtion p
        , ;^&.-
   	,,sS*A  .
  -  f-n ip"'''!^5^"—i  **''  • " "^ "iVff-* r ,«"','^WN%'.;«s-''J»«-^:«f,I
 ,  "jEM§,:,ejf,||;ii^pjy,integrated -the tqqiljjy 7^jjsinre:ss,,d;rig
      ^2J?fifJlit.stf'^rts and.fhelpBaiig'eii.Ijty :po|lyt

/!••., :,p,seZJjjese .changes.1 gayefl the:corrfpany:-n&ffly $1. 'irfj
 J-'^JQO^tE;<5f>e^gt:ing c6stsvSnd"q,n estimgted;.$2^.mijy;6n ,|r
^e^^nes^^m^^f^^^Ms^m^: 'iJ^^S^^^,

ygn;.q;"Volynlgry pilot/project'thdlithcIodesire'com-^i^S^vft'v?^' .?**
gpggw* -...v^fflj^; i* '^•%'^f^•f::•i'tP^^^:%^^i^*?^g^tei;|S^^;•*S|i
        ^iy;:-;;c,--:._;--- ^;.j. ^V^-f^i^1' ^""^",^^^S"^I"^^"'::"  i'
              One way to boost compliance is simply by making information readily available so facili-
            ties  know what is required and how they might improve their performance. The need for
            this information is especially critical for local governments and small businesses, many of
            which lack the resources to hire technical support staff.
              In an effort to provide quick, easy access to information about environmental regulatory
            requirements, the Agency opened five new Compliance Assistance Centers on the Internet

            Welcome to the Virtual CCAR-Green Links Shop
                                       Helping Automotive
                                       Professionals Save Time and
                                       Protect the Environment
                                  Link* 0 • tovke «f (ht Coordinating Committed For
                           Amamittlvg RtnlUr fCCAl»
                                               p.  in 1998. These online centers, open 24 hours a
                                                   day, are geared to sectors with lots of small and
                                                   medium-sized members, and that have the
                                                           potential to cause significant environ-
                                                           mental impacts (depending on the
                                                           technical processes and practices they
                                                           use). Users can request "expert help" to
                                                        I  answer questions about specific situa-
                                                           tions. Or they can reference "virtual
                                                           shops" that allow them to click on any
                                                           facet of~an illustrated operation to see
                                                           what regulations apply.
                                                                    The five new centers serve the
                                                                 paints and coatings industry, the print-
                                                                 ed wiring board sector, the transporta-
                                                         tion industry, small and medium-sized chemical
                                                         manufacturers, and local government agencies.
                                                         With four centers opened in 1997 for the metal
                                                         finishing, automotive service and repair, print-
                                                         ing, and agricultural sectors, nine are now up
                                                         and running.
                                                           The decision to open additional centers was
                                                         based, in part, on the response the centers have
                                                         generated. EPA's Internet statistics showed
                                                         1.9 million hits on these centers for the year. This
                                                         figure, likely to be much higher next year when
                                                         all nine centers are operational, indicates that
                                                         information provided in this manner can fill an
                                                         important need within the regulated community.
                   Results from a 1998 survey of users are telling, too. We found that more than 85 percent vis-
                   ited the centers at least once a month. And more than 80 percent responded that they had
                   taken certain actions, such as contacting appropriate regulatory agencies or changing the way
                   they handle waste or emissions, based on new information gained from a center visit.
                     All of these centers operate in partnership with industry, academic institutions, environ-
                   mental groups, or federal and state agencies. To ensure help for businesses and communities
                   that might not have Internet access, the centers also offer service through toll-free phone
                   lines and fax mail.
        "After years of waiting for this
     type of resource, I find  the
     National Metal  Finishing
     Resource Center to  be  a valuable
     part of our daily business. The
     Center provides comprehensive
     information on  all metal finishing
     topics  in a timely manner—
     instant gratification!"
              Larry Zitko,  small  business owner and
                     President of ChromeTech, Inc.

                                                         REINVENTING .ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
   In addition to offering assistance online, sometimes the Agency offers assistance onsite.
For the most part, states, tribes, or local governments are the primary providers of direct
assistance to the regulated community. EPA views its role as providing tools to support
these providers as well as regulated facilities in their environmental management efforts.
But, sometimes, we see a special need or have an opportunity to get more involved. When
we do so, it's generally done in partnership with the states. Last year, for example, we
worked with the Massachusetts Environmental Agency to improve environmental manage-
ment practices at municipal highway garages. Through these visits, municipalities were
tutored on relevant compliance issues
such as hazardous waste management,
underground injection control, and best
management practices. They were also
given information on pollution-preven-
tion methods that could cut costs and
pollution. In addition to the on-site vis-
its, workshops were conducted on tech-
niques and best practices for managing
motor oil,  using alternative parts clean-
ers, and protecting floor drains. Similar
visits and workshops are planned in other
New England states in 1999.

   •'ear,'EPA's. Office.ot"the..Smcil!.,Busin.es;s
   Hjsmess 'ombudsman OT
      i^^]*ro?»?*S^gS^©53?!^^1S<3£Sl |

     smah receivec
     of service in seyeraT-notablejoryms.,
     before the, Senate., Ben Copper of the  ,
     '~-^=^^^g^^;^*i^f^^f^-;^                              I
                                                  2i)dsmgn office as
                                             firiiVi ^awiei^SfeTiVSwnS I
      	office as  one of tnie best oufreacrl .  ..  .     	,
       'rrf the:federal governme.nt. In May, the                I
   EPA has developed other sector-based
 tools to aid compliance. Since 1995, we
 have published "notebooks" profiling
 environmental issues related to 28 major
 industry sectors. Written in easy-to-
 understand language, the notebooks give
 readers a basic understanding of the over-
 all compliance history of die industry,
 applicable federal laws and requirements,
 major production processes and pollution
 prevention techniques, die amount and
 types of pollution generated, and cooper-
 ative programs and others resources for
 improving environmental performance.
  fJJo^Ln'g "mpd'el .of gpyernrnent working, well pr
 ;: pppjpje 'if "sewe£'-Tfe .qrticle. ?:re^i|s, |P'A's.:
 Sydsman^'s being fne model for fWp iegislatiye
                                          •^^-^Al-W^'.'^-^^^K'* I
      s-—an amenameht to the.)
                              ean Air Act
SiBEK'onipijqs^^^                in the ;
fcSA'-'V^fit-^-Jt-.fe :S^^r^_f^^f:^'':S^^yS^^'lf:":(^-^^X-^^..^A''-^,''l:/i:J"7:i^
          "wfiicB required each federal agency
     incompliance centers to help small .b.usi-
       with.          ..,^
ifRts .Sffice, joutin?
                    as small businesses by  ,
    ,..,„„ ,., ., , -.,. ... ,... »*atef*W'^»TW*W»«'M3»K»r^3-fflBS«®S^^    I
    3vg point of contact and assistance in:,get-
 '"••fi'j1^?^"-'-^$^^                ^r.rs-^n^.rs!^-*.,^-^*!!^^^'^?^^          I
 que^iorTs :answere8; ensuring that small busi- .   :
!^gji0^,qn.3 offering'a.IpTf-free Rofline.anc' a :  -:
'  .|e tp^jjroyicje^iregf access foinforrnqftpn.Jn
  "fhe/iq'n%^|^l;irooVe:jh'aai..i_P/Bf ~ '
   id sent put nearly 39.000"publications in
  isS.lo'smdll business information requests.


