*"u*v!",
&,* -M
*x x
EPA
/5t^^vfe^>^:Jr, .ff\
'l
;-*;,"
4. ^
j -> "j; , 4.*XJ*' f *» i* JE
M1*!**.* ,T*^* * . . «t^4^" '-*
Planning Our Third Decade
v
«'****
F ^W^W' '
.'C '-'.J***-1
V
.^1 ^
,*%%&*;&* .&*
jc .-».;- - iT% * f1*
f" V-^§»:^>^'^S
L,*-r ./.* A.' ^c#*S3«iJ, " ai, '- **. -
'" » y J» > ' t. !»"»V' " *V*5 *« T
- -, . ,\--~ ^- i?c--Tt <- vi*;, ,U
," , . ^'lf- :';;^tj^l-^t, v,4^M-r
"
"f ftft » * 1 T> l,..,-l^r"t- a > fc .1^ J^jg
w * * f f% J^ «, J-C" *
/>':%i«k^
-:-'' "**« ^ 5«J:;/
t ll
. V'-^V^'jfMSjfjS^fit^gjmt^
- - * A^r *&'. "*. . s. " ,*j^-.*P>1Pf5' "' ^v,,.?Swnr_^»ct
,
, s4it* >«»i" , fftt
'
i*?** '.^j,.-^ -; ^-^jaaf'^S
New England
Regional Office
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
-------
-------
7~^^8B$5E7»3*--'r^'%
'.. ": \:,V " '
'£* O'SJjfe; -*':& f X,',-^V.'f*---"
-".^w^fiPgf^ /«>^/s 'r,'"?./ ^--v*t"'
' " _ "* ^ **" t . . * % -nt ^ " * *
m*f; .'H-'T'-S'"^
'---
.- .IVr*
Planning Our Third Decade
*,v
s^
--*' , ; r--- %y§fv- -; > ?;"
.,,,.,,:\^;>^-'v^%.:^.:,,r,>:
.-..».- -r,. - ;-,rjs^^«t,v.-.".--
"
^fe';*-i4f*'-\ i.utf
EPA
New England
Regional Office
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
1991
-------
-------
EPA
New England
Regional Office
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
199Z
-------
CREDITS
EDITORS: Deborah Johnson
Alice Kaufman
lorn Skinner
CONTRIBUTING Steven Ells
WRITERS: DwightPeavey
Cynthia Green
Trish Garrigan
Mark Mahoney
Susan Studlien
Sam Silverman
Andy Lauterback
Amelia Welt-Katzen
Joshua Secunda
Alice Fitzgerald
Laurel Seneca
DESIGN AND Resolution Graphics,
TYPOGRAPHY: Boston, Massachusetts
COVER Compass Grass, Crane's Beach,
PHOTOGRAPH: Ipswich, Massachusetts
©1991 Stephen Bastide
% Printed on recycled paper.
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
A Message from the Regional Administrator _ 1
A Team Approach to
Managing Environmental Resources 2
The 33/50 Program:
Forging an Alliance for Pollution Prevention __4
Trash: Increasing Personal
Awareness and Recycling Initiatives __J?
The Recovery of the Merrimack River:
A Holistic Approach to Water Resource Management ____£
The Clean Air Act _ _8
Environmental Review:
Planning for the Future of New England 9
Enforcement: The Cornerstone of
Environmental Management 10
Environmental Benefits from Enforcement 12
First Superfund Cleanup in New England Completed
Multi-Media Enforcement: A Case Study 15
THE STATE PERSPECTIVE
EPA and the States _j£
Connecticut ._JZ
Maine Jg
Massachusetts 19
New Hampshire 20
Rhode Island _^21
Vermont 22
Financial Overview and Employment Statistics 23
-------
-------
INTRODUCTION
A Message from the
Regional Administrator
The Environmental Protection Agency is now entering its third decade of managing and
protecting the nation's environmental resources. Here in New England, we are espe-
cially proud of local, state, and federal efforts to safeguard public health through sound
environmental policies.
