ISSUE #11
                            United States
                            Environmental Protection
                            Agency
                  Office of Enforcement and
                  Compliance Assurance
                  (2261 A)
         EPA #300-N-01-006
         Spring 2001
                             an environmental bulletin for federal facilities
 Partnering  at  NAS  Patuxent River
 is a CERCLA Reuse Success
    Despite numerous potential pitfalls and
    constraints including multi-funding of
 the project, the Naval Air Station (NAS)
 Patuxent  River partnering team suc-
 ceeded  in -.accelerating  the  CERCLA
 process for a former drum storage area,
 the Bohneyard, and preparing it for bene-
 ficial reuse.    ••-.
    Commissioned pn.April 1, 1943, NAS
 Patuxent River is  naval aviation's pre-
 miere research, development, test, and
 evaluation facility. The NAS hosts the full
 spectrum  of acquisition management,
, research and development capabilities, air
 and ground test and evaluation (T&E),
 aircraft logistics, and maintenance man-
 agement for naval  aviation. The station
 encompasses 7,900 acres  and includes
 Webster.Field Annex, an outlying parcel
 in  St.  Inigoes, Maryland,  about eight
                    Continued on page 13  '  Bohneyard drum storage in 1978. The drums were removed between 1979 and 1982.
 2  FedEnviroNews-Pnline Debuts
 3  National Environraiental
    Achievement Track
 4  The Hammer"
 6  Partnerships            ..:.:;';';J
 7  Demonstrating Federal Leadership
    in the Western United States
 9  Upcoming Events
 10 Workshops and Conferences:
 14 Sector Facility Indexing Project-
    Expansion to Federal Facilities
 15 EPA's Federal Facilities Program
    Managers
GSA's  Stormwater
Management Program
TThe  General Services Administration
 \ (GSA) Natiprial^apital Region (NCR)
has seized the opportunity to promote
environmental excellence- through  its
newly designed "stormwater pollution
prevention" initiative that includes a
stormwater management plan and train-
ing. The objective of the" initiative is to
impart a basic understanding  of the
causes of stormwater pollution and the
types of activities that require stormwa-
ter permits, as well as provide a valuable
reference tool for GSA facility managers.
Training on implementing the stormwa-
ter management plan, was provided for
NCR property  and project  managers
region-wide. GSANCR is integrating this
environmental initiative throughout the
organizational culture by actively encour-
aging consideration of the impact of pro-
jects,  activities,  and operations on
stormwater and the environment.
  The environmental problem faced in
this area is real. The percentages of paved
surfaces and roof tops have dramatically
decreased the natural nitration system of
the surrounding soils. Washington, DC
                   Continued on page 12
                                                                                         Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
     IENVIRONEWS-
      I'E'DEfeUfs"   -,;
ipn December 8,2000,the Federal Facilities
              i launched its first issue
 jjf FedEnviroNews-On(ine5 a computerized,
 subscription-based, electronic newsletter.
 lybscrijers^ to thi^jnonthly	newsletter
                                     Interagency Response to the Los Alamos
                                     National Laboratory Fire: Post-Cerro
                                     Grande  Fire Flood Risk Assessment
                                1 'I
                                "	4
 :ecetV6 °efivi)'ortmentaj news and jnforma-
*$qh relevant to federal facilities.
                                 1
                                ...I
 Oniine highlighted information on new poll-  ;
"Jcfes, regulations, and protocols pertaining  *
;"|o federal facilities' national training, work-  :,
r||pps, and conferences^ and other infor-  :•
"jijiaioh of interest to federal facility" ehvi-  j
i'Jpnmerftal  practitioners. The format  for  .
                                 i
                                 "*
                                 I
                                 i
 'ing subscribers to quickly get information
 ,prj a variety of topics, and then follow the
 Instructions or links within each news item
 jor further information.
  i In in i piiiiiili Jin in i i in  in i ill 11   i  i.i ii HI in  ii
   "Subscriptions  to   FedEnviroNews-
 Online are available free to federal facility
 environmental managers and staff, as well
        environmental  practitioners. To
 1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1IHII Wll !•         	llllllHIIII||ll|l|ilH	IIII iTHIIIII	«HIIII|I|III'II	IIIJIiLllllli' H|ll lilt	I
 gub.scnbe, follow these steps:
   Send an e-mail message addressed to:
   \ |iisjs-1|ryer@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
   Leave the subject line blank
  !." In tfje body""6f" thT	"message''wnteT
   Subscribe FEDENVIRbNEWS-ONLrNE
   first name lastname
    jV^_:jjeaseadh_ere_to spacingara/case
        lll/s""1	:jFor ""example:" '"subscnffe
    You should receive a welcome e-mail
            /ithin 24 hours indicating you
   i have been added to the subscriber list
    for additional information, please con-
 tqct Marie Muller, EPA Office of Enforce-
 ment  and  Compliance  Assurance  at
 mul|er.rnarie@epa.gov
 iliiiiiiip ii iiiiif
    11 n i ill
          11
                             i 4 III
                             in 11 ill
                             i| "III !l>
      Cerro Grande Fire of May 2000
   burned  through   watersheds   of
canyons that run through the Los Alamos
National  Laboratory (LANL),  possibly
impacting the water quality of the  Rio
Grande and Cochiti Reservoir. An Intera-
gency Flood  Risk  Assessment  Team
(IFRAT) was formed to better understand
how  contaminant  transport  from
increased flooding due to the fire might
affect downstream  property  owners,
water users, and general public health.
The IFRAT includes the following organi-
zations:  EPA  Region VI, New  Mexico
Environment Department (NMED),  Los
Alamos  National Laboratory (LANL),
Department of Energy,  and New Mexico
Health Department.
   The Cerro Grande Fire has increased
the potential for runoff and erosion
events in waters that cross  LANL prop-
erty. Sampling and analysis efforts are
being conducted by NMED, LANL, EPA,
and other entities.  The majority of the
samples taken thus far were from the ini-
tial flood event during the monsoon of
2000. Additional samples will be taken
during the Spring of 2001  snow runoff
and the 2001 monsoon season. Sampling
and analysis includes surface water,
groundwater, sediment, soils, crops, fish,
and wildlife in the  areas that might be
affected by the flood.
   The initial sample results are being
analyzed by the IFRAT Risk Assessors.
The risk assessment team will consider
several activities  associated with water
and sediment runoff from the fire  and
characterize the potential risk to the pub-
lic and to the environment. The IFRAT
has developed risk models for possible
radionuclide, metal, and organic contam-
ination in the Rio  Grande and Cochiti
Reservoir. Analysis of the preliminary
results will occur in the Spring of 2001,
while long-term analysis will continue to
be monitored by the IFRAT.
   An "Open House" was held on Decem-
ber 18,2000, to share information regard-
Sampling and analysis
includes surface water,
groundwater, sediment, soils,
crops, fish, and wildlife in the
areas that might be affected
by the flood.

ing monsoon flooding and runoff  from
areas affected by the fire. Congressman
Tom Udall delivered the opening remarks
at the open house and  encouraged the
public to participate in the meeting. The
IFRATs main purpose for the meeting
was to hear citizens' concerns about the
fire, flooding, and the potential for flood
related runoff of contaminants. For more
information, visit the IFRATs website at
www.nmenv.state.nm.us/ifrat/.
   For information  on the  Interagency
Flood Risk Assessment Team, please con-
tact Anna Treinies (EPA) at (214) 665-
8348, Kirby Olson (NMED) at (505) 827-
1558, or Lars  Soholt (LANL) at  (505)
667-2256.
2 FEDFACS