                      These notebooks improve compliance by providing businesses as well as government and
                   other interested stakeholders with a better understanding of the key environmental issues
                   facing individual industry sectors. This common understanding enables all parties to then
                   work productively towards more environmentally sound management strategies.
                      Like the compliance assistance centers, the sector notebooks are available online. They
                   are also available in hard copy with more than 300,000 copies distributed to date.
                   REGULATORY  INCENTIVES
                                               EPA and the states routinely visit facilities to investigate
                                             compliance with environmental requirements, but frequent
                                             investigations at the millions of facilities subject to environ-
                                             mental regulation is simply not feasible. To provide an incen-
                                             tiv6 for regulated entities to rigorously monitor their own
                                             compliance, in 1995 EPA announced a national audit policy
                                             that reduces and, in some cases, eliminates enforcement penal-
                                             ties for companies that take the initiative to identify, report,
                                             and quickly correct violations on their own. By creating an
                                             economic incentive for regulated entities' to take these actions,
                                             the policy enables regulatory officials to target enforcement
                                             resources more strategically for greater environmental and pub-
                                             lic health protection gains.
                     In 1998, we expanded outreach efforts to call the policy to the attention of industry sec-
                   tors with the greatest potential for benefit. "We also surveyed users of this policy to find out
                   how it is working. Eighty-eight percent said they would use the policy again, and 84 per-
                   cent reported they would recommend it to others.
                     As of December 1998, 318 companies had conducted audits at 1,668 facilities, up from
                   247 companies and 760 facilities the year before. As an example of the policy's effect, in
                   September 1998, we reached a settlement with a real estate firm in Maryland based on vio-
                   lations of the 1996 Real Estate Notification and Disclosure Rule. This rule requires firms to
                   disclose information about lead-based paint to new buyers or renters. The firm disclosed
                   four violations of the disclosure requirements in May after conducting a voluntary self-audit
                   of 28 apartment complexes. They discovered they had failed  to properly disclose the pres-
                   ence of known lead-based paint to tenants in two apartment complexes. The firm promptly
                   notified EPA and provided the required notices to its tenants. As a result, we waived a
                   $10,560 penalty.
                     Variations of the audit policy have  been created to address the environmental compliance
                   challenges facing certain key sectors. EPA's Final Policy on Compliance Incentives for Small
                   Business offers penalty waivers or reductions for small businesses that receive compliance

                                                               : REINVENTING. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION    59
        assistance, conduct self-audits, and then disclose and address any violations by a specified
        date. Similarly, the Policy on Flexible State Enforcement Responses to Small Communities
        offers the tools and regulatory flexibility that small communities need to come into compli-
        ance. It enables them to address their worst compliance problems first through an enforce-
        able schedule for achieving compliance with all applicable requirements. A Final
        Environmental Management Review Policy for Federal Facilities provides incentives, such as
        fewer inspections and possible penalty reductions for civilian agencies that volunteer to have
        their environmental management systems evaluated by EPA. And in New England, our
        Regional staff manage a special program called CLEAN, which provides enforcement
        amnesty for facilities that open their doors to regulatory inspection, and then agree to fix
        problems and adopt recommended pollution prevention techniques.
 ;-  While, regulated facilities often ne_ed and even
 request assistance from regulatory staff to improve
 .compliance and environmental performance, compa-
 nies can also learn a great deal from each other.
 Pne way this can happen is through mentoring,
 where companies with environmental expertise share
 their knowledge and experience with their peers, sup-
 pliers, or customers Recognizing an opportunity to
 advance a potential new trend, in 1998 the Agency
 provided funding to help create an Institute for
 .Corporate Environmental Mentoring This pro|ect  is
 being  launched by the National Environmental
 Education and Training Foundation (NEETF), a non-
 profit organization established by Congress. The goal
 js to link the expertise of corporate environmental
 leaders/with the needs of small and medium-sized
 companies for cost-effective, workable environmental
 fnanagement solutions
 ;  In January, EPA supported NEETF in organizing a
 White House conference on Corporate Environmental
 .Mentoring  More than 100 representatives from  mdus-
..Jr^smaiLbusiness, government and_ public interest _
 groups were invited to share mentoring information
 and experiences on what works and what does not.
 Conference participants also discussed the reasons
 vyhy companies might be interested in becoming a
^erjfor. Some spoke about the desire to reduce the
"environmental impacts associated with goods or ser-  [	
 vices from their suppliers or customers Others  cited   ; ^
 the opportunity to learn something new by helping    r
 others solve their environmental problems. And some  1 ~
 described their commitment to giving something back t,  "*
 to the  community. As Sam Rowse, President of VeryFine^J^
 Products, Inc. stated about his cornpany's willingness  t~^
 to share its innovative waste-water treatment technolo-J,
 gy, "(It) allows the companies to learn in a few  days
 what it took Veryfine years to develop."
 ? Following this event, additional prefects were
 Launched to support mentoring opportunities With oun
^support, NEETF is developing a mentoring handbook ,'
 to guide companies interested or just getting started.
 An online mentoring resource center is being set up to
 Serve aS a clearinghouse for mentoring information,
 and case study evaluations are being conducted to   ,
 document the environmental and economic results
 <"- ^                                            IF
 from mentoring activities Planning also began for a   k
 special forum that will be held in 1999 to promote
 rnentojingjto national industry trade associations,,^ _

                                                                                                  fff  a
               Another strategy to encourage and reward voluntary compliance is the strategic targeting
             of specific geographic, community, or industry sectors for one-time compliance audit pro-
             grams, or "CAPs." CAP programs—which make use of the full range of compliance incen-
             tives, compliance assistance, arid enforcement tools in EPA's reinvented enforcement and
             compliance assurance program—are designed to address specific issues or compliance prob-
             lems, and typically include tailored voluntary audit and disclosure incentives for participat-
             ing facilities. For example, beginning  in 1997 and concluding in  1998, EPA's Regional
             office in Chicago encouraged approximately two dozen small steel mills (mini-mills) in the
             Midwest to conduct self-audits and disclose any violations discovered. Instead of conduct-
             ing immediate inspections in  this industry sector, EPA educated the regulated community
             and offered a limited-time opportunity for the mini-mills to correct problems prior to
             planned EPA follow-up inspections. In this case, 11 of the mini-mills conducted audits, and
             several disclosed violations. This approach also was used in 1998 to address adverse water
             quality impacts from pork production (see the section on The Clean Water Action Plan in
             "More Tailored, Flexible Approaches"). Upcoming CAP programs include an effort to
             address compliance problems  in the organic chemical sector.
               EPA has long recognized that publicity surrounding enforcement actions can deter non-
             compliance by others. In 1998, the Agency moved to take advantage of this effect by pub-
             lishing a series of "Enforcement Alerts" which highlight particular requirements through an
             actual enforcement case. The information provided can help states identify potential prob-
             lems in need of attention. And by raising awareness and explaining how compliance pitfalls
             can be avoided, they can help responsible companies stay in compliance and minimize the
             risk of an enforcement action. As Rob Adams, Jr. of Adams Technology Systems stated, "As
             a consultant, this (Enforcement Alert) is really valuable information for us to have. It makes
             our job a lot easier to show our clients what will happen if they don't comply with the regu-
             lations and our advice."
               In some cases, the feasibility of achieving compliance comes down to a basic need—
            money. This is especially true in small communities that often don't have the tax base or
            financial capital to invest in environmental infrastructure or technology. EPA provides
            financial assistance to address a number of environmental needs, typically through grants or
            loan programs. Funding for waste-water infrastructure, for example, has been provided ever
            since the Clean Water Act was passed in 1972. But this has not been the case for drinking
            water. Recognizing die need to help communities provide safe water for their residents, in