The 1990s offer many environmental opportunities for us
all. At EPA Region I, we are aware that "end-of-pipe" solutions are
not enough to solve the environmental challenges of the decade,
and are working on environmental management systems that
encourage ingenuity to prevent the release of hazardous pollu-
tants. We are turning to market-based incentives, non-prescrip-
tive approaches, and competitiveness not only to protect the
environment, but to stimulate the economy and save energy. We
have initiated a strategic planning process within our regional
office to help us develop new approaches and to focus more on
cooperative relationships that will extend our efforts further.
At the same time, we are witnessing an invigorated envi-
ronmental ethic in which businesses, communities, and citizens
can choose to both save money and reduce pollution, be it from
energy efficient lighting systems or product manufacturing and
use. We are encouraged by these new approaches to difficult
problems and will continue to actively support them. We recog-
nize, however, that regulatory and enforcement activities continue
to provide EPA with the necessary tools to protect public health and the environment.
We invite you to join us in "Planning Our Third Decade," and hope you enjoy reading
about the many new programs and activities in which we are involved. Your input to and
active participation with EPA are critical to our success. We look forward to hearing
from you.
PHOTO: JOHN KENNARD
iLvCui
(/ Julie Belaga ()
^^ Regional Administrator
-------
INTRODUCTION
PHOTO: JOHN KENNARD
A Team Approach to
Managing Environmental Resources
T' he Environmental Protection Agency is at a crossroad. Since its inception in 1970, EPA
has grown to reflect new priorities established by Congress and each successive admin-
istration. Over those twenty years, we have achieved significant successes in improving the
quality of our environment. EPA's approach has generally been regulatory in nature, resulting
in activities that have been
successful in meeting past
needs.
But given the enor-
mity of our mandate
protecting the environment
and human health this
regulatory focus alone is
now not enough to address
the demands we face, meet
the expectations of the pub-
lic we serve, or utilize fully
the tremendous profession-
al resources of the Region I
staff. To build on our suc-
cesses to date and to respond
to the environmental chal-
lenges of this decade and the 21st century, EPA must plan for the future and explore new
ways to ensure that our resources and our health are protected.
In To Kill a Mockingbird, Atticus Finch is constantly exhorting his daughter Scout to
look at events from another person's shoes, to gain a new perspective. As the EPA Leader-
ship Team for Region I, we have had to take time out from our normal workloads to follow
Atticus's advice. We have expended considerable energy in setting aside our individual pro-
gram needs to determine the best way to work toward overall agency goals. We have
carefully considered the many issues that threaten the environment and public health, and
have utilized the best available research in developing strategies to minimize their impacts.
We have conducted and made use of a study entitled Unfinished Business in New England:
A Comparative Assessment of Environmental Problems (December, 1988) to examine future
environmental risks to New England's ecology, public health, and social welfare. We have
also considered the secondary impacts our agency has on state and local governments, on
businesses and hospitals, and on the general public. A result of our efforts has been a strate-
gic planning process to guide EPA Region I through this decade and beyond.
-------
A TEAM APPROACH
Just as one would not set out to hike the Appalachian Trail without a destination, a
map, and a list of tools necessary to hike the trail, so, too, must EPA in New England chart
its course for the next decade with the same care and detail. This strategic planning proc-
ess, which we began well over a year ago, has enabled us to pinpoint our destination, map
out the changes we will need to make to reach our goal, and fully appreciate the resources
required for this task.
Our vision of a New England in which the environment is not threatened, where the
economy and the environment are compatible, and where all people share a commitment and
concern to prevent pollution is a goal toward which EPA Region I has been striving for over
20 years. We have come a significant distance already. EPA must continually support and
enhance its regulatory, testing, analysis, and enforcement functions to continue the journey.
By coordinating our regulatory and technical assistance efforts, we can make full use of
existing programs to maximize resource protection. We intend to emphasize those activities
that offer the best opportunities to reduce risk to public health and ecosystems.