-------
EPA  Selects  Federal  Facilities  as Charter Members  of
National  Environmental  Achievement  Track
   EPA congratulates several federal
   facilities for their selection as char-
ter members in the National Environ-
mental Performance Track's Achieve-
ment Track program, including DOE's
Strategic Petroleum Eeserve facilities
in both Louisiana and Texas, West Valley
Demonstration  Project in New York,
Waste Isolation Pilot. Plant in 'New Mex-
ico, and Kansas City Plant in Missouri;
the U.S. Coast Guard Air Station in
Massachusetts; NASA's White Sands
Test Facility in New Mexico; and the U.S.
Postal Service's Portland Processing and
Distribution Center in Maine and Hart-
ford Processing and Distribution Center
and Hartford Vehicle Maintenance Facil-
ity in Connecticut.  The National Envi-
ronmental Performance Track's program
recognizes and rewards both public and
private  sector facilities for exceeding
environmental protection requirements.
   The National Environmental Achieve-
ment Track is the first level of EPA's new
National Environmental Performance
Track program. EPA plans to launch the
second level of the program, the Steward-
ship Track, in the Summer of 2001. The
National Environmental Performance
Track program was established by EPA to
recognize  and encourage top  environ-
mental  performers  —  those businesses
that go  beyond compliance with regula-
tory requirements.
   Each federal facility in the program
has made voluntary commitments for spe-
cific environmental improvements in four
areas over the next three years. Likewise,
the other Achievement Track facilities
have  strong  records in environmental
management  with more waste recycling
and greater reductions  in air and water
pollution than are legally required. They
have reduced their cumulative energy con-
sumption by millions of kilowatts per year
and are committing to  an average of 22
percent improved energy efficiency. Com-
mitments for future water use reductions
average 31 percent. Some companies have
even exceeded in virtually eliminating dis-
charges to surface water, while others are
significantly  reducing  discharges to
        National
        Envionmental
        Performance Track
groundwater  to  protect  underground
drinking water supplies. Waste, reduction
at these facilities is projected to average 44
percent per year, representing millions of
pounds of saved resources as process and
packaging materials are recycled or
reused. Others are significantly reducing
emissions of greenhouse gases to help pro-
tect the ozone layer, and some will cut their
output of toxic air pollutants in half.
   The expectation is that the program
will motivate  other facilities to achieve
similar improvements, and complement
existing regulatory activities. The pro-
gram has been designed so that criteria
for participation are proportional to the
benefits and  that small, medium, and
large facilities will participate. Emphasis
                                      is being placed on continued environmen-
                                      tal improvement, effective state/EPA part-
                                      nerships, and the need to inform and
                                      involve citizens and communities.
                                        Among the 228 charter members in the
                                      program  are municipalities and several
                                      branches of the federal government. The
                                      roster  of  private  sector  companies
                                      includes small businesses and large cor-
                                      porations, representing the automotive,
                                      pharmaceutical,  sports equipment, food
                                      processing,  chemical, and  petroleum
                                      industries, to name a few. The facilities
                                      and corporate headquarters are located in
                                      38 states and Puerto Rico.
                                         All federal faculties are encouraged to
                                      review the program  qualifications and
                                      consider  applying. Applications will be
                                      accepted  again from August 1 through
                                      October 31, 2001. For further information
                                      on the National  Environmental Perfor-
                                      mance Track and the process being recog-
                                      nized for similar achievements is  avail-
                                      able at www.epa.gov/performancetrack.
tooi CJFE¥ERIA USES ENVIRONMENTALLY
^I^E^^l^O^ERVlC^I^CKAGINQ^    ,^~-N,r, .•
Sue,st Se;yjces,vlnc., whicV provides food service^managemetifoperations to U.S Government j
   erfcfes' Ohder contract wrmme General Services Administration, has entered into a commercial" ^
   ree^nf wfth EarthShell® Corporation,'manufacturers of envirorirnentall/preferabte food"ser{]
    •jf- s.  ,   .<  ..     -     ,  ,..    ..-*..     ..   , ,  .,   „    .   . - ,->, e jn^_
^w^"(DOt|Washfngtori, DC cafeteria,** The aVeefnentbegaVin March and will be revrewe'3 after,
^le^ye'ar. EarthSheH packaging has-been used successfully in a pilot project with DPI for two j
  4a*rs! The 'plfot project beg'an on Earth Da*y 199§ and was originally scheduled to"run for six  •
  "**"" f 6ut|ontFnued due to its success^and posrtive feedback from DOI employees.
       jv'e'testea' the EarthSheH products In both our cafeteria and in the Department of Agri-
        SajeTwrth the durafiiftty and usability of the plates and bowls, and the research staffat «
        -1-**=--)* facility Is" equally satisfied iwfth EarthShel's compostabilrty. This is the firsffoodl
            •ing that comfiines performance witfi environmental advantages?'
       Isfefl, ]ocated In^njjipoJis Junction, Maryiarccf^supplies DOI with foodservice pack-^
       Jade primarily from natural limestone and starch. The manufacture of these products*!
 fequtfes>(ess total energy and results in fowef greenhouse'gas^emissiorts than traditional rigid ,
 ^f!».»^..^ ggrthshell packagmgfreduces'risks'to wildlife'and the environment because^lf 1
            "'""" i expoWcUo mojsture in nature. larthSbell Packaging is recyclable tr?rougrT1
                   f<                               ^                      ^
                fltipn gbgut the^EarthShell dorporationryisft their^web site  at www.Earth-',

         '>;'^^>^'»^*«sL>^lli*:' '^'l^T^LV-  , -.ILL.v^V-'awS&fiJ
                                                                                                     FEOFACi

-------
                                             The  Hammer
BIA Agrees to Fine and
Cleanup for Underground
Storage Tank Violations
In the Fall of 2000, EPA Region VIE and
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)  exe-
cuted a settlement agreement regarding
EPA's RCRA/Underground Storage Tank
(UST) enforcement action involving the
U.S.  Department  of  Interior,   BIA
Aberdeen Area Office. The enforcement
action against BIA was  initiated in
December 1997,  and settlement  was
reached in May 1999. Finalization of the
consent  agreement  was  temporarily
stayed pending a decision by the Depart-
ment of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel
(OLC) regarding  EPA's UST penalty
authority against federal facilities.  Fol-
lowing the issuance of OLC's opinion
upholding EPA's penalty authority in June
2000, the parties agreed to sign and file
the previously-negotiated consent agree-
ment. The action addresses the BIA
Aberdeen Area Office's past non-compli-
ance with several UST notices of violation
issued over a five year period. The action
includes  approximately 52 BIA-owned
USTs located at BIA facilities and grant
schools within the BIA Aberdeen Area on
 , is published by EPA's Federal Facilities
        1  Enforcement Office.

     Joyce Johnson, FFEO, Editor
        StaComm, Inc., Layout

fib receive FedFacs in the mail, contact:
I        .      i     .,
 Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
|*O.S. EPA 1226 lA), 1200 Pennsylvania
Uvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20044
V Fax: 202-501-0069
*Read FedFacs on the Internet
                                  j
                                   i
                                  • 4
                                   1
nine Indian reservations iri North and
South Dakota.
   The settlement provides for a penalty
payment of $93,383 and the performance
of three supplemental environmental pro-
jects (SEPs) valued at a minimum of
$425,410. The supplemental environmen-
tal projects include establishing and
implementing a multi-media environmen-
tal cleanup program at the Marty Indian
School and removing three underground
storage tanks  at the  school's tribally-
owned store in  Marty, South Dakota.
These projects  will improve environmen-
tal protection  from UST  leaks and
enhance the quality of life in Indian coun-
try in that area.
   Following EPA's enforcement  action
and a large-scale UST removal effort, BIA
met the 1998 UST upgrade deadline and
continues to perform site assessments and
cleanup — where necessary — at  the
removal sites.  Only eight tanks at four
facilities subject to this action remain in
the ground and one is under contract to be
removed. The parties agreed that BIA's
obligations under the consent agreement,
including penalty payment, are subject to
the availability of funds to ensure tribes or
tribal  programs  are  not  negatively
impacted by the settlement. Once gasoline
or chemicals get into groundwater, it is
extremely  expensive  and  sometimes
impossible to clean up the contamination.
It makes more sense to emphasize leak
detection over cleanup to keep contamina-
tion out of the water supplies.
   For  more information, please contact
Amy Swanson of EPARegion VIII at (303)
312-6906.
Region VI Settles Adminis-
trative Action Against BEP
Fort Worth Facility
EPARegion VI filed a Consent Agreement
and Final Order (CAFO) on January 18,
2000, against the U. S. Department of the
Treasury, Bureau of Engraving & Printing
(BEP) in settlement of an administrative
action filed against BEP's Western Cur-
rency Facility in Fort Worth, Texas. The
Complaint alleged that BEP violated reg-
ulations concerning the state and federal
air regulations including the Texas State
Implementation Plan, New Source Perfor-
mance Standards, and National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
during the operation of its Western Cur-
rency Facility. As part of the CAFO, BEP
submitted their supplemental  environ-
mental project (SEP) completion report on
January 29, 2001. The final cost for the
SEP was $257,587. BEP upgraded  their
air pollution control equipment on the
chrome plating line and added air pollu-
tion control equipment to the nickel plat-
ing line. BEP is also recycling the rinse
water from  three chromic acid plating
tanks thereby reducing the amount of liq-
uid hazardous waste shipped each year.
   For more information, please contact
Toni Allen at (214) 665-7271 or Jan Gerro
at (214) 665-2121.
Cannon Air Force Base
Issued "Show Cause Letter"
for Possible EPCRAi 313
Violation
Cannon Air Force Base, located 6 miles
west of Clovis, New Mexico, was issued a
"show cause letter" on February 1, 2001,
under Executive Order 13148, "Greening
the Government Through Leadership in
Environmental Management." On May 3,
2000,  an EPCRA compliance inspection
was conducted at Cannon AFB. Prior noti-
fication had beengiven in order for facility
personnel to ensure that appropriate doc-
uments were available for review. From
the information provided by Cannon AFB,
                     Continued on page 5
 a FEDFACS