                                                                REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
         1996 the Administration supported amendments that were signed
         into law establishing the federal governments first ever loan pro-
         gram for drinking water improvements. Under the law, EPA pro-
         vides funding to the states to set up revolving loan programs so
         they can then offer funding to needy communities.
           In 1998, EPA approved all state programs for administering
         these funds. To date, states have awarded $846 million to improve
         drinking water infrastructure in 348 communities. Unlike grants,
         which are one-time investments, these funds are designed to sus-
         tain a continuous source of capital. While the 1996 amendments
         allow loans to be forgiven for communities with very limited
         financial capability,  most loan recipients repay what they borrow
         so that more  loans can be offered to other communities.
           Having this financial support is essential for raising the quality of drinking water. Across
         the country, about 82 percent of health-based violations occur in small community systems.
                                                                                            ^ ^~L " I
'^f                                             8
"I*"" This section describes numerous EPA programs
"designed to help regulated facilities improve their
 environmental performance, either by achieving or
 exceeding compliance with federal environmental
 &  "-^                                            Sj
 requirements But how well are they working? To
 answer this question, EPA's enforcement and compli-
 ance assurance office is leading a pioneering effort to
 develop more meaningful performance measures This
 effort, the National Performance Measures Strategy, is
^(gading to measures that show not only how many
^activities (inspections, enforcement cases, etc) have
 peen conducted, but the environmental results of
 tRose activities and their effect on compliance
        Based on input received in 1997 from many stake
      coders, in 1998, the Agency worked with experts to
          op the  performance measures that could best
             \and the public New measures include
        iFonmentaJ^and human health improvements from
       iforcement and compliance assistance actions, non-
       M*~         •""   ~^  ^  *           M           ^
          liance  rates for selected sectors, disclosure and
        action of violations using EPA compliance mcen-
       gj3olicies, timeliness of return to^compliance by
      gnificant violators, and recurring or new violations
    &m£'%pfa&*J&l?*'t "    8!   Jnr WV *~  *"* r-^se^.  j* "* K «^ws%        fflg
    ^by significant violators Development and implemen-
    ^WSS-«B  f«^ _ !jr* ^ '  Mtr=^ j^j j^i-  ^  ^aA^w. ^s     nf  ^    *•«
             brts are still underway witn the entire set of
         measures scheduled to take effect in FY 2000
         f- *i}^v.  ^tV^ "^   ^   »-^^^-=m   ^ <^ ^ ^  -^^^   v?
  l^'4ft*Thejse along with traditional measures will  help
  Dfef^EPA and the public to understand program effective-
  Vj?B.ess and how strategies and activities could be modi-
  T^^fe§£^1|^t            *          s
— *^ sited to  produce the best possible results
    ^g^i*r~ *5*J ~ K   ~    i     *3 ,    *    $     vt  r
                                                                         *«ji  ff
                                                                    •*• i

                     LESS  REGULATORY BURDEN
                                                                           \ ^t *sr -" a •
                                                                                            f fa
I         ike all regulatory agencies, EPA issues rules to implement federal laws. These regu-
          lations protect Americans from many risks, and they have led to tremendous
   improvements in our quality of life. Making these regulations more efficient, as well as
   more effective, has been the objective behind many of our reinvention efforts.
     When the Agency adds more flexibility and gives regulated facilities more options in how
   they comply, the burden that industries and businesses perceive is diminished. "When we
   take advantage of new information management capabilities, such as electronic reporting,
   which can eliminate the need for paperwork, it is reduced more. And when we begin to
   issue our requirements and guidance documents in simple, easy-to-understand language, we
   reduce it even further. The benefit associated with these actions can't always be measured in
   quantifiable terms. And yet, for the many individuals who work to ensure compliance with
   EPA requirements, the savings of time and money are very real indeed.
     The requirements imposed for recordkeeping and reporting have been a focal point for
   EPA's burden reduction efforts. Under federal laws, most regulated businesses and commu-
   nities are required to report information to EPA (or to states with delegated federal respon-
   sibility) or to maintain their own records for regulatory inspection. Without these records,
   facilities would be unable to prove, and government would be unable to ensure, compliance
   with environmental regulations. These records may include information about:
   •  air pollution and waste-water emissions
   •  vehicle and engine emissions
   •  hazardous waste generation,  transportation, and disposal
   •  oil and hazardous chemical spills
   •  levels of contaminants in drinking water
     Collecting, reporting, and  maintaining these records requires someone's time and effort.
   This includes the time needed to review EPA instructions, adjust to new requirements, train
   employees, and collect, store,  review, and report the data. In the most basic sense, the time
   associated with these actions is perceived as a "burden" that society carries to ensure

 Jurden Reduction by Statute
^m v

protection under federal environ-
mental laws. This burden is essen-
tial and vital to ensuring protection,
and yet, certain problems can mag-
nify its weight unnecessarily.
   The most obvious and common
complaint has been the existence of
outdated, obsolete, or unnecessary
requirements. These requirements
were developed at separate times
over many years as new environ-
mental laws were  passed. As a
result, a single facility might face
multiple record-keeping require-
ments under various federal and
state laws and programs. Other
requirements may not reflect the
latest environmental techniques
and technology, making them
obsolete or unnecessary.
   In  1995, EPA set a goal of reduc-
ing burden caused by such require-
ments by at least 25 percent, or
25 million hours.  Since then, the
Agency has worked steadily to
achieve this goal and in 1998 it was
surpassed. By the  end of the year,
we had reduced requirements repre-
senting 26.9 million hours—the equivalent of more than 672,000 workweeks. These reduc-
tions, valued at about $807 million, are essential to improving the nations environmental
protection system, and they have been especially important during a time when new com-
munity right-to-know requirements have come into effect to improve environmental protec-
tion and accountability. Today, the overall burden associated with environmental regulations
is about the same as it was 4 years ago, but it would be considerably higher without the
Agency's concerted effort to rid die system of unnecessary requirements that do not yield
environmental or  public health protection benefits.
   The reductions made, to date, strengthen our regulatory system and demonstrate the
Agency's commitment to making environmental regulations work more efficiently and
effectively. This section highlights how reductions in recordkeeping and reporting burden
were achieved in many of our programs over the year. But, as mentioned above, it is impor-
tant to realize that many other actions described in this report have reduced burden, too.
 CM (Clean Air Act), CWA (Clean Water Act), RCRA (Resource
 Conservation and Recovery Act), TSCA (Toxic Substances
 Control Act), FIFRA (Federal, Insecticide, Fungicide, and
 Rodenticide Act), EPCRA/TRI (Emergency Planning and
 Community Right-to-Know Act/Toxic Release Inventory), OPA
 (Oil Pollution Act), CERCLA/SARA (Comprehensive
 Environmental Response, Compensation, and. Liability Act;
 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act), CZARA
 (Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments), SDWA  (Safe
 Drinking Water Act), Misc. (routine contractor support, quality
 assurance reports, and purchase orders)