Part of this effort requires new approaches. For example, we have made a commit-
ment to examine environmental issues comprehensively through our air, water, waste
management, field monitoring, and legal divisions, rather than the more traditional approach
of addressing single environmental problems through only one program. This cross-media
emphasis on enforcement, regulation, and pollution prevention relies heavily on scientific
research; on accurate risk assessments; on the determination and professionalism of the
EPA staff; and on constant communication within EPA and with other federal, state, and
local agencies. It also forces us to fully recognize our reliance on other government agencies,
private entities, and the general public to ensure that our groundwater, our wildlife, our wet-
lands and waterways, and our air are protected.
Incorporating cross-media strategies into our principal activities is a critical step in
the future success of EPA. It is a common-sense approach to complex problems. But public
knowledge of the intricate relationship between our society and the environment, and an
understanding of how difficult it is to clean the environment once polluted, are also key fac-
tors in our success as an agency. As we plan a long-term strategy that will reduce pollutants
and improve environmental quality, EPA must also take the time to explain what we are
doing and why. To do so is not only sound public policy; it is an obligation we have in order to
carry out our mission.
While the task before us is considerable, some of the activities in which we have been
involved bear noting, and are indicative of the new directions we are exploring. We hope you
will take the time to read the following articles, and that you find them both stimulating and
informative.
The Leadership Team (pictured at left) is composed of:
(back row) Merrill Hohman, Director of the Waste Management Division; Stephen Ells, Director of
the Office of Environmental Review; Tom Skinner, Director of the Office of External Programs;
Harley Laing, Regional Counsel; James Younger, Director of the Office of Civil Rights and Urban Affairs;
(middle row) Patricia Meaney, Assistant Regional Administrator for Planning and Management;
David Fierra, Director of the Water Management Division; Edward Conley, Director of the
Environmental Services Division; Linda Murphy, Director of the Air, Pesticides, and Toxics
Management Division;
(front row) Paul Keough, Deputy Regional Administrator; Julie Belaga, Regional Administrator.
Our vision of a New
England in which the
environment is not
threatened, where the
economy and the
environment are
compatible, and where
all people share a
commitment and concern
to prevent pollution is a
goal toward which EPA
Region I has been striving
for over 20 years.
-------
INITIATIVES
PHOTO: LE5TUDIOLAPORTE
The 33/50 Program:
Forging an Alliance for Pollution Prevention
As soon as EPA required companies to file forms detailing the types of chemicals that
they were routinely (and legally) emitting into the environment, the results were eye-
opening. The data, stored in the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), revealed very large
quantities of toxic chemicals being released to the air, water, and soil. The largest portion
(39 percent) were emitted directly to the air as
fugitive or stack releases.
With this startling data, EPA Adminis-
trator William K. Reilly convened an air toxics
roundtable with nine major chemical manufac-
turers, whose 40 facilities in 14 states were
emitting almost 10 million pounds of six chemi-
cals of concern. That meeting resulted in a
voluntary reduction by these companies of toxic
air emissions by 83 percent.
So successful was this first endeavor
that EPA developed a large-scale national
industrial toxics program, called 33/50, with
aggressive reduction goals. At the core of this
pollution prevention program is the reduction of
the release and off-site transfer of 17 TRI-listed chemicals: 33 percent by 1992, and 50 per-
cent by 1995. Leaving the "how" to the corporation, be it through substituting a less toxic
chemical for one currently used, or changing a process entirely, companies are finding that
they can save money and time by avoiding the regulatory approach to environmental
protection.
"Reducing Toxic Risks Through Voluntary Action" (a 33/50 progress report) docu-
ments more than 300 commitments by U.S. corporations to reduce over 390 million pounds
of toxics from our waste streams by 1995. In New England, EPA is targeting 554 companies,
with 1,100 facilities using the 17 target chemicals, for the 33/50 program. Companies such
as the Eraser Paper Company of Madawaska, Maine (pictured above), have accepted this
challenge.