-------
 THE HAMMER
 Continued from page 4
 it appears the facility has failed to report
 one toxic chemical (Naphthalene) to EPA
 and the State of New Mexico as required
 byEPCRA§313.
   Cannon AFB contends they are not in
. violation of EPCRA § 313 by taking the
 "motor vehicle exemption" for all  aircraft
 refueled at the base. However, EPA guid-
 ance stipulates only,aircraft stationed at
 the base may qualify for this exemption.
 Aircraft stationed at other ifederal facili-
 ties do not qualify for the exemption. The
 issue under discussion is whether EPA or
 DoD guidance should be followed in the
 case of a disagreement. In this case, the
 refueling of non-facility aircraft.
   For more information, contact Rajen
 Patel at (214) 665-2788.
EPA  Region VI  FUDS  Inventory
Region VI Settles With U.S.
Army Pine Bluff Arsenal for
Clean Air Act Violations
On February 7, 2001, EPA Region VI filed
a simultaneous Complaint and Consent
Agreement/Final Order settling Clean Air
Act violations found at the U.S. Army's
Pine  Bluff  Arsenal  in Pine  Bluff,
Arkansas. The alleged violations were
found during a multi-media inspection on
February 7-10, 2000. Pine Bluff Arsenal
uses and maintains refrigeration equip-
ment to control humidity in numerous
buildings. Thirteen pieces  of refrigeration
equipment were  identified  during  the
inspection that contained greater than 50
pounds  of refrigerant. EPA alleged that
the U.S. Army violated 40 C.F.R. Part 82,
Subpart F, for 1) failure to maintain ser-
vice  records documenting the date and
quantity of refrigerant added to the thir-
teen individual  pieces of refrigeration
equipment, and 2) failure to certify acqui-
sition of recovery or recycling equipment.
The U.S. Army will pay a cash penalty of
$21,000.
   For more information,  please contact
EUen Chang Vaughan at (214) 665-7328 or
Toni Allen at (214) 665-7271 EPA Region
VI.
 In 1998, Region VI" began an effort to
 identify all formerly used defense sites
(FUDS) in Arkansas, Louisiana,  New
Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Each of
the U.S.  Army Corps  of Engineers'
(USAGE) District offices were visited and
FUDS files were reviewed and copied. In
January of 2001, Region VI completed the
draft inventory of FUDS, with a prelimi-
nary evaluation of risks at these sites,
and provided it to USAGE and to each of
the state environmental agencies for
review and comment.
  In   March  of  2001,
Region VI hosted a series
of meetings, inviting each
state      environmental
agency and  their respec-
tive USAGE District  and
Division offices to discuss
EPA's  draft report.  The
primary purpose of these
meetings was to allow them  to identify
any mistakes EPA had made in identify-
ing or evaluating each site. The report is
expected to be finalized in May of 2001.
  In the  Region VI  states, 907 FUDS
were identified, mostly in New  Mexico
and Texas. Of these, 415 were  recom-
mended for further action and 42 were
identified has having significant potential
for listing on the Superfund National Pri-
orities List (NPL). Also, due to a lack of
file information, EPA was unable to com-
plete the  environmental  evaluation of
another 165 sites. To put the regional uni-
          1 j,a3 ^.*s!i'•« -f^-tT ^ff^-~V">nf r  f "f    * "• , f ~ <         -
    iase of the project was to identify which federal facilities own electrical equipment with
   concentrationl'cisUsddlppm) According to lIPAs/CB Transformer Registration Data-
ase, when jconstjering al the different fedetal jiepartments and agencies that registered PCB
   'orifersVthe federal government is the single largest* owner of PCB transformers Accorrf-
   jhe database, ana accourtiingfor one known error, approximately 62 federal facilities reg-
  ied 2215 PCB transformers ftranjformers containing fluids with >500 ppm PCBs} nationally,
  "A over 1Q^o gl^Jo^l JC^ tfpnsformer^ registered. The departments or agencies that
  jerfcd the^mosfPCB transformers are'TVA, DoD, DOE, and DOT. The next phase of the pro-
  is tojjeterrmne trfe most effective way^PA can seek reductions of the PCBs from the other
   ' il^fearEtnenfe^or agencies.*^ ~ *

-------
                                            Partnerships
Building A Road To Success:
Government Partnering
on Transportation and the
Environment

EPA Eegion VI has teamed with  the
Federal   Highway   Administration
(FHWA) and  the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USAGE) to  improve trans-
portation and environmental protection
in Texas. There are more  than 1,300
transportation  projects  undertaken
annually in Texas totaling over $3  bil-
lion that can have potentially devastat-
ing effects on the environment. Compli-
ance with the National Environmental
              Compliance with the National
      Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
   other environmental laws has helped to
          minimize environmental impacts.
Policy Act (NEPA) and other environ-
mental laws  has helped  to minimize
environmental  impacts.  The  Trans-
portation Equity Act for the 21st Cen-
tury (TEA-21) recently challenged gov-
ernment  agencies to "streamline" the
process for addressing applicable envi-
ronmental  regulations  to reduce  the
duration  of transportation projects. It
targets accelerated compliance with all
applicable environmental requirements.
In order to support this Department of
Transportation (DOT)  mandate, while
continuing  to meet burgeoning  NEPA
demands across its 5-state jurisdiction,
the EPA  Region  VI Office of Planning
and  Coordination, within the Compli-
ance Assurance and Enforcement Divi-
sion,  established a staff position in
Austin, Texas. The position is being used
to work more closely with FHWA and
related agencies on streamlining envi-
ronmental compliance related to trans-
portation projects in Texas.
  Through its efforts to enhance coordi-
nation with Texas transportation agen-
cies, Region VI has begun a more com*
prehensive approach to addressing
issues that serve as stumbling blocks to
compliance with NEPA and other envi-
ronmental regulatory authorities. Appli-
cation of differing agency policies, inter-
pretations, and definitions has driven a
communication wedge between trans-
portation  and  resource  agencies.
Acknowledging the critical  nature  of
this matter, EPA, FHWA, and USAGE
have  committed to partnering at a
higher level of interaction, understand-
ing, and problem solving to eliminate
            historical barriers  and
            clearing the way for inno-
            vation and improvement.
               In September  1998,
            EPA Region VI hosted an
            interagency   Executive
            Summit  on Transporta-
            tion and Environmental
            Streamlining in Irving,
            Texas.  At that meeting,
there was general consensus among
participants that the  Region VI states
would initiate streamlining  activities
appropriate to their state. In January
1999, a  Texas Department  of Trans-
portation (TxDOT)/FHWA Streamlining
meeting was held in Austin, Texas to
identify opportunities and roadblocks to
streamlining and to develop preliminary
strategies to address these opportuni-
ties and eliminate roadblocks. Partici-
pants identified priority  issues,  corre-
sponding strategies, and  pilot projects.
Another EPA-coordinated meeting was
held in Austin on January 31, 2001, dur-
ing which EPA, FHWA, and USAGE dis-
cussed issues related to delays in autho-
rizing transportation projects in Texas.
Interagency participation was limited to
these particular  organizations, due to
the nature of the issues. The partici-
pants reinforced  that a  partnering
approach is the most effective way to
resolve the issues  and then prioritized
the issues for action.
   The issues primarily relate to permit-
ting requirements of the Clean Water
Act Section 404 and Section 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, and
several  NEPA requirements.  Recom-
mendations for both interim and long-
term resolutions were developed jointly
by the federal agencies and brought to
the attention of the TxDOT on February
14, 2001, through a daylong series of
facilitated discussions at the executive
and technical levels. Next steps for the
federal partners include the formation
of issue-driven, federal/state teams with
TxDOT  to further develop the  recom-
mendations  into  workable solutions.
The overarching objective of this collab-
orative approach is not to create new
formal agreements (MOUs or MOAs),
but to build better working relation-
ships among  the  agencies through
improved communication, coordination,
and resolution.
   For more information, please contact
Dominique Lueckenhoff, EPA Region VI,
at (512)  916-5012.
Texas Pollution Prevention
Partnership Takes Flight
The Texas  Pollution Prevention Part-
nership (TXP3) held a full-day meeting
on November 2, 2000, hosted by Chuck
Gawenis  of the Corpus Christi Army
Depot (CCAD). The twenty TXP3 atten-
dees toured the CCADi facility that per-
forms scheduled maintenance and over-
haul of the Army's Apache, Blackhawk,
and Huey helicopters and several atten-
dees took an aerial tour of the Corpus
Christi area in a Huey helicopter. The
TXP3 is a collaborative initiative of the
Department of Defense (Air Force,
 0 FEDKACS