                    Because most rules are designed to control specific pollutants and processes, they can lead
                  to confusing and overlapping requirements at the factory level. In 1998, we showed that
                  combining multiple rules for a specific industry is difficult, but worth the effort. A consoli-
                  dated air rule the Agency proposed in October for large chemical manufacturers combines
                  16 existing federal air regulations into one simplified rule. As proposed, this first-ever consol-
                  idated regulation under the Clean Air Act brings together similar monitoring, reporting and
                  recordkeeping requirements and eliminates duplicative compliance activities. It is expected to
                  save the average U.S. chemical plant 1,700 person-hours, or $80,000, annually without
                  increasing emissions of volatile organic compounds and air toxics. The proposed rule is vol-
                  untary, giving chemical plant owners the choice to comply with the consolidated rule or con-
                  tinue complying with existing rules. "We'll be using this rule as a model for potentially
                  consolidating other rules under the Clean Air Act or other statutes in the future.
                  AUTOMOBILE MAKERS
                                                   Automobile manufacturers will save an estimated
                                                 $55 million each year under a new program to reduce
                                                 costs and reporting burdens while also providing clean-
                                                 er air for Americans. The program proposed last sum-
                                                 mer would streamline the process for certifying that
                                                 new passenger cars and trucks meet federal air pollu-
                                                 tion emission standards. Under the old requirements, a
                                                 large volume manufacturer would typically spend
                                                 $8.4 million and 120,000 hours filling out 13,000
                                                 pages for certification each year. Under the new pro-
                                                 gram, the typical application would be cut by about
                  7,000 pages slashing time and costs by 60,000 hours and $4.2 million. Instead of brand-
                  new vehicles or test models, manufacturers would test a subset of customer-owned vehicles.
                  This change will direct more resources to investigating whether vehicles on the road are
                  actually in compliance, while giving manufacturers data to produce more durable air emis-
                  sion control equipment. The proposed regulations are also half as long and easier to read
                  than those currendy in effect.
                    EPA regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act require companies
                  to keep track of hazardous wastes from the day they are created to the day they are dis-
                  posed. These tracking and reporting requirements have helped to significantly reduce

                                                         REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTION
mishandling and dumping of dangerous wastes. But, over the years, EPA has recognized
that some requirements are not flexible enough when businesses or regulators put them into
practice. These requirements might inadvertently discourage recycling, increase disposal
costs, and make cleanup efforts more difficult. In 1998, the Agency addressed problems in
the hazardous waste management program in the following ways:
•  In April, EPA issued a final rule establishing treatment standards for land disposal of
   hazardous waste that make it easier for mineral processors to recycle their waste. The rule
   eliminated hazardous waste treatment requirements for wastes that are legitimately recy-
   cled and kept off the land prior to recycling. The rule also changed treatment standards
   for soil contaminated with hazardous waste. The new standards will make it easier and
   cheaper to cleanup sites, by allowing land disposal rather than incineration in more cir-
   cumstances. To further facilitate land disposal, it allows risk-based variances to be grant-
   ed for contaminated soils that might not otherwise meet the new standard. In July, we
   hosted a roundtable to begin discussions about other ways to improve land disposal of
   hazardous wastes.
•  In June, we announced a new regulation to  reduce disposal costs and increase flexibility
   in managing products that contain polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs. PCBs were
   widely used as insulating material in electrical transformers and capacitors and other
   products prior to 1979, when their manufacture was banned because of health concerns.
   PCBs are  still present in some equipment, however, and they can be generated as a
   byproduct of some manufacturing processes. The new rule made common sense changes
   to the 20-year-old PCB program that could produce savings of between $178 million
   and $736 million each year. For example, it created new disposal options for industries
   and others sources with large volumes of PCB wastes. It eliminated redundancies in fed-
   eral permitting requirements. The rule also eliminates the permits previously required for
   small-scale testing of new PCB disposal technologies.
•  A new EPA regulation issued in October makes it faster and easier to close hazardous
   waste disposal facilities. Under the old rule, a permit was needed whenever a facility was
   closed. The new rule gives EPA and states flexibility to either issue the post-closure per-
   mit or to  impose the same regulatory requirements in an enforceable document. This
   flexibility eliminates the lengthy permitting process for facilities who are already subject
   to enforcement action. The new rule also eliminated dual requirements that made it dif-
   ficult to clean up contamination at hazardous waste disposal facilities. Previously, solid
   waste and hazardous waste disposal units at the same facility were governed by separate
   and conflicting closure requirements. Under the new rule, EPA can develop site-specific
   closure and ground-water protection strategies, and under certain circumstances, site-
   specific requirements that protect the facility owner from future financial liability.
 •  Another rule issued in November also facilitates hazardous waste cleanup. The rule
   makes it easier for facilities to obtain permits for treating, storing, and disposing of
   cleanup wastes, and it gives facilities more flexibility by allowing diem to temporarily

                     store contaminated soils during cleanup activities. Administrative changes also make it
                     faster and easier for states to receive EPA approval when they update their hazardous
                     waste management programs to incorporate new federal requirements.
                    Like small businesses, small communities might also face special challenges meeting feder-
                  al requirements. In August, EPA announced changes to make it more affordable for smaller
                  water systems to meet federal drinking water standards. These changes, aimed at systems
                  serving less than 10,000 people, were made based on the 1996 amendments to the Safe
                                        Drinking "Water Act. They include a list of technologies that will
                                        offer, for the first time ever, alternatives to help small systems assure
                                        compliance. In the past, small systems have been required to use
                                        the same technologies as their larger counterparts. As a result, they
                                        have not been able to purchase and install some of the less expen-
                                        sive, readily available technologies.
                                          The rule also allows exemptions that would enable small sys-
                                        tems to request more time to achieve compliance. Finally, the rule
                                        establishes regulatory procedures by which variances from required
                                        standards could be approved in the future. These variances could
                                        be needed for a variety of reasons. For example, the technologies
                                        required to achieve compliance with drinking water standards are
                  based on the need to guard against specific contaminants. Yet, in some cases, a system
                  might face multiple contaminants, complicating the selection of an affordable technology.
                  Having regulatory procedures that allow variances for these and similar circumstances is an
                  important part of a balanced and practical program to protect public health. Overall, the
                  common sense changes made to the drinking water rules should create more practical,
                  workable alternatives for small systems.
                  Rtsi<  PESTICIDES
                    Before any new pesticide or new use of an existing pesticide becomes available in the
                  commercial marketplace, it goes through a thorough EPA review and approval process.
                  Every year EPA receives thousands of applications from companies that want to register or
                  change products. Since 1995, we have been working to make this process faster and easier
                  while still providing strong protection for public health and the environment. One way diis
                  has been accomplished is by offering self-certification procedures that allow companies to
                  proceed with certain activities as long as they notify the Agency first. This option, which

                                                     REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
includes random audits by EPA to ensure the process is working properly, helps applicants
avoid unnecessary paperwork and delays waiting for EPA review.
  In January 1998, EPA established a self-certification process that enables companies to
satisfy data requirements related to product chemistry. More than 2,000 submissions of
product chemistry data come to the Agency for review every year. Some data merits careful
regulatory review, but simple determinations of physical and chemical properties, such as
product color, odorv or pH, can now be handled more quickly and efficiently through a
self-certification process.
  In October, a streamlined process related to another registration activity-—product
labeling—was expanded. Now companies can make more types of minor changes on their
labels by simply notifying the Agency first.  Since this option was originally offered, the
number of minor labeling changes handled in this manner has doubled. The types of
actions described here save time and resources for pesticide companies. They do the same
for EPA, enabling Agency staff to focus more attention on the pesticide registration issues
that have the greatest potential for reducing risks.