The voluntary, flexible approach to this pollution prevention initiative is a challenge
which industry appears to prefer to the traditional command-and-control approach. The
33/50 Program may be the new way for doing environmental business in the future, present-
ing a win-win situation for everyone involved. Industry's commitment to reducing pollution is
a huge step forward in the "greening" of their image and our planet.
-------
INITIATIVES
Trash: Increasing Personal
Awareness and Recycling Initiatives
We as Americans, in our homes, produce between four and five pounds of garbage each
day: that's 180 million tons of garbage every year. As Russell Baker of the New York
Times said, garbage is the principal product in the United States, not a fact we should feel
proud of. As consumers, the decisions we make about what products we buy and how we
manage our trash can play a leading role in shaping our future. Here in New England, we are
acutely aware of the lack of space to dispose of garbage in landfills. The amount of garbage
that needs to be disposed of has to decrease, and municipal governments (usually responsi-
ble for developing garbage disposal strategies) now factor in source reduction as part of a
strategy that typically includes landfilling, incineration, and recycling.
Consumers, armed with heightened awareness and economic incentives, are playing
a much more central role in reducing garbage by choosing products that are not excessively
packaged or packaged in recyclable materials. Some cities have adopted unit pricing, where a
fee is charged by the bag or barrel, or by weight, for trash collected, thereby encouraging
reductions in the waste stream. One city has seen the average number of barrels collected
from a family each week drop from three to one and a half.
But recycling cannot flourish without markets to process and produce a salable com-
modity. With that in mind, EPA is studying markets for residential mixed waste paper,
which makes up 15-25 percent of household garbage; plastics,
which make up seven percent of household garbage; and office
printing and writing papers.
The final link for successful recycling is the procurement
of recycled materials. EPA has written procurement guidelines
for retread tires, reused oil, insulation, paper, and cement, that
require federal procurement officials to procure products with
recycled content when they are making a purchase over $10,000.
Some states have instituted similar policies.
Recycling is an effective pollution reduction strategy that
has significantly raised consumer awareness. In response, the
Federal Trade Commission and EPA ensure that labeling claims
are not made fraudulently to mislead the consumer. To help con-
sumers, EPA has proposed definitions for the terms recycling and
recyclable for product labeling purposes.
In the end, the responsibility rests with all of us to reduce the amount of garbage that
we create. With each of us being careful about what we buy, consume, and ultimately throw
away, we will be successful in meeting the nation's recycling goals and in reducing the amount
of garbage that we produce each day.
Recycling is an effective
pollution reduction
strategy that has
significantly raised
consumer awareness.
PHOTO: DEBORAH JOHNSON
-------
INITIATIVES
PHOTO: LOWELL NATIONAL
HERITAGE PARK
The Recovery of the
Merrimack River: A Holistic Approach to
Water Resource Management
Just a decade ago, the Merrimack River, which flows for 116 miles from its headwaters in
the White Mountains of New Hampshire to the Atlantic Ocean at Newburyport, Massa-
chusetts, was called one of the ten most polluted rivers in America. The river fell victim to
numerous competing demands for its resources over a period that spanned more than 100
years of use. Mills lined its banks, shipbuilding flourished, its powerful force was harnessed
to power machines, and the river was important for shipping. River historians credit the
Merrimack with bringing the Industrial Revolution to much of New England.
The Merrimack provides drinking water to more than 300,000 people in Nashua and
Merrimack, New Hampshire, and Lowell, Lawrence, Methuen, Andover, Dracut, and
Tewksbury, Massachusetts. The river provides water for industry, commercial develop-
ment, and agriculture. Even ski resorts draw river water for winter snowmaking. The river
is the site of a major anadromous fish restoration project and the Merrimack River Trails pro-
ject a joint effort by the National Park Service, Appalachian Mountain Club, and the
Merrimack River Watershed Association.