-------
        :
Huey photo right to left: Chuck Gawenis (CCAD host), Israel Anderson (TXP3 Co-
Chair), Ken Zarker (TNRCC), Col Pat Fink (HQ AETC), Glenda Swierc (TNRCC),
Joyce Stubblefield (EPA Region VI), and Dr. Thorn Rennie (TXP3 Co-Chair).
Army, and Navy installations in Texas),
the Texas Natural Resource Conserva-
tion Commission (TNRCC), EPA Region
VI, Texas Army National Guard, NASA-
Johnson Space Center, and other Civil-
ian Federal Agencies. Its mission is to
promote  pollution prevention as the
standard way of doing.business for fed-
eral facilities by developing and  imple-
menting model  initiatives,  building
trust,  and  producing  measurable
results. The TXP3 boasts numerous suc-
cesses, including reductions  of  nearly
one million pounds of hazardous waste
and savings of over $2.7 million  at fed-
eral facilities in Texas. The TXP3 meet-
ing at CCAD included presentations
and discussions on Army Pollution Pre-
vention efforts,  the DoD Munitions
Issue, EPA Sector Facility Index Project
(SFIP), TNRCC Clean Texas Program,
and the TXP3-sponsored Green Base of
the Future initiative.
   The TXP3 also held a recent meeting
at Goodfellow AFB, San Angelo,  Texas,
on March 6, 2001. Thanks to the efforts
of TXP3 partner Col. Pat Fink (Chief,
Environmental Directorate, HQ Air
Education and Training Command, San
Antonio), the TXP3 members sat in on a
base   Environmental   Compliance
Assessment and Management Program
(ECAMP)  Team  meeting,  toured the
base Joint Service Fire  School  (main
fire training school for Department of
Defense), participated in an Environ-
mental Leadership Course given to the
Goodfellow AFB wing commander and
senior leadership, and held its regular
meeting. The next TXP3 meeting will
be hosted by Joyce  Stubblefield, EPA
Region VI Federal Facilities Coordina-
tor, in Dallas on May 23, 2001. Other P2
Partnerships  in Region  VI are being
invited to attend the meeting. Tentative
plans are for the August 2001 meeting
to be held at Fort Sam  Houston, San
Antonio, Texas.
  For more information, contact TXP3
Co-Chairs Dr. Thorn Rennie (DoD REG
Region 6) at (214) 767-4678 and Israel
Anderson (TNRCC) at (512) 239-5318.
Demonstrating Federal
Leadership in the Western
United States
On Earth Day 2000, a "Statement of
Unity" was  signed by  leaders of the
EPA, GSA, DOE, the National Park Ser-
vice, Navy, and Air Force that created a
"Federal Network for  Sustainability"
(FNS). Why was this collaborative net-
work of Pacific region federal  agencies
created  to  focus  on  sustainability?
Because sustainability is  a concept
about the interconnectedness of the
environment, the  economy,  and social
equity.  Sustainability  creates a long
term approach to environmental protec-
tion and process improvements. It pre-
vents pollution from the start. It calls
for systems  thinking  and leverages
scarce resources. The various  missions
of the federal agencies give expression
to the concept of sustainability through
individual programs and initiatives and
through collective leadership values.
The FNS seeks linkages and  partner-
ships. During its first year, one focus of
the FNS was on using the power of gov-
ernment as consumer and using envi-
ronmental  management  plans  (sys-
tems).   Government     can   use
sustainability  principles as  a frame-
work to manage its own  consumption
and waste  generation  practices. The
FNS hosted  two Green  Power Summit
conferences   and  an  Environmental
Preferable  Purchasing training pro-
gram.
   For more information on the  FNS,
contact Alan Hurt, Navy, at (619) 524-
6253 (Hurt.Alan.C@asw.cnrsw.navy.mil)
or Curtis Framel,  DOE, (206) 553-7841
(curtis.framel@ee.doe.gov).
                                                                                                      FEE9FAOS 7

-------
Anacostia Watershed  Toxics Alliance
 In 1987 the Anacostia Watershed Agree-
 ment was signed by the District of
Columbia, Montgomery   and  Prince
George's Counties, and the State of Mary-
land to collectively dedicate resources to
the restoration of the "most polluted"
watershed in the nation. Since this sign-
ing, a restoration committee was formed
to provide the resources needed to accom-
plish the agreement's mission to evaluate
the presence,  sources,  and impacts of
toxic  contaminants  on the Anacostia
River, and to evaluate and take actions to
enhance the restoration of the watershed.
Since its formation in 1991, the Anacostia
Watershed Restoration Committee has
adopted an action plan which, with the
aid of many informal partners, has made
remarkable progress in addressing the
problems of toxics contamination in the
river sediments and the watershed.
  In March 1999, the Anacostia Water-
shed Toxics Alliance  was  created as a
public-private partnership for the pur-
pose of addressing the toxic sediments in
the  tidal Anacostia. The creation of the
Alliance was based on the determination
that 1) a watershed-wide focus on toxics
and their management was needed in the
Anacostia; 2) a solid scientific foundation
was needed to support further action on
the  issue; and 3) an inclusive, voluntary
public-private  partnership was  the
appropriate vehicle to achieve that focus.
  The Alliance will clean up the Anacos-
tia in three phases:          %
Phase 1: Compilation and  Evaluation of
        Existing Data
Phase 2: New Data Collection and Risk
        Assessment
Phase 3: Implementation of Cleanup and
        Restoration
Several subcommittees were formed to:
collect and evaluate the data, recruit new
members, contract needed restoration
services, evaluate new and innovative
cost-effective  protocols, and conduct a
risk assessment of the effects on human
health and the ecosystem.
   Several members of the AWTA have
worked together to gather and analyze
sampling results from several sites along
the Anacostia and produce a GIS (Geo-
graphic Information System) to visually
demonstrate the effects on human habi-
tats and the ecosystem. This information
will be updated periodically and can be
used by researchers, students, and other
interested parties. Anyone interested in
seeing this  demonstration  and  the
progress made in the restoration process
can visit the Anacostia Watershed Toxics
Alliance at http://www.chesapeakebay.
net/AWTA.
GSA  Public  Building  Service  Establishes
Environmental  Hotline
   The General Services Administration
   (GSA) Public Building Service (PBS)
Environmental  Business  Strategies
Division  established its PBS Environ-
mental Hotline  in  October 2000. The
objective of the new Environmental
Hotline is to help integrate environmen-
The PBS Environmental Hotline is a tool
designed to assist PBS Regional
Environmental Managers with technical
environmental information and services.
tal requirements into day-to-day PBS
business processes and improve overall
environmental performance.  Building
on the successes of the PBS NEPA Hot-
line, PBS will now provide a range of
environmental services  (e.g., environ-
mental remediation, hazardous waste,
asbestos, indoor air quality (IAQ), sus-
tainable design, and recycling) to GSA
employees, contractors, and client agen-
cies.
   The PBS Environmental Hotline is a
tool designed to assist PBS Regional
             Environmental   Man-
             agers  with  technical
             environmental informa-
             tion  and services. For
             many PBS  client agen-
             cies,  the GSA Building
             Manager is the best first
             step to answer environ-
mental  questions and concerns.  GSA
Building Managers can discuss environ-
mental regulations relating to their spe-
cific GSA properties, arrange for  envi-
ronmental   sampling,  and  obtain
technical support from the  regional
Environmental Manager. PBS Regional
Environmental Managers are technical
experts on environmental issues relat-
ing to their properties and can interpret
regional environmental policies.
   Where the client agency environmen-
tal issues are time-sensitive and beyond
GSA in-house expertise or in cases
where no GSA policies exist, the envi-
ronmental issue will be directed to the
PBS Environmental  Hotline  service.
The Hotline is designed to quickly pro-
vide  relevant environmental informa-
tion. It is not a complaint line. The key
to the success of the Environmental Hot-
line is  collaboration between GSA and
the client agency.
   For more information or to offer sug-
gestions for  improving  the  hotline,
please  contact Jerry  Hefner at (202)
501-4774.