  One action to reduce regulatory burden  should also produce significant benefits for chil-
drens' health. In December, die Agency proposed new standards that would make it easier
and less costly to remove and dispose of lead-based debris in nonhazardous waste landfills.
We found that the cost of disposing of this material as a hazardous waste under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act had actually slowed down efforts to eliminate
lead-based paint by deterring families from reducing lead exposure in their home. Lead poi-
soning can be very harmful to young children, causing effects ranging from hyperactivity
and learning disabilities to paralysis, convulsions, and even death. Studies showed that the
disposal of lead-based debris in nonhazardous landfills would not pose a significant threat
to human health and the environment. The proposed standards, which provide a less expen-
sive disposal option, are meant to encourage paint removal, protecting children from expo-
sure to contaminated dust, paint chips, and deteriorating paint in older buildings.
 AIR Toxics
   Many requirements that contribute to die regulatory burden imposed by federal regula-
 tions fall on our regulatory partners in state and local governments. To reduce their burden,
 we are making it easier for state and local agencies to assume direct responsibility for envi-
 ronmental programs. Under the Clean Air Act, for example, states and localities may replace

                   federal rules for controlling toxic air pollution with their own regulations, as long as their
                   requirements are at least as stringent. In December, the Agency proposed changes to give
                   states more flexibility in making this demonstration. One provision would allow us to
                   approve portions of local programs, instead of only accepting or rejecting the entire pro-
                   gram. Another would allow us to consider state and local rules as a whole, rather than on a
                   word-for-word basis, when determining equivalency. The proposed changes  would also
                   reduce burdens on industry by eliminating overlapping federal and state requirements, and
                   by saving time and costs involved in permitting and enforcement actions.
                     One of the simplest and most basic actions we can take to reduce real—and
                   perceived—regulatory burden is to make environmental regulations easier to understand.
                   Difficulty understanding complex, confusing requirements has been a longstanding criti-
                   cism of federal agencies including EPA. As part of Vice President Gore's efforts to reinvent
                   government, writing in plain language—with the final customer in mind—became a high-
                   er priority in 1998.
                     In June, die White House issued a plain language directive requiring all agencies to use
                   plain language standards in all correspondence and communication products by October 1,
                   1998, and in all regulations by January 1,  1999. (An exception was made for regulations
                   that were already proposed prior to that date).
                     At EPA, we had a head start on this new requirement. The Agency began a pilot pro-
                   gram to write regulations in plain language in 1997. As a result, last year we issued several
                   regulations using simpler formats and plainer language than ever before. As the box on the
                   next page shows, a plain language rule was issued under the Safe Drinking Water Act
                   explaining what gas station owners, industrial facilities, and others  operating underground
                   injection wells must do to ensure drinking water protection. Another explains what facilities
                   must do in chemical emergency response situations. While these were part of the pilot pro-
                   ject, others were a result of the increased emphasis that is being given to plain language
                   throughout the Agency. EPA staff understand tliat regulations that  can be understood are
                   the ones that will bring compliance and, ultimately, environmental improvement. As Tom
                   Murawski states  in his standard training text, Writing Readable Regulations, "Done well, reg-
                   ulations help readers find requirements quickly and understand them easily. ...Done well,
                   they boost compliance, strengthen enforcement, and cut down on mistakes, phone calls,
                   and litigation. Everyone gains from readable regulations."

                                                              REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.
   Provisions from a rule proposed in July for owners and operators of Class V injection wells show how much
simpler and easier to understand the environmental regulations of tomorrow might be.

§ 144.80 What is a Class V Injection Well?
   [Paragraphs (a)-(d) describe the first four classes of
injection wells.]
   (e) Class V wells include all other injection wells
that do not fit one of the classes listed above.
Typically, Class V wells are shallow wells used to
place a variety of fluids directly below the land sur-
face. However, if the fluids you  place in the ground
qualify as a hazardous waste under the Resource
Conservation and  Recovery Act (RCRA), your well  is
either a Class I or Class IV well, not a Class V well.
Specific types of Class V wells are described in
§ 1.44.81.

§ 144,81 Does  this subpart appjy to  me?
  .Jhis.subparf applies to you if you own or'operate
one of the following well types, all of which  qualify
as Class V wells:
   (a) Motor vehicle waste disposal wells receive or
have received fluids from  vehicular repair or mainte-
nance activities, such as an auto body repair shop,
automotive repair  shop, new and used car dealer-
ship, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and
muffler repair shop), or .any facility that does any
vehicular repair work...

§ 144.82 What must I do to protect under-
ground sources of drinking water?
  If you own or operate any type of Class V well list-
ed above, the regulations below require that you
cannot allow moverneatof injection fluids into under-
ground sources of drinking water that might cause
endangerment, you must properly close your well
when you are through using it, you must comply with
other federal Underground Injection Control (UIC)
requirements in 40 (CFR)  parts  144 through 147,
and you must comply with any other measures
required by your state or EPA Regional Office. You
also must submit basic information qbout your well,   ,
as described in § 144.83.
  '(a) Prohibition  of fluid movement...
   (b) Closure requirements...
   fc)  Ofher requirements In parts 144 through  147...
   (d) Other State or EPA  requirements...

§ 144.83 Do I need to notify anyone about
my well?
   Yes, you need  to provide basic "inventory informa-
tfon" about your well, if you haven't already. You also
need to provide any other information that your UIC
Program Director requests in accordance with the
'provisions'of the  UIC regulations.

i1 • t1 '''i"i"ji	i* v ij	aniii	,i	'"	ii iiillhin	ii11	i	i	r;	«i'i 'tiiiiii	•	pi	i:	viiiiiiiiiSiiiiiJiji	;; infill	i HI, ;i|!:''|	pph,	iiiginjijii	iii!iii|,iii	iiikiii!iiiinl|iri|iiiifci;' i:its:iLni»i:i:1iiii'pl,, >«,»'! i

                                    )  K]  (Cofc
                                'isnta**"   fc.    "W   ""**asw^'  fc»«««««rf
                              PA's focus on reinventing its environmental and public health protection programs is
                              producing meaningful results. What began' as a tightly focused agenda of about 40 pro-
                              jects in 1995 has expanded into a much broader-based effort that enables*us to pursue
                      national environmental goals, such as clean air and clean water, more efficiently arid effectively.
                                                                                I    >*&-. '  .' -i
                         When we began 4 years ago, the Agency collected extensive environmental data, and yet,
                                                            • ,    :                ' ^     '•"''/
                      we did not routinely offer that information in forms that people could  easily access or
                      understand. There were regulations in effect that had become obsolete or unnecessary and
                      were not really improving environmental or public health protection. The Agency was just
                      beginning to introduce market-based approaches, such as pollution trading, into our regula-
                      tions. And we were just beginning to recognize how significant and beneficial voluntary
                      environmental initiatives could be.                          ;
                         Steady progress has been made in these and other areas each year since then, and 1998
                      was no exception. During the year, Administrator Browner made several strategic decisions
                      that will have long term implications for the way EPA does business.: Based on her resolve
                      to improve environmental information, the Agency began setting up a new information
                      office, the first in EPA's history. This decision came at a critical time when public demand
                      for environmental information is increasing—the Agency's Web site now receives more than
                      40 million hits a month. Based on the lessons learned through the Common Sense
                      Initiative, she also committed the Agency to improve the way we work  with industrial sec-
                      tors and other stakeholders.
                         Along with these commitments, EPA also acted to improve some of its most well-established
                      programs. Reforming a 20-year-old program for managing PGBs, consolidating 16 federal air
                      requirements into a single rule for large chemical manufacturers, and surpassing our goal of cut-
                      ting regulatory burden by 25 million hours were all the results of reinvention commitments first
                      made in 1995. This same level of perseverance will continue in 1999.
                         As the Agency pursues new opportunities to advance environmental  and public health
                      protection capabilities, we will also be looking for ways to make current reinvention initia-
                      tives even more productive. With funds earmarked by Congress, in May we awarded a
                      $2 million contract to the National Academy of Public Administration  to evaluate some of
                      our highest priority reinvention initiatives. Over time, results from their evaluation and
                      EPA's own  internal evaluation efforts should prove informative, enabling us to better under-
                      stand what is working and what is not, so we can adjust Agency actions accordingly.
                         Testing, evaluating, and  then applying what we learn is what reinvention is all about. It
                      encourages steady, progressive change in our environmental and public  health protection
                      system.  But it  does so based on the merits of proven strategies, without jeopardizing the sig-
                      nificant gains made over the past.                             ,,  "