Recreational use of the river has increased as the water quality has improved. It is
recognized and is being developed for its cul-
tural and historic impacts on the industrial
development of this area of the country as its
mill sites are being renovated as heritage parks.
But unless we manage competing inter-
ests of the river today, we face once again a
cycle of gradual decline. Threatened by
stormwater discharges and discharges from
combined sewers, accumulation of toxic pollu-
tants, point and nonpoint source pollution, and
continued development pressures, the river
and its watershed are the focus of a multi-media
research and planning project at EPA.
In 1988 EPA, the States of New Hamp-
shire and Massachusetts, and the New England
Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission
began what is called the Merrimack River Initiative. The initiative allows us to step back and
examine the watershed, not as a collection of discharge permits or construction grants, but
as a single ecological system. The only way to address the multifaceted uses of the river is
6
-------
THE RECOVERY OF THE MERRIMACK RIVER
through a resource-based approach that seeks to balance the demands on the resource while
restoring and maintaining the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of the river and its
watershed. To effectively manage this vast river system will take a firm scientific under-
standing of the resource, its uses, and threats to it. But just as important will be establishing
the coordinated network of agencies, organizations, and public interest groups that each play
a significant role in watershed management and river protection.
A strategic plan for the Merrimack includes detailed scientific analysis of the river
system, spanning the breadth of EPA's environmental regulatory mandates. Coordinating
research and planning efforts under the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and waste manage-
ment laws together provides engineers, planners, and scientists with a comprehensive
picture of present and potential environmental threats.
Following baseline studies, river planners rely on environmental indicators such as
water quality, flow maintenance, biodiversity, and results from critical habitat and pollutant
loading analysis as measures of success and as a gauge of the river's well-being. Ambitious
goals have been set for the next four years of the Merrimack River Initiative: 30 percent
reduction in pollutant load; 80 percent of watershed communities to have water supply and
water quality protection measures in place; and a comprehensive watershed management
plan written.
One thing is clear. To protect a resource that spans the New England landscape for
more than 5,000 square miles takes a cooperative effort of scientists, planners, and citizens.
We've witnessed the recovery of this river network and now stand poised to influence its
future.
The only way to address
the multifaceted uses of
the river is through a
resource-based approach
that seeks to balance the
demands on the resource
while restoring and
maintaining the physical,
chemical, and biological
integrity of the river
and its watershed.
PHOTO: FRANK MclNTYRE
-------
INITIATIVES
The Clean Air Act
The new law will be
an effective tool in the
process of ensuring
the quality of our
air through
the next century.
PHOTO: ©JERRY HOWARD
POSITIVE IMAGES
One of the most significant pieces of environmental legislation signed into law last year
was the updating and strengthening of the Clean Air Act of 1977 the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990. This legislation will play a key role in helping to mitigate major air pol-
lution problems in New England as well as the rest of the United States.
The new Clean Air Act contains seven titles, addressing issues from individual car
emissions to controls affecting small businesses and air pollution from smokestacks. Of par-
ticular interest to New England is the acid rain portion of the law. For years, the transport of
pollutants into New England from outlying areas has caused damage to our lakes, streams,
and forests. Under the new law, major reductions in sulfur dioxide, a prime component of acid
rain, will take place at power plants in the Midwest as well as at approximately 15 power
plants in Region I.
Tough revisions for regulation of ground-level ozone (smog) and carbon monoxide will
mean cleaner air throughout the region. One section of this legislation focuses on areas that
do not meet EPA's ground-level ozone standards, and classifies them as marginal, moderate,
serious, severe, or extreme. In New England, most of the urban areas are classified as
"serious" for ozone. The worse the air quality, the more controls the area will have to imple-
ment. Several strategies are required to control ozone, as it is caused by emissions from
many sources, including automobiles, power plants, petroleum refineries, chemical plants,
dry cleaners, gasoline stations, house paint, and printing shops.