-------
Environmental  Management  Reviews
Commence in Region  VII

   Region VII conducted its first Environ-
   mental Management Review (EMR) of
the Hinton, Iowa, facility of the Western
Area Power Administration Upper Great
Plains Region (Western) on January 8-11,
2001. The review was conducted by a
team of EPA and state specialists. West-
ern is  a  division of the  Department of
Energy (DOE) and distributes hydroelec-
tric power generated by other government
agencies  to small co-ops  and municipal
utilities.
   An  EMR evaluates an organization's
environmental program and management
system to determine the extent of the
development and implementation of spe-
cific environmental protection programs
and plans which, if properly managed,
should ensure regulatory  compliance and
progress toward environmental excellence.
In Region VII, federal facilities EMRs are
scheduled through Diana Jackson, Federal
Facilities  Program Manager. The intent of
an EMR  is to  assist federal facilities in
improving environmental management
systems,  not to identify regulatory viola-
tions. Any violations discovered would be
addressed outside the review process using
the EPA self-audit policy.
   The EMR at Western Area Power
Administration focused on management
and internal compliance auditing. Other
areas observed were internal communica-
tions,  documentation,   and  training
related to the  facility's  environmental
management  system. The review team
identified both successes and opportuni-
ties for improvement at the facility. No
violations were observed.
   As an indication of the success of the
region's first EMR, Western Area Power
Administration  bestowed its Gold  Star
Award on the members of the review
team for their contributions knd assis-
tance. William Rice, Region VII Acting
Regional Administrator,  presented  the
awards to the team members on behalf of
the Western officials.
   The EPA field team consisted of Ruben
Meddlers (ARTD/CRIB), Wes Bartley
(ARTD/SWPP), and Clint Sperry (ENSV/
ARCM). Denise Rayborn and Ken White
of the Iowa Department of  Natural
Resources also participated in the review
process, as did two EPA contractors. Joe
Francis, Nebraska Department of Envi-
ronmental Quality, joined the  group for
the opening and closing conferences.
 May 24-25,2001
 Region VI Pollution Prevention Conference
 Dallas, TX
 www.p2.org/events
 August 14-16,2001
 U.S. EPA Federal Facilities Conference and
 DoD Environmental Seminar
 Chicago, IL
 (312) 353-6478 or (630) 910-3213, ext. 224
 GSA PACIFIC RIM
;IjElSlfiN PARTICIPATES
   *      ENVIRONMENTAL
        IGEMENT REVIEW
         BEST*"
         ,'tfF _«   - -i--.*-
         •srJxrJ
 T;be,Genera|;S6rvrces"A3rninistration(6SAJ
 >||cJ|pLpim Region supports natlonaTenvT-™
 rojimental program efforts through its vol-
  ^WVartcigatton in. the EPA Environmen-
  Jjjpnagement Review (EMR) Program.
  ie*G"SA*PuDlic Building Service (PBS) has
   -  «  •  "  , t    a
           g since 1999 on  a  national
  improving Environmental Performance"
          j>bjective of this initiative is to
 integrate environmental considerations into
        'business to improve its environ-
        iajragement program The GSA
        n fle'glbn expected that the EPA
      /5uld,*proyide an objectivVreview of
     .v^qrjrrjejrtal program activities as they
     jtojiitipna! programs. GSA plans to
     e "the EMR results to GSA building
     **   •**
     gers and client agencies occupying
          "*"  •"•""•  -"   -'
    Lspace,
    '*~B]*W.fflv -      « -
       EMjolrpund Rules Letter of Agree-
       "gried by EPA and GSA set the stage
    he"5days of intensive work led by Larry
      : of ,EPA Region IX. This  EMR was
  — *r~~r  7^  *"
  assigned to focus on:
       r^3~B3^  ^ *-
     >r rnalrty of Environmental Programs
       jram Evaluation, Reporting, and
                                                                                      •ective Action^
                                                                                    invironm'ental Planning and Risk
                                                                                    •
                                       feTtie je^view began "on February 8, 2001, at
                                              Regional Office in San Francisco with
                                       wnferviews" of GSA Headquarters and
                                       N|NS^V£ A^-^J^Sfe,-™ ^ ^V  ^ ^ T  m
                                       fe^egional Management Staff. The fieldwork
                                       j^a^ Sfncludeci atjhi Lukeville, Arizona,
                                       |pT3qfder "Station witrT alwalk-through mspec-
                                               '..interviews of GSA management
                                             he"final EMR report is expected from
                                               May 2001, however, the preliminary
                                            ----- is very positive. EPA has docu-
                                          nented that the GSA Pacific  Rim Region
                                        >V«SK»R/V * x*  -
                                        Vhas unique  environmental programs that
                                        Indirectly enhance their environmental per-
                                               '*¥*  -<•*'••' -»•<>.«— —
                                              litact  Rebecca O'Dell at (415) 522-
                                              &&t&f**iz,% *",  f.  *v-'*
                                              ir nnore infornnation.

-------
                                               Workshops  and  Conferences
EPA Region V and DoD to
Provide Free Environmental
Training
EPA and the  Department of Defense
(DoD) will conduct a combined 2001 U.S.
EPA Federal Facilities Conference and
DoD Environmental Seminar in Chicago,
Illinois, on August 14th, 15th, and 16th.
The Federal Facilities Conference portion
will be held on August 14th and the morn-
ing of the 15th and will be directed toward
federal agency  environmental personnel.
The Environmental Seminar portion will
be held on the  afternoon of August 15th
and August 16th and will be intended for
DoD environmental personnel. Attendees
may register for either  or both of the two
training opportunities.
   The purpose of the combined conference
and seminar is to provide an educational
opportunity for those who have responsibil-
ities or concerns  regarding the environ-
mental management of DoD or other fed-
eral facilities. The conference agenda will
consist of topics of importance and interest
to these environmental managers.
   The conference/seminar presentation
media will include presentations, videos,
discussion groups, and booths/exhibits.
Conference participants  will  also be
invited to tour  the EPA Region V labora-
tory.
   For more information, please contact
Lee J. Regner at (312) 353-6478 or Hugh
M. McAlear at (630) 910-3213, ext. 224.
Region VI Pollution
Prevention Conference
The EPA Region VI Pollution Prevention
Roundtable and the National Pollution
Prevention  Roundtable, in  partnership
with federal facilities and local industry
and municipalities, is sponsoring a confer-
ence on May 24 and 25, 2001 at the Fair-
mont  Hotel in  Dallas. Going "Beyond
Compliance Assistance Through Pollu-
tion Prevention" is a proposed theme for
the conference as we strive to demon-
strate how pollution prevention, energy
efficiency, and water conservation can
prevent compliance issues and be eco-
nomically beneficial to facilities.
   For more information contact Michele
Russo  at  (202) 466-P2P2,  michele
russo@compuserve.com, or see www.p2.
org/events.
Feds Unlock the Mysteries
of EMSs

On March 22, 2001, environmental man-
agers of federal agencies completed the
last  workshop in  a series designed to
unlock the mysteries of Environmental
Management Systems (EMSs). The series
of 2-hour workshops conducted since Sep-
tember 2000 has focused on the keys to
planning  and implementing  EMSs. At
each session, 20 to 30 federal representa-
tives from DoD, DOE, and Civilian Fed-
eral  Agencies participated  in hands-on
workshops at EPA Headquarters. Spon-
sored by the  Executive  Order 13148
(Greening the Government through Lead-
ership  in Environmental Management)
EMS Sub-Work Group and supported by
EPA's  Federal  Facilities  Enforcement
Office, the workshops provided basic infor-
mation about EMS requirements, group
exercises, and agency-specific examples.
The  workshops included practical plan-
ning skills in the following areas:

1. Auditing  as a gap analysis and self-
   assessment tool
2. Writing  environmental policy state-
   ments
3. Identifying environmental aspects and
   impacts
4. Setting and maintaining environmen-
   tal objectives and targets
5. Establishing and maintaining emer-
   gency preparedness and response
To further assist federal agencies with
their EMS obligations under E.O. 13148,
the EMS  Sub-Work  Group is  putting
together agency-level self-assessment
tools. These tools, or self-assessment
instruments, will help agencies, facilities,
and installations compare their  existing
management programs with EMS stan-
dards and guidance.
   For further information, contact Sarah
Hart of FFEO, after June 1,2001 at (202)
564-2457 or hart.sarah@epa.gov.
Reducing Your Ecological
Footprint Training

EPA Region VIII Federal Facilities Coor-
dinator Dianne Thiel designed a training
course based on the "footprint" model pre-
sented in the book Our Ecological Foot-
print by Mathis Wackernagel and William
Rees. Ms. Thiel has  conducted the two-
hour course for EPA Region VIH staff, the
Colorado  Department of Public Health
and Environment, and the Department of
Energy Regional Office in Golden, CO.
She plans to conduct the course for other
federal agency personnel.
   Actions we take every day have far-
reaching  impacts  on the  environment.
Americans, because of our high standard
of living and consumer culture,, have
larger environmental impacts than any
other nation,  with Canada and Europe
not far behind. Our Ecological Footprint
was  written to help  us understand the
environmental impact of this lifestyle. An
"ecological footprint"  is the acres  of eco-
logically  productive  land (and water)
needed to supply  the energy, food, and
lumber we use, plus the land needed  to
handle our waste and absorb the carbon
dioxide generated by burning fossil fuels.
   The footprint model measures not just
the resource consumption and pollution
for which we are directly responsible, but
also estimates our share of the pollution
and resources used to make the products
we buy.  For  example, an  automobile
 tO FEDFACS