                                                                'REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                      :   APPENDIX:  STATUS  OF  EB\
                            •REINVENTION PROJECTS

   EPA's reinvention activities have increased and evolved considerably since the initial "Reinventing
Environmental Protection" agenda was launched in March 1995. The following matrix provides a brief
description and status of the initial reinvention projects^—with distinction for the 25 highest priority projects.
It does not reflect the full range of EPA's reinvention activity nor all of the projects featured in this report.
Initial "List A" (High-Priority) Projects
  •  Open-market air emission trading
    For smog-creating pollutants, establish an open
    market for trading emission credits, with account-
    ability for quantified results,  and encourage new
    trading options.
  Proposed open market emissions trading policy
  August 1995.
  Final guidance combined with broader guidance on
  trading forthcoming in June 1999 (Economic
  Incentive Program Guidance).
  Offered flexible trading options to states for achiev-
  ing compliance with federal air quality requirements
  for smog.
    Effluent trading in watersheds
    Promote use of effluent trading to achieve water
    quality standards—e.g., establish a framework for
    different types of trading, issue policy guidance for
    permit writers, and provide technical assistance.
  Final policy on effluent trading issued in 1995.
  Draft framework ("how to" guidance) published in
  1996. Extensive stakeholder input being sought and
  evaluated before a final framework is issued.
  Numerous pilot projects in progress around the
  United States.
    Refocus RCRA on high-risk wastes
    Reform hazardous waste regulation so that low-risk
    wastes are exempted from hazardous waste require-
    ments, and states have greater latitude to design
    management requirements for low-risk, high-
    volume wastes from cleanup operations.
  Final rule issued in October 1998 simplifies closure
  of hazardous waste management disposal facilities.
  Final rule issued in November 1998 reforms haz-
  ardous waste management requirements for remedi-
  ation wastes to promote better and faster cleanups.
  Proposed rule December 1998 to shift regulation of
  lead-based paint debris from RCRA to TSCA to
  make it easier to remove lead-based paint.
  Forthcoming proposed rule revising the definition
  of hazardous waste to remove stringent require-
  ments for low-risk wastes: October 1999.
*Note: The original March 1995 agenda included 39 projects. Only 38 projects are listed .here because 2 projects (alternative strate-
gies for facilities arid alternative strategies for sectors) were incorporated intp Project XL.

                          I ' . »1. 1' '
                                                                          ,r f *
                                                       ¥ j *    ii ihrJi
          Focus drinking water standard setting on highest
          health risks
          Establish a risk-based approach to regulatory devel-
          opment, and tailor drinking water monitoring
          requirements to reflect local contaminant threats.
          Expand use of risk assessment hi local
          Promote risk-based decision-making at the local
          and regional level by providing citizen access to
          appropriate tools, resources, and information.
          Flexible funding for states and tribes
          Provide an option for state and tribal governments
          to combine dieir existing grant funds to reduce
          administrative burdens and to improve environ-
          mental performance by allowing states and tribes to
          target funds to dieir high-priority environmental
         Sustainable development challenge grants
         Offer competitive action grants to encourage place-
         based/community-based management that com-
         bines environmental protection, economic vitality,
         and community well-being.
Successfully worked with Congress to revise former
statutory requirement that EPA regulate 25 conta-
minants annually into a more flexible mandate that
allows EPA to set regulatory priorities based on
health risks.
Published ANPRN July 1997 to initiate process of
streamlining drinking water monitoring require-
ments for 64 chemical contaminants.
Finalized guidelines August 1997 on additional
monitoring flexibility for states.
Held stakeholder meetings April 1998 and January
1999 to discuss data received and alternatives for
proceeding with the monitoring revisions proposed
in July 1997 ANPRN.
Developed online Green Communities Tool Kit to
provide guidance on community planning and
environmental priority setting.
Provided technical assistance during 1995-97 to
more than 20 communities on risk-based priority
setting, use of environmental indicators,  communi-
ty planning,  and consensus building.
Since 1995, promoted risk-based decision-making
at local level through cooperative agreements with
the National Governors Association and  the
International City/County Managers Association.
Developed National Environmental Performance
Partnership System (NEPPS) in 1996 to improve
collaboration and coordination between EPA and
By end of FY 1998, signed performance partnership
agreements with 33 states and approved 43 perfor-
mance partnership grants (PPGs).
Forthcoming proposed regulations on PPGs and
other grants  to states: March 1999.
Piloted Sustainable Development Challenge Grant
(SDCG) Program in 1996 with 10 grants to com-
munities, totalling $500,000.
In 1998, expanded program by awarding 45 grants
to communities, totalling $5 million.

                                                                 REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
 Regulatory negotiation and consensus-based
 Review all rules to identify candidates for negotiated
 rulemaking—a process that involves all stakeholders
 in developing agreement on how best to regulate.
 Use the Common Sense Initiative (CSI) process as a
 vehicle for identifying regulations that may be devel-
 oped through negotiation and consensus.
Continued monitoring of EPAs regulatory agenda
for upcoming candidates for negotiated rulemakings.
Through CSI, negotiated agreement with metal fin-
ishing industry that resulted in January 1998
launch of new Strategic Goals Program—will
reduce pollution below what is required under cur-
rent law. In November 1998, reached voluntary
agreement with National Pork Producers Council to
improve runoff control from pork production
Developed Agencywide Stakeholder Involvement
Action Plan in 1998 to improve stakeholder partici-
pation in processes ranging from consensus-based
rulemaking to information sharing.
  25 percent reduction in paperwork
  Reduce existing reporting and recordkeeping bur-
  den hours by 25 percent, beginning with local gov-
  ernments and small businesses. Initiatives already
  underway include expanded use of electronic
  reporting and recordkeeping.
Exceeded initial 25-percent reduction target. Cut
reporting and recordkeeping burden by 26.9 mil-
lion hours by December 1998.
  One-stop reporting
  Create a consolidated system for environmental
  reporting. Initiate as a pilot program in coordina-
  tion with the states before applying more broadly.
Established "One-Stop" reporting program in 1995
to support state information reform projects.
In 1996, 1997, and 1998, awarded "one-stop"
grants of $500,000 each to a total of 21 states (to
MA, MO, NJ, UT, and WA in 1996; to PA, WV,
GA, MI, MN, NM, OR, andTX in 1997; and to
AZ, FL, IN, MD, OK, NH, NY, and WL in 1998).
In 1997, launched Reinventing Environmental
Information (REI), a broad information reform ini-
tiative that incorporates "One-Stop" program goals
for establishing common data standards, imple-
menting electronic reporting, and reengineering the
Agency's national information systems in collabora-
tion with  the states.
• Consolidated federal air rules
  "Work with key industries, beginning with the
  chemical industry, to streamline federal air compli-
  ance requirements.
 Proposed rule in October 1998 consolidating and
 simplifying 16 different air-emission rules for the
 synthetic organic chemical industry.
 Forthcoming final rule: fall 1999.