While each vehicle on the road today emits fewer pollutants than the vehicles built in
the 1960s, there are many more vehicles on the road, driving
more total miles and thus cancelling out a large portion of the
emission reductions gained from motor vehicle controls. The
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 establish tighter pollution
standards for emissions from automobiles and trucks on a
phased-in basis beginning in 1994.
Fuel quality will also be controlled, and programs requir-
ing cleaner or reformulated gasoline will be initiated in 1995 for
cities with the worst ozone problems. Prior to that time, many
New England states may "opt-in" to these reformulated gasoline
provisions, providing even more widespread use of cleaner fuels.
In addition, all New England states will be required to implement
enhanced inspection and maintenance programs within two years, while vapor recovery
procedures will be needed in some areas to capture refueling emissions at gasoline stations.
Other issues addressed by the act include toxic air pollutants, operation permits for
sources covered under the act, the loss of stratospheric ozone, and the provisions for enforc-
ing the act. With its comprehensive approach, the new law, scheduled to take effect over the
coming decade, will be an effective tool in the process of ensuring the quality of our air
through the next century.
8
-------
INITIATIVES
Environmental Review:
Planning for the Future of New England
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 is a unique law directing all federal
agencies to follow a code of conduct that requires them to prevent environmental harm.
NEPA is one of our most powerful tools for environmental protection.
NEPA requires federal agencies to use all practical means to protect the environment
to "fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the
environment for succeeding generations." Under this law, federal
agencies must not only analyze and disclose the impacts of and
alternatives to proposed major activities, grants, or permits
through an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), but also
strive to choose the alternative that avoids or minimizes environ-
mental damage. Sometimes this means the agency must not
approve a project, or approve an alternative location or design that
is different from the one it originally proposed. Often it means
that previously uncorrected environmental problems at a facility
are corrected in anticipation of NEPA's scrutiny.
EPA's NEPA Review Program provides excellent opportunities to carry out the
region's strategic objectives, such as pollution prevention, priority risk reduction, and
resource protection through multi-media analyses of projects. The massive Central Artery
project in Boston is an excellent example. The environmental review process for that project
provided EPA with its best opportunity to ensure that this $5 billion urban highway invest-
ment would be accompanied by federal support for mass transit improvements and emission
reduction measures that are needed in an area with a high level of air pollution. The NEPA
review process uniquely articulated our concerns and advocated mass transit mandates and a
more far-sighted Charles River crossing.
The Central Artery project also needed a federal wetlands protection permit (under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act), and EPA's NEPA Review and 404 programs joined
forces to prevent the needless fill of 100 acres of Boston Harbor, which would have been
inconsistent with EPA's major harbor cleanup efforts. The Central Artery project was
redesigned to produce less fill, to make use of fill as landfill cover, and to use it to turn an
abandoned harbor island dump (pictured above) into a park.
The NEPA review process, alone or combined with the expertise of other EPA pro-
grams, is a powerful multi-media analysis and enforcement tool, which can be applied early
in a project's planning process to fulfill EPA's goals. It affects actions of the federal govern-
ment, which creates, funds, or permits some of the nation's largest and potentially most
environmentally damaging projects. NEPA review will continue as a powerful ally of environ-
mental protection during the next decade. *,
PHOTO: FILE
EPA's NEPA Review
Program provides
excellent opportunities to
carry out the region's
strategic objectives, such
as pollution prevention,
priority risk reduction,
and resource protection
through multi-media
analyses of projects.
9
-------
ENFORCEMENT
PHOTO: FILE
Enforcement: The Cornerstone of
Environmental Management
An aggressive enforcement program is the cornerstone of EPA"s environmental manage-
ment strategy. Complex laws and issues require not only sufficient penalties to deter,
but new methods to ensure compliance. Enforcement efforts reflect a greater emphasis on
the strategic value of the actions the agency takes. To be an effective regulatory manager,
EPA strives to take enforcement actions in those cases that pose
the greatest risk to the environment, and those in which the
most environmental benefit will be realized.