-------
owner's footprint includes more than just
gas and oil. It includes  the energy and
resources consumed to manufacture the
vehicle and build roads. Ecological foot-
prints are commonly calculated for coun-
tries or regions.  The book and training
provide questions to help estimate indi-
vidual  footprints as well as suggestions
for actions  to reduce footprints, such  as
using mass transit instead of driving.
   For  More Information, please contact
Dianne Thiel at (303) 312-6389.
Region VI NEPA Training
Region VI hosted its second NEPA train-
ing the week of March 19-23 at the Mag.
nolia in Dallas, Texas. The Shipley Group
presented "How to Manage the NEPA
Process and Write Effective NEPA Docu-
ments" to about twenty attendees from
various federal and state agencies includ-
ing DOE, INS, Army,  Air Force, FAA,
TXDOT, USFS, COE, and DOI. The goal
is to offer  informative and  consistent
training to the federal facility community.
The region is working in conjunction with
the Shipley Group to offer various NEPA
workshops both in Dallas and  in  the
states contiguous to Texas. Please contact
Jana Harvill at (214) 665-8369 for more
details.
Regions VI and VIII Join
Forces to Conduct Environ-
mental Justice Training at
DOI Meeting
EPA Regions VI and VIII Environmental
Justice programs joined forces to present
Environmental  Justice (EJ)  training to
Department of the Interior employees at
the annual DOI Conference on the Envi-
ronment  held  March 13-15 in  Albu-
querque, New  Mexico. The  conference,
titled "The Path Before Us: Environmental
Stewardship for the 21st Century," was
hosted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
   As the lead federal agency for Environ-
mental Justice, EPA was invited to present
a training course to conference attendees
on the subject. EPA representatives from
Headquarters also participated in many
other aspects of the conference.
   The Environmental Justice training
course was initially developed by Region
VIII, but has been refined through collab-
oration with several Regions and Head-
quarters. The course aims to provide par-
ticipants with an understanding of EJ
concepts so that they may identify, facili-
tate, and respond to EJ issues more effec-
tively in their organizations. The four-
hour course includes a number of activi-
ties designed to involve participants in
the material.
   "The course was very well received."
said Deldi Reyes, Region VIII EJ trainer.
"Participation was  lively,  and people
really engaged in the material we  pre-
sented.  Most importantly,  I think  they
came away with a better understanding
of environmental justice and how to effec-
tively analyze and address the issues. In
addition, the course  evaluations  were
very positive."
   "This training is really a great tool for
environmental justice," Region VI EJ
Trainer, Mary Wilson,  said. "It gives par-
ticipants an opportunity to examine their
own ideas about what E J is and isn't, and
can provide a solid basis for analyzing
issues surrounding EJ."
   EPA is  currently  developing  an
expanded E J Training,  "EJ 101", for deliv-
ery to a wide range  of audiences.  The
training is being developed through the
EJ Training Collaborative, which is made
up of EPA Regional and Headquarters
representatives, other  federal and state
government  partners,  community-based
organizations and academia. The Train-
ing Collaborative plans to pilot this new
training sometime in fiscal year 2001.
   If you would like additional informa-
tion regarding the EJ pilot  training
development and implementation efforts,
contact Deldi Reyes at (303) 312-6055 or
Sheryl Good at (404) 562-9559.
New Mexico. The course addressed how
to conduct an onsite review of the water
sources, facilities, equipment, operation,
maintenance, and compliance data of a
public water system to evaluate the ade-
quacy of the system, its sources, opera-
tions, and distribution of safe  drinking
water. The course ran three and a half
days, including one full day and  three
half days of classroom instruction and
discussion and two half days of field exer-
cises.
  An interagency agreement was devel-
oped between EPA Region VI (Dallas) and
Forest Service Region III (Albuquerque)
to have the Drinking Water Academy con-
duct Sanitary Survey Training for the
USDA Forest  Service for about thirty
employees. EPA Region VI provided the
instructors and all the course materials
and the Forest Service paid for all the
necessary travel,  per diem, equipment,
training facilities, and the systems to be
used during the field portion of the train-
ing. The training emphasized Non-Com-
munity Water Systems, of which the For-
est  Service has thousands.
  Region VT staff visited four Forest Ser-
vice water systems  in September 2000.
Region VI evaluated the water systems,
met with the Forest Service officials to
debrief them, and sent the Forest Service
a written report based on the evaluation
findings. The results of these evaluations
were used in the Sanitary Survey train-
ing as case studies.
  EPA Region VI is willing to conduct
future training with other federal agen-
cies, however, the agency must be able to
cover the  cost of  the course,  which
includes travel for three instructors for a
week and some minor charges for materi-
als, usually totaling $4,000 - 5,000. Agen-
cies may be able to use the IAG process to
pay the expenses.
  For more information, please contact
Bill Davis of EPA Region VI at (214) 665-
7536.
 EPA Region VI Conducts
 Sanitary Survey Training for
 the USDA Forest Service
 EPA Recion VI  conducted Sanitary Sur-
 vey Training for the USDA Forest Service
 on  April 23-27, 2001 in Albuquerque,
                                                                                                        FEDFA.CS 11

-------
McGregor Cleanup  Team Wins  National  Award
   The cleanup team, for Naval Weapons
   Industrial Reserve Plant (NWIRP) at
McGregor, Texas, has won the Secretary
of the Navy's  Environmental Cleanup
Team Award. Each year the Secretary of
the Navy recognizes  one individual or
team for demonstrating excellence in the
Navy's cleanup program. NWIRP McGre-
gor,  located on  9,700  acres 20  miles
southwest of Waco, Texas, is a closed
Navy facility where  former  industrial
activities  included   manufacturing
weapons  and solid-fuel rocket  propulsion
systems.   The  McGregor Team  was
selected  because  of its  streamlined
approach to cleanup, use of  innovative
technology, and cost savings. In an eight
month period, the Team generated a con-
ceptual design, evaluated several bench
and pilot  scale studies, and implemented
full scale remediation systems,  saving
$6.5  million.  In addition, the City of
McGregor was  given the Community
Economic Development Award by  the
Texas Department of Economic Develop-
ment in recognition of the redevelopment
efforts at the facility.
   The McGregor Team also won  the
Grand Award from the Consulting Engi-
neers of Tennessee in association with the
American Consulting  Engineers Council
for the innovative and low-cost remedia-
tion of perchlorate contaminated ground-
water through an in situ system. Before
closing in 1996, NWIRP McGregor stored,
used, and disposed ammonium perchlo-
rate (AP), an oxidizing agent used in solid
rocket propellant. AP is a salt, very solu-
ble and mobile in water, and may persist
in  the  environment for decades.  AP
affects the thyroid by inhibiting hormone
production.
   In February 1999, the Texas Natural
Resource   Conservation  Commission
(TNRCC) requested the Navy implement
Interim  Stabilization   Measures   to
address migration of AP offsite in excess
of Texas Provisional Drinking Water
Standard of 22 ug/L. Two large raw water
sources for 400,000 people were of con-
cern, and the Navy's response resulted in
several innovative remediation systems
after bench scale studies were conducted.
   The in situ treatment system for the
Propellant Manufacturing Plant consists
of a Permeable Bioreactive Barrier using
three cutoff and collection trenches to
intercept and'treat groundwater before
offsite migration. Each trench used either
compost, granular activated carbon, or
cotton seed/meal as  a carbon source.
Under normal flow conditions, AP was
reduced from 20,000 ppb to 4.0 ppb detec-
tion limits. Since October, 2000, rainfall
over 200% of the normal has overpowered
the system so that residence time is not
sufficient for efficient bioremediation. A
Calgon Ion Reactor has been installed in
a pilot  test mode to polish the water
before discharge
   .Offsite in situ biotreatment on Texas
 A&M property consists  of 200 .borings
 (bioborings) in multiple  lines backfilled
 with cottonseed meal, aggregate, sodium
 acetate,  and AP-reducing microorgan-
 isms. The array of boreholes (15 to 20
 rows of 11 boreholes) were placed along
 the AP plume. Early sampling from the
 new system indicates AP concentrations
 are  trending down, although it is not
 clear whether the reduction  is  from
 degradation or dilution.
   Onsite  surficial  soil  contamination
 contributes to offsite AP  migration after
 storm water runoff. Three soil treatment
 cells are under construction over existing
 soil contamination for in situ treatment.
 The cells are designed to infiltrate carbon
 and nutrient rich water back into the for-
 mation, manage contaminated soil from
 other areas; and provide water storage
 capacity when needed. Also, a pilot phy-
 toremediation study northeast of Area F
 is ongoing where 2000 cottonwood whips
 have been planted. Early sample results
 are  inconclusive.  Normal maturation
 time is three years.
   All ongoing remediation activities are
.Interim  Measures.  No  final  remedies
 have been selected.  ~
   For more information, contact David
 Neleigh at (214) 665- 6785, or Bob Stur-
 divant at (214) 665-7440.
GSA'S STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Continued from page 1