         Risk-based enforcement
         Target enforcement actions against significant viola-
         tions that present the greatest risks to human health
         and the environment. Develop tools that allow
         analysis of risk as well as patterns of violations
         among corporations and facilities within a particu-
         lar sector. Make results publicly available.
 In May 1998, published online sector-facility
 indices for five industries, making compliance histo-
 ry and environmental performance information
 publicly available on a facility or sector basis.
 Tested/evaluated various methodologies for utility
 in risk-based enforcement, including environmen-
 tal indicators model. Also working with EPA's
 Science Advisory Board on ways to advance risk-
 based enforcement.
         Compliance incentives for small businesses and
         Provide compliance assistance, without fear of
         fines and penalties, to responsible small businesses
         and small communities who volunteer to comply
         with environmental regulations. Allow up to 180
         days for small  businesses to correct violations iden-
         tified through federal or state technical assistance
         programs. Provide similar compliance assistance
         for small communities.
EPA policy issued in 1995 encourages states to
give small communities the tools and flexibility
they need to achieve compliance on a sensible
schedule and with penalty reductions.
Policy issued in May 1996 offers small businesses
penalty reductions or waivers if they conduct envi-
ronmental audits, and agree to correct by a specific
date any violations discovered in the process.
Offered technical assistance and grant funding for
compliance assistance and training to states com-
mitted to helping communities. Grants to SD in
1996,  and to MO and WA in 1997.
Issued March 1998 report on impact of compli-
ance incentives/compliance assistance on small
businesses and communities.
       • Small business compliance assistance centers
         Establish national customer centers for six small
         business sectors that face multiple environmental
         requirements. The centers should provide up-to-
         date, easily accessible and understandable compli-
         ance and pollution prevention information.
With five new centers opened in 1998, nine online
centers now serve eight business sectors—metal fin-
ishing, automotive service and repair, printing,
printed wiring board, agriculture, paints and coat-
ings, transportation, and small and medium-sized
chemical manufacturers—and local governments.
       • Incentives for auditing disclosure and correction
         To reward responsible companies and eliminate
         costly litigation and red tape, provide incentives
         through reduced penalties for companies that dis-
         close and promptly correct violations—except for
         criminal violations, imminent and substantial
         endangerment, or repeat violations.
Issued policy in January 1996 providing incentives
for companies to conduct self-audits and to dis-
close and correct violations.
As of December 1998, 318 companies had con-
ducted audits at over 1,668 facilities nationwide.
Customized compliance assurance programs—
each designed to promote use of the audit policy
by a specific sector—being implemented for sever-
al sectors.
EPA study findings on the results of the audit pol-
icy to be published in 1999.

                                                                 REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
 Self certification
 Develop a self-certification program to handle
 low-risk pesticide registration activities, and then
 expand self-certification into other appropriate
 program areas.
  Issued final rule in 1996 allowing registrants to
  submit a simple notification to EPA before mak-
  ing minor label changes (rather than applying for
  an amended registration).
  Expanded notification process in October 1998 to
  allow registrants to make more types of minor
  labeling changes by notification.
  Self-certification process established in January
  1998 allowing registrants to satisfy certain product
  chemistry data requirements for registration by
  submitting a simple certification notice to EPA.
  Public electronic access
  Make information from all EPA programs avail-
  able through Internet and other electronic means
  that Americans and local organizations can access
  in their homes, schools, and libraries.
  Redesigned EPA Web site  to facil-
  itate public access to environmental information.
  As of December 1998, EPA Web site receiving
  more that 40 million hits each month.
  Center for Environmental Information and
  Establish a new Agencywide center charged with
  assessing, consolidating, and disseminating envi-
  ronmental information.
• Launched online Center for Environmental
  Information and Statistics (CEIS) in August 1998.
  Project XL
  Manage Project XL to provide a limited number
  of responsible companies a structured opportunity
  to develop and employ an alternative environmen-
  tal strategy, replacing the requirements of the cur-
  rent system if certain conditions are met.
  Approved 3 projects in 1998, bringing total num-
  ber of final project agreements to 10.
  Twenty projects in development stage.
• Alternative strategies for communities
  Join with states and communities to conduct pilot
  projects that will demonstrate and assess the merits
  of community-designed and directed strategies for
  achieving environmental and economic goals. The
  pilots will be undertaken with communities seek-
  ing innovative alternatives to current approaches
  and those grappling with limited ability to meet
  current regulatory requirements.
  Project XL for Communities: Five projects
  presently under development or negotiation.
  Promoting community-based environmental pro-
  tection (CBEP) through the EPA regions. Also
  developing "capacity-building" tools for CBEP
  practitioners in communities, states, and EPA
  regions. These include: environmental information
  and monitoring systems; guidance on socio-
  economic analysis; and technical assistance.

             • Alternative strategies for agencies
               Starting with a pilot project focusing on two to
               four Defense Dept. (DoD) facilities, work with
               other federal agencies having environmental
               responsibilities to ensure that these federal pro-
               grams achieve results in the most cost-effective
               ways, while eliminating needless bureaucratic pro-
               cedures. Develop a memorandum of understanding
               with DoD defining performance goals and an opti-
               mal approach for achieving them. The approach
               agreed upon must combine pollution prevention,
               compliance, and technology research projects.
                                                             Signed Memorandum of Understanding with
                                                             DoD in 1996 to implement specified performance
                                                             goals and approaches to achieve them.
                                                             Approved alternative strategy under Project XL at
                                                             DoD s Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa
                                                             Barbara, California, in November 1997.
                                                             Three additional projects under development:
                                                             Elmendorf AFB, Puget Sound Naval Shipyard,
                                                             and Mayport Naval Station.
               Third-party audits for industry compliance
               As one approach for streamlining compliance over-
               sight, explore the use of independent, certified, pri-
               vate-sector firms to audit industry environmental
               performance. The Environmental Leadership pilot
               program—with input from environmental groups,
               industry, and states—will evaluate criteria for third-
               party audits that will assure the public that envi-
               ronmental requirements are being met, and any
               violations disclosed are promptly corrected.
                                                             Tested third-party auditing at several facilities as
                                                             part of nationwide Environmental Leadership
                                                             Program pilot for industrial and federal facilities.
                                                             Testing third-party audit certifications process
                                                             through Star Track Program in EPA's New
                                                             England office.
               Multimedia permitting
               Evaluate as a mechanism for addressing all releases
               at a facility through a single permit and encourag-
               ing facilities to pursue performance-based
                                                             Project completed: Issued report, Multimedia
                                                             Pollution Prevention Permitting Project (EPA 902-
                                                             R-97-003), in 1997 summarizing state multimedia
                                                             permitting efforts and giving recommendations on
                                                             ways to promote the multi-media approach.
             • Design for die Environment—"Green
               Chemistry Challenge"
               Joindy sponsor, with the chemical industry, a pro-
               gram to recognize and promote innovative chemi-
               cal technologies that further pollution prevention
               in industry.
                                                            Established Presidential Green Chemistry Award
                                                            program in partnership with the American
                                                            Chemical Society, the Council for Chemical
                                                            Research, the National Research Council, and
                                                            stakeholder groups.
                                                            Made five awards in 1996, five in 1997, and six in
                                                            1998 to academic institutions, small businesses,
                                                            and the chemical industry.
                                                            Nominations for 1999 awards received from acad-
                                                            emic institutions and from companies in numer-
                                                            ous industrial sectors across the United States.