Using our new strategic thinking, EPA enforcement ini-
tiatives stress a multi-media approachone that addresses the
environment as an integrated natural ecological system. A coor-
dinated effort addresses all violations of environmental laws at a
facility at once, reviewing compliance with the Clean Water Act,
the Clean Air Act, and waste management laws. This ensures
that pollution is not merely being transferred from one environ-
mental medium to another. In addition, enforcement actions may
carry a pollution prevention message, in which violators may be
encouraged to eliminate a source of pollution or substitute less
toxic chemicals for conventional ones.
At federal Superfund sites where the costs of cleanup
are often high, EPA requires responsible parties to pay. Cur-
rently nearly 60 percent of all site study and cleanup work,
amounting to more than $1 billion nationally, is being paid for by
those responsible for the contamination.
Enforcement Highlights
Boston Harbor
EPA's seven-year enforcement effort to clean up Boston Harbor
saw the initiation of construction of the long-awaited new sec-
ondary treatment plant at Deer Island. The quality of the
harbor's water is expected to improve markedly when the primary treat ment portion of the
plant is completed in 1995 and again when the secondary treatment portion is completed in
1999. In the meantime, interim improvements to existing facilities and the elimination of
scum discharges have already led to significant improvements.
Winding Brook Turf Farm
A conservation easement was established as part of a settlement of a case in which the
owner of the Winding Brook Turf Farm allegedly filled 17 acres of wetlands. The farm owner
agreed to pay a $35,000 penalty and restore the damaged wetlands.
10
-------
ENFORCEMENT: A CORNERSTONE
Pease Air Force Base Superfund Site
A precedent-setting interagency agreement, signed by the U.S. Air Force and the State of
New Hampshire, ensures that cleanup at the base will be unimpeded by planned closure and
redevelopment.
New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site
Three of five defendants in the New Bedford Harbor Superfund site, Aerovox Incorporated,
Belleville Industries, and AVX Corporation, settled for a total of $79 million with a large por-
tion of the settlement going to cover future cleanup costs.
Laurel Park Superfund Site
Nineteen potentially responsible parties entered into a $21 million settlement to clean up this
site in Naugatuck, Connecticut. Highlighting that recalcitrance bears a high price, EPA filed
suit against four non-settling parties to recover cleanup costs.
United Technologies Corporation
United Technologies Corporation (UTC) pleaded guilty to six felony violations of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (hazardous waste management laws) and was
sentenced to pay a $3 million fine. This settlement is the largest criminal fine for hazardous
waste violations in the country. In a separate case, UTC paid a $730,000 fine for numerous
violations of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) storage and handling laws of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act. As part of this settlement, UTC will undergo a comprehensive PCB
audit to improve on the management of PCB handling at four separate UTC facilities. The
company has since made a major effort to incorporate environmental compliance into its
daily activities.
International Paper Company
Pleading guilty to five felony charges, International Paper was fined $2.2 million for violations
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. This marks the first environmental crimi-
nal case in the State of Maine and the second largest criminal hazardous waste fine in the
country. International Paper stored and treated hazardous wastes without a permit, avoiding
costly regulatory requirements for proper waste management.
Raymark Industries
As part of a nationwide crackdown to enforce existing lead regulations, suit was filed against
Raymark Industries for improper disposal of lead-asbestos dust and other hazardous waste
at its Connecticut facility. In a previous case, Raymark agreed to pay a $135,000 fine for viola-
tions of air emission standards for asbestos.
Each year, EPA
publishes a full review of
enforcement highlights
and accomplishments.
Copies of this book may
be obtained through
EPA's New England
Regional Office.
11
-------
ENFORCEMENT
EPA's pollution
prevention and pollution
reduction goals have
resulted in several
important environmen-
tally beneficial projects
being undertaken by
companies when settling
an enforcement action.