relies on  antiquated  combined storm
water drainage and sewage systems to
carry rainfall to treatment facilities. How-
ever, when as little as 0.27" of rain falls,
the drainage system backs up, resulting
in raw sewage being released into rivers
and tributaries.
   GSA NCR first became involved in
EPA's Federal Agencies Committee of the
Chesapeake Bay Program as a voluntary
member. Because NCR owns and man-
ages numerous facilities in the  Chesa-
peake Bay watershed area it  became
apparent that its inventory could poten-
tially impact the environment. GSA NCR
soon became one of the programs leading
proponents. Additionally, GSA realized
its responsibility to the surrounding com-
munities which prompted GSA to move to
the forefront of this issue.
   GSA NCR developed a comprehensive
region-wide  stormwater management
plan in  2000, compiling best manage-
ment practices and stormwater pollution
prevention measures for all GSA facilities
within the National Capital Region.
   This program is still in its infancy, it is
too early to assess the results in terms of
 reduced runoff and pollution. However,
 GSA NCR  believes that, when  fully
 implemented and accepted in the organi-
 zational  culture, the  new region-wide
 stormwater  management plan will con-
 tribute significantly to overall improve-
 ment  in  the water  quality of  local
 streams, rivers, and the Chesapeake Bay.
 Furthermore, the program is designed to
 be easily  adapted and  implemented
 within other GSA regions nation-wide.
   Contact Kelly Holland at  (202) 708-
 5255 for further information on this ini-
 tiative.
 12 FEDFACS

-------
 PARTNERING AT NAS
 PATUXENT RIVER
 Continued from page 1

 miles south of .the NAS. Over 25 miles of
 shoreline, ranging from sandy beaches to
 tidal marshes,  line three sides of the
 installation.  Bordered by the Patuxent
 River and Chesapeake Bay, the NAS has
 three seaplane basins,  six' man-made
 freshwater ponds, and three tidal creeks.
    In August 1998, the NAS Installation
 Restoration  (IR) Program began formal
 partnering. The partnering meetings are
 intended to open the communication
 channels and avoid disputes, outline a
 mutual commitment on how  to interact,
 and form a relationship of teamwork,
. cooperation, and good faith performance.
 Currently, the team includes  representa-
 tives from the activity's IR program, Engi-
 neering Field Activity Chesapeake (EFA
 CHES), Maryland Department of the
 Environment, and the U.S. EPA. Contrac-
 tor involvement consists of key represen-
 tatives from the Navy's Comprehensive
 Long-term  Environmental Action Navy
 (CLEAN)  and  RAG (Remedial Action
                                       Photograph of the Bohneyard fuel tanker parking lot in December 2000.
                                        would save money. Thus, the Bohneyard
                                        was an ideal reuse candidate. Reuse of
                                        the  CERCLA site also met the NAS's
                                        long-term operational needs by centraliz-
                                        ing fuel tanker truck parking next to fuel
                                        storage.
                                          As  a  result,  the  partnering  team
                                        decided  to  accelerate  the  CERCLA
                                        process. A series of expedited evaluations
                                                 and onboard  reviews  were
                                                 implemented  to   accelerate
                                                 schedules for the  proposed
                                                 plan, record of decision (ROD),
                                                 remedial design, and remedial
                   .      „   ,  .     .     .  .     action. Timing the construc-
commitment on how to interact, and  form tion scheduie and the
 The partnering meetings are intended to
 open the communication channels and
 avoid disputes, outline a mutual
                       -
  a relationship of teamwork, cooperation, availability was critical to the
  and good faith performance.
 Contractor) contracts, CH2M Hill and IT
 Corporation. Meetings  are held once a
 month. This partnership results in more
 cost-effective actions, efficient use of dol-
 lars spent, and an improved  quality of
 product.
    The NAS  Supply Department Fuels
 Division approached the partnering team
 and inquired about reusing an existing
 CERCLA Site (Bohneyard or Site 6) for an
 aircraft fuel tanker parking lot. At the
 time, the fuel tanker parking  areas and
 the fuel farm were not  centrally located.
 The' operations were  about two  miles
 apart. Site 6 is located next to the fuel
 farm and adjacent to the taxiways and
 runway. Moving and consolidating fuel
 operations in one area made  sense and
                                                  plan's  success.   The  team
                                                  decided to separate the site
                                                  into two operable units (OUs).
                                        This also aided  in  streamlining the
                                        process. The feasibility study (FS) evalu-
                                        ated several options including a cover. The
                                        OU-2 comprises  groundwater and down-
                                        stream surface water and sediment, and is
                                        currently under investigation.
                                          The partnering team coordinated with
                                        the  EPA biological technical assistance
                                        team  (BTAG  comprised of EPA, U.S.
                                        FWS,  and NOAA members). Based  on
                                        future reuse, the remedial investigation
                                        (RI) concluded that because the ecological
                                        habitat would be limited following con-
                                        struction and that the cover would elimi-
                                        nate the exposure pathway_ for ecological
                                        receptors, the  ecological risk assessment
                                        was complete. The BTAG  agreed with
                                        this conclusion. A gravel layer would be
added as an additional barrier between
the contaminated soil and the portions of
the site that did not contain concrete.
   In support of the NAS's mission, the
alternative selected in the ROD involved
constructing a concrete parking lot over
about one-half of Site 6 (3 acres). A soil
cover over a gravel layer was placed over
the remaining area of the site.  The ROD
also  included  a remedy for Site 6A, an
asphalt cover.  This area is currently used
for storage/staging  of equipment.  The
ROD selected an asphalt cover to facilitate
continued use  as a storage facility. Site 6A
is  in the  design phase. Institutional  con-
trols will consist of access restrictions to
prevent trespassing, land use controls to
restrict site development and access to
groundwater,  and monitoring to  assess
whether contaminants are migrating into
the  environment.  The  selected  remedy
achieves  the goal  of reusing a CERCLA
site while protecting human health and
the environment.
   In order to  meet the station's schedule,
the  conceptual design was  completed
while the RI  and  FS were ongoing.  The
ROD was signed  on 9/29/99.  The ROD
was  accepted  on 10/12/99, and construc-
tion  began on 10/26/99. Funding for the
project   was  critically  coordinated.
Defense Fuels, Defense Base Operating,
and  Navy  Environmental Restoration
Account funds paid for the construction.
Despite  the  possible  pitfalls and  con-
straints,  construction began on schedule.
The Bohneyard was ready for reuse in the
Spring of 2000. .
                                                                                                        FEOFAOS 13

-------
Sector Facility  Indexing  Project - Expansion
to Federal  Facilities
 In response to widespread stakeholder
 interest, EPA is scheduled to announce
in May the expansion of the Sector Facil-
ity Indexing Project (SFJP) to include a
subset of federal facilities. This expansion
means that communities can obtain
important compliance and  inspection
information about local federal facilities,
and  the  facilities themselves will  be
encouraged to become more accountable.
   As a community-right-to-know project,
This expansion means that communities can
obtain important compliance and inspection
information about local federal facilities, and
the facilities themselves will be encouraged
to become more accountable.
SFIP is a computerized database of envi-
ronmental information that is intended to
make facility-level compliance data read-
ily available to the public in one location
on the internet. SFIP includes such infor-
mation as a  facility's compliance and
enforcement history, information on pol-
lutant releases  and spills, and  demo-
graphics of the surrounding community.
All of this information is already publicly
available.  This  project  combines data
from several existing EPA databases in
order to allow easier access and review.
The  new  federal facility subset will
include all federal facilities which  are
considered to be major facilities  in at
least two of the three following programs:
the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, or
the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. This new subset will join the approx-
imately 650 facilities in five industry sec-
tors  - pulp manufacturing,  petroleum
                refining, automobile
                assembly,   iron  and
                steel,  and  primary
                smelting and refining
                of nonferrous metals -
                that  initially  com-
                prised SFIP.
                 When EPA launched
                the   SFIP   website
(www.epa.gov/oeca/sfi)  in May 1998, we
committed to monitor  and evaluate  the
progress of this project. User groups both
inside and outside the  Agency were con-
sulted in our evaluation and the results
were positive. Extensively accessed by a
variety of  users, the SFIP website has
been found to be understandable and
easy to navigate, resulting in numerous
analyses to be undertaken that  have
used SFIP data. Users have commented
that SFIP has met the challenge of sum-
marizing complex compliance and pollu-
tant release information from multiple
statutory programs. Users  have also
stated that the project serves as an incen-
tive to achieve and maintain compliance
while helping to improve quality in the
underlying databases.
   With this expansion, we have contin-
ued to ensure that we maintain the pub-
lic's confidence in the  integrity of  the
data. Once again regions, states, and the
affected facilities were given the opportu-
nity to review the data and resolve any
data quality issues through a coordinated
EPA/state effort prior to release.
   When the expansion is completed, we
encourage you to use this information
and provide  us with comments by con-
tacting Rob Lischinsky by phone at (202)
564-2628, by e-mail at  lischinsky.
robert@epa.gov, or by mail at U.S. EPA,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (mail-
code 2223AX Washington, DC 20460.
Together we can work toward ensuring
that everyone has easy access to impor-
tant information relevant to the protec-
tion  of our  health and environment.
Again, the website containing the initial
five sectors  is currently available at
www.epa.gov/oeca/sfi.
 Region III Stresses Affirmative Procurement
  Issued in 1998, Executive Order 13101,
  "Greening the Government Through
Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal
Acquisition," was intended to strengthen
the federal governments commitment to
recycling and buying recycled content and
environmentally preferable products. The
executive order, in conjunction with the
requirements of RCRA 6002 that directs
federal purchasing decisions for recycled
products, provides  the  baseline for the
federal government's affirmative procure-
ment policy. RCRA 6002 requires  each
procuring agency to procure items "com-
posed of the highest percentage of recov-
ered materials practicable." After E.O.
13101 was issued, the Federal Acquisi-
tion Regulation (FAR) was amended to
implement policies to assist government
agencies in carrying out the requirements
of the Executive Order.
   EPA inspectors contacted 74 facilities
in 2000 about their affirmative procure-
ment procedures. In 2001, RCRA pro-
gram personnel will contact an  addi-
tional 30 to 40 federal facilities in Region
HI to focus attention on RCRA 6002 and
affirmative procurement requirements.
Federal agencies have responded in sup-
port  of  affirmative procurement. For
example, the Department of Defense
(DoD) through a 5-year, multi-million dol-
lar contract for maintenance and repair
of parking lots, has reused 3,328 tons of
recycled asphalt and recycled 4,380 tons
of asphalt.
  For more information on E.O.  13101,
consult the Office of the Federal Environ-
mental Executive's web page at www.ofee.
gov/index.html.  Guidelines for procure-
ment along with products and specifica-
tions can be found at www.epa.gov/cpg/ or
http://pub.fss.gsa.gov/environ/recycled-
prod.cfin.
 14 FEDFACS