                                                                  -REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Initial "List B" Projects (Other Significant Actions)
    Facilitywide air emissions
    Conduct demonstrations of facilitywide limits for
    air emissions that allow companies increased man-
    agement flexibility to use least-cost control options
    to meet air permit requirements.
  Total of 12 demonstration projects at industrial
  sites around the country: 8 active, 4 completed or
  close to completion.
  Draft guidance forthcoming—based on lessons
  learned from demonstration projects—on facility-
  wide permitting for air emissions: June 1999.
    Flexibility in meeting effluent discharge
    Propose targeted Clean Water Act revisions to
    extend compliance schedules for industrial waste-
    water treatment standards for companies that
    apply innovative treatment approaches that pre-
    vent pollution.
• Crafted proposed amendments to Clean Water Act
  (CWA) that include incentives for pollution pre-
• Further action contingent on Congressional reau-
  thorization of CWA.
  • Eliminate millions of storm-water permit
    Work with stakeholders to develop a risk-based
    approach to storm-water management by limiting
    individual permits to only those sources that are
    known to contribute to water quality impairment.
  Consulted extensively with small businesses and
  other stakeholders on storm-water permit issues.
  Proposed rule in January 1998 to cut requirements
  for 7 million sites, including many small munici-
  palities and 70,000 "no exposure" facilities.
  Forthcoming final rule: October 1999.
  • Exempt low-risk pesticides and toxic chemicals
    from regulation
    Exempt low-risk active ingredients from pesticide
    regulation. Propose a similar exemption for low-
    risk chemicals under TSCA, for which manufac-
    turers must now submit premanufacturing notices.
  Issued final rule in March 1996 exempting
  31 low-risk pesticides from regulation as active
  Forthcoming notice clarifying issues related to pre-
  vious exemptions: mid-1999.
  Issued final rule in March 1995 eliminating TSCA
  premanufacturing notification requirement for
  polymers that meet particular low-risk criteria.
    Environmental forecasting to anticipate future
    environmental problems
    Establish a program to help identify and character-
    ize emerging environmental problems, taking
    guidance from a new report by the EPA Science
    Advisory Board (Beyond the Horizon: Using
    Foresight to Protect the Environmental Future,
  Series of meetings/workshops held by EPA's
  Science Advisory Board to explore various meth-
  ods for projecting future environmental risks.
  Participated in three international meetings (April
  1997, February 1998, and January 1999) con-
  vened by the G-8 countries' Environment
  Ministries to discuss transnational environmental
  forecasting issues.
  Participating in a 3-year project on the future of
  the North American Environment, coordinated by
  the Commission for Environmental Cooperation
  under NAFTA.

         State and tribal flexibility for municipal landfill
         Encourage states and tribes to implement a flexi-
         ble, performance-based approach for permitting
         municipal landfills by proposing clear criteria for
         state and tribal programs that are consistent with
         that approach.
Issued draft guidance in August 1997 on site-
specific flexibility for municipal solid waste land-
fills in Indian Country.
Issued final rule in October 1998 giving states
flexibility to run performance-based programs for
permitting municipal landfills.
         Save billions on PCB disposal
         Revise PCB disposal regulations to reduce the
         number of permits required, eliminate duplicative
         state and federal controls, and give states and the
         regulated community flexibility to choose less
         expensive disposal methods as appropriate.
Proposed rule in December 1994 to amend PCB
disposal regulations so as to allow the use of less
expensive PCB disposal alternatives where appro-
Final rule issued in June 1998 gives states and reg-
ulated community more flexibility in choosing
PCB disposal methods.
         Simplify air permit revision requirements
         Develop a streamlined process for revising air qual-
         ity permits that allows states to build on their exist-
         ing programs and avoid unnecessary regulations.
Proposed rule in May 1997 streamlining revision
process for air permits.
Forthcoming draft final rule reflecting discussions
with stakeholders: mid-1999.
       • Simplify review of new air pollution sources
         Streamline EPA's new source review process to
         provide more flexibility, reduce the number of
         industry activities subject to major review as new
         sources, reduce permit review times, and create
         incentives for use of innovative technologies.
Proposed rule in July 1996 to streamline review of
new air pollution sources and encourage technolo-
gy innovations.
Forthcoming final rule reforming EPA's New
Source Review program: December 1999.
         Simplify water permit paperwork
         Reduce paperwork burdens for municipalities and
         businesses by simplifying the permit application
         forms for water discharges.
Proposed rule in December 1995 simplifying
water permit paperwork for municipalities.
Forthcoming final rule simplifying permit applica-
tion forms for municipalities: Spring 1999.
Proposed rule to allow electronic data transmission
for NPDES permits: Spring 1999.
         Streamlining RCRA corrective action proce-
         Promote "faster, better" cleanups under RCRA by
         responding to a number of promising ideas identi-
         fied through discussions with outside stakeholders,
         such as reducing government oversight and expe-
         diting use of interim protective measures.
RCRA Cleanup Initiative to promote flexible, per-
formance-based corrective action through aggres-
sive outreach, guidance, and training: details
forthcoming spring 1999.

                                                                 REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTION, „,
  Flexible compliance agreements for specific
  Develop experimental EPA/Industry Compliance
  Agreements to allow companies to voluntarily dis-
  close violations and correct them in a timely man-
  ner in exchange for reduced penalties.
Flexible compliance assurance agreements developed
with several industry sectors, including pork pro-
ducers (reduced civil penalties in return for having
Clean Water Act compliance audits by certified
inspectors); natural gas processors (financial liability
capped for 62 companies that self-disclosed not
having metTSCA reporting requirements); the
chemical industry ($1 million liability limit for
89 companies that disclosed chemical exposure and
incident reports); and the food sector (no more
than $2,000 financial liability for 170 companies
that failed to provide right-to-know data to local
emergency response personnel).
  Independent study on collecting and using
  information more effectively
  Commission a study on ways to improve data col-
  lection and management at EPA, and use the
  study recommendations in designing a center for
  environmental information and statistics.
Study completed: Center for Environmental
Information and Statistics (CEIS) launched
August 1998.
• Electronic data transfer
  Establish a system to allow facilities to report
  monitoring results electronically, thereby reducing
  monitoring burdens while enhancing enforceabili-
  ty or accountability.
Pilot projects in states being coordinated through
EPA's "One-Stop" program.
"Reinventing Environmental Information" (REI)
initiative, announced July 1997, included Agency
commitment to making electronic reporting
option available to all regulated entities within
5 years.

             FOR  MORE INFORMATION about EPA's reinvention activities, look on the
             Internet at  or send an e-mail to . You can
             also contact the Office of Reinvention in Washington at 202 260-1849. In this office, our
             staff manage multimedia reinvention initiatives, such as Project XL, and coordinate reinven-
             tion activities that involve other Agency programs. The majority of reinvention initiatives,
             however, are managed directly in EPA national program offices or Regional offices. All of
             these organizations have senior level managers assigned to oversee reinvention initiatives.
             Together, they make up EPA's Reinvention Action Council. Their responsibilities include
             resolving issues that hinder reinvention progress and being available to staff and external
             constituents who might have ideas or concerns about reinvention issues. A current listing of
             the Reinvention Action Council members, along with information about how to contact
             them, can be obtained from the Office of Reinvention.
                                              EPA Regions

http://www.epa. gov/airnow



Center for Environmental Information and
Statistics (CEIS)

CLEAN Pollution Prevention Pilot Project
http://www.epa.gov/regionO 1 /steward/clean

Clean Water Initiative

Common Sense Initiative

Community Based Environmental Protection

Compliance Assistance Centers

Drinking Water

Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database

Enforcement and Compliance

Environmental Monitoring for Public Access and
Community Tracking (EMPACT) Program
Industry SectorJSfotebooks               „ (
              ^   —      ~~°~      * *"   J f   Al
~  f~  ,          •£    *   »**>„'; f^-v
Innovative Technologies for Hazardous
Waste Treatment

Lead Programs

National Environmental Performance „
Partnership System (NEPPS)

One Stop Reporting

Partners for the Environment


Sector Facility Indexing Project

Small Business Assistance _

StarTrack Program

STOrage andHETrieval (STORET)
Water Quality Data Base

Surf Your Watershed
                   *>             H   j.,5 I
Toxic Release Inventory
j^^sffiff.™.  ^2^ ^flf
                                                                                                         *"-«•«< ,*. ,
                                                                                                        rtj*»nng(( s^
                                                              fy,  it