-------
EPA's  Federal  Facility  Program Managers
£ach EPA Region has a designated Federal Facilities Program
tManager (FFPM), who, in conjunction with other EPA Regional
staff, is responsible for coordinating the implementation of EPA's
federal facilities policies and programs at the regional level. They
serve as the primary regional point of contact for facility environ-
mental managers.  FFEO works closely  with  Regional FFPMs.
                      Their responsibilities include giving program assistance and train-
                      ing for federal facilities; informing federal facilities about current
                      environmental issues  and developments; managing, tracking,
                      overseeing, and planning compliance activities; encouraging pol-
                      lution prevention; and coordinating with the region's media pro-
                      gram staff to implement federal facilities enforcement programs.
  FEDERAL FACILITIES PROGRAM MANAGERS
^ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
^HEADQUARTERS
* *•" Greg Snyder, Director
'r  Planning, Prevention, & Compliance Staff
f':\1S. EPA Headquarters (2261 A)
»t* Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
 _ :*1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
"•'.Washington, DC 20460
f"  E-mail: snyder.greg@epa.gbv
i" Phone: 202-564-4271
;„! Fax: 202-501-0069    >'

r REGION I
 '.'AnneFenn
;i',U.S". EPA Regionl^            "   <
   "Office of .Environmental Stewardship v
yK1 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Majl: SPP
'"Boston/MA02114-2023   ,  "
ii-E-fnail: fenn.anne@epa.gov "  -'
ikPhpae.:617:918-1805
L"Fax: 617-918-1810
   fEGION II
•  ' Kathleen Malone
 *, Alt John Gorman
7-U.S. EPA Region It
^'Compliance Assistance Section
;" 290 Broadway, 21 stFI.
'€ New York, NY 1"OOQ7-1866
  7 Ermail: malone.kathleert @epa.gov
.  Phone: 212-637-4083 (Malone)
 -'- E-mail: gorman.john@epa.gov
-  Phone: 212-637-4008(Gorman)
  1 Fax:212-637-4086           '

   REGION  III
!'" Bill Argute
;-- US. EPA Region 111
*i- Office of Environmental Programs
  -1650 Arch Street'
•_ Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
f 4E-mail: arguto.willam@epa.gov
j '"Phone; 215-814-3367
?t'Fax: 215-814-2783
 REGION IV                   ;
-Stacy Gent-Howard   "
-US. EPA Region IV,    ,  .
 Env. Accountability Division, FecieraLfecilities
 61 Forsyth St., SW                   •
 Atlanta, GA 30303-8960  ,       . "   "
 E-mail: howafd.stacy@epa.gov   - '    <
 Phone:404-562-9633, '        "   , •"• ,
 Fax;404-562-959a

 REGION V
 LeeJ, Regner
 U.S. EPA Region V
 Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assurance
 77 West Jackson Blvd    r   •
 Chicago, 1160604:3507
 E-mail: regner.iee@epa.gov
 Phone: 312-353-6478   „,
 Fax:312-353-5374    ,         ;    '

 REGION VI
 Joyce F. Stubblefield
 U.S. EPA Region VI  •
 Compliance Assurance's Enforcement Division
 1445 Ross Avenu,e
' Dallas, IX 75202
 E-mail: stubblefield.Joyce@epa.gov
 Phone:214-665-6430
 Fax:214-665-7446         -   x  -

 REGION VII
 piana Jackson
 Us. SPAJtegion  VII
 Enforcement Coordination Office,
 901 North 5th Street     ,  "
 Kansas City, KS 66101
 E-mail: jackson.diana@epa.gbv       '
 Phone:913-551-7744  "   '   "   ,
 Fax: 913/551-9744-
 REGION VIII          °
 Dianne Thiel,
 Connally-Mears
 aS.",EPABegionVIII_
 Office ot Partnerships and Regional Assistance,
 8P-P3T ."
- 99918th Street
 Denver, CO 80202-2466  '
 E-mail: thiel.dianhe@epa.gov
'Phone: 303-312-6389.(Thiel)
 Fax: 303-312-6044 '   , '
. E-mail: mears.cbnnally@epa.gov
 Phone: 303-312-6217 (Wears)
 Fax: 303-312-6409

 REGION IX
-Sara Segal
 Larry Woods
 U.S. EPA Region IX  -     '   '-   .
 Cross-Medja Division
 75 Hawthorne St, CMD-2 -
 San Francisco, CA 94105      •   .
 E-mail: segal.sara@epa.goy;
 PhpnK 415-744-1569 (Segal)
 E-mail: woods.Iarry@epa.gov
 Phone: 415-744-1580 (Woods) -  .
 Fax: 415-744-1598

 REGION X
" Michele Wright
 U.S. EPA Region X-
 "Office of Enforcement & Compliance (OEM 64)
 1200 6th Avenue
 Seattle, WA 98101 ,
 E-mail: Wright michele @epa.gov
 Phone: 206-553-1747
 Fax:206-553-7176     -   -•
                                                                                                               FEDFACS 15

-------
United States Environmental
Protection Agency (2261A)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Service Requested
    1IST OF ACRONYMS    l^Z.^',
    LASVTA.    Anacpstia Watershed 'Ibxics Alliance
    BEP     Bureau of Engraving & Printing
    jBIA    :: Bureau of Indian Affairs	
    CERCLA  Comprehensive Environmental Response,
    j-";     -;,	Compensation, and Liability Act
    -CFA     Civilian Federal Agency
    DoD     Department of Defense
    DDE     Department of Energy
    -DOI     Department of the Interior
    DOJ     Department of Justice
    1)OT     Department of Transportation
    EJ       Environmental Justice
    ; EPCRA   Emergency Planning and Community RigmVto-Know Act
    J2MR     Environmental Management Review
    EMS     Environmental Management System
   -FFEO    Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
   ,FHWA    Federal Highway Administration
    -FUDS    Formerly Used Defense Sites
 GIS      Geographic Information System
 GSA     General Services Administration
 LANL    Los Alamos National Laboratory
 MDE     Maryland Department of the Environment
 NAS     Naval Air Station
 NASA    National Aeronautics and Space Administration
 NEPA    National Environmental Policy Act
 NMED    New Mexico Environment Department
 NPL     National Priorities List
 OU       Operable Unit
 P2       Pollution Prevention
 FOB     PolychlorinatedBiphenyl
 RCRA    Resource Conservation, and Recovery Act
 RKFS     Remedial Investigation/Peasibfliiy Study
 ROD     Record of Decision
 TNRCC   lexas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
 TXP3     lexas Pollution Prevention Partnership
• USAGE   U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
 USDA    U.S. Department of Agriculture
 UST     Underground Storage Tank

-------