Environmental Benefits from Enforcement
In an effort to foster a pollution prevention ethic in the American corporate lifestyle, EPA
has initiated an innovative enforcement policy that focuses on providing direct benefits to
the environment. More and more, the agency is including pollution prevention and recycling
conditions in enforcement settlements, both as a means of achieving statutory compliance
and as "supplemental environmental projects" (SEPs). SEPs allow EPA to achieve environ-
mental benefits beyond those required by law. In this innovative regulatory system,
companies in violation of federal environmental laws can make environmentally beneficial
expenditures that provide long-term benefits to the environment as well as to the company,
while also reducing the cash portion of the penalty the company is required to pay to EPA.
In order to be considered for credit as a supplemental environmental project,
a proposed project must meet certain criteria. First, the major portion of the project's
environmental benefit should go to the general public rather than the company. Second, the
environmental benefit must go beyond statutory requirements, and not be something a viola-
tor would reasonably be expected to do as a part of normal business practice. Third, the
project must be undertaken in connection with settlement of the enforcement action; it may
not be required under the terms of any other federal, state, or local settlement or by any
other statute or regulation. Finally, a significant cash penalty component must be part of the
settlement (greater than the economic benefit to the company of non-compliance). Typical
projects considered are (in order of preference):
Pollution Prevention: a project that substantially reduces or prevents generation of
pollutants through use reduction or closed-loop processes. Innovative recycling is considered
pollution prevention if pollutants are kept out of the environment.
Pol I ution Red uction: a project that brings the facility past the point at which it
achieves compliance with existing discharge limitations. More effective end-of-pipe technolo-
gies, improved operation and maintenance, and recycling of residuals at "the end of a pipe"
are examples of pollution reduction. Any chemical substituted for the subject regulated
chemical must be non-polluting.
Environmental Restoration: a project that not only repairs the damage done to the
environment, but also goes beyond the repair to enhance the environment.
Environmental Auditing: audits are designed to correct the management practices
that are leading to recurring or potential violations. They must be in addition to audits under-
taken as a good business practice.
Enforcement-related Environmental Public Awareness: may include publica-
tions, broadcasts or seminars. As an integral segment of the project, the company must
publicly announce the connection of the project to the enforcement action.
12
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS FROM ENFORCEMENT
EPA's pollution prevention and pollution
reduction goals have resulted in several impor-
tant environmentally beneficial projects being
undertaken by companies when settling an
enforcement action.
The settlement of a case brought under
the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act (EPCRA) against Balzers, a high-
technology vacuum equipment manufacturer,
contained an agreement for the company to
undertake a $50,000 supplemental environmen-
tal project. The SEP consists of the installation
of a water-based cleaning system at the com-
pany's Hudson, NH, and Fremont, CA, facilities.
The new cleaning system is a substitution for
the freon-based system currently used in the
facilities' turbo pump repair process. The project will reduce by 66 percent the amount of
freon-113 used at the two facilities. The original penalty assessed in the case was $17,000.
In another EPCRA case, a Connecticut metal parts manufacturer negotiated to
reduce the original assessed penalty of $59,000 by choosing to invest approximately $76,000
to recycle and recover wastewater and oil-based coolants, resulting in at least a 50 percent
reduction in the amount of waste coolants generated by the facility, from 52,000 gallons per
year to not more than 26,000 gallons.
In a third EPCRA case, a Massachusetts company has agreed to substitute alkaline
soak cleaners for vapor degreasing units at its two electroplating facilities, resulting in the
elimination of the use of the toxic solvent 1,1,1-trichloroethane at both facilities. The original
assessed penalty was $15,000, and the total capital expenditure for the project will be at
least $8,000. As a result of the project, the company's usage of 1,1,1-trichloroethane will be
reduced from 55 gallons per year to zero gallons.
PHOTO: GREG GRANT
13
-------
ENFORCEMENT
EPA Regional
Administrator Julie Belaga
and Massachusetts DEP
Deputy Commissioner
Edward Kunce removed
the hazardous warning
sign from the Cannons
Engineering Corporation
Superfund site in
Bridgewater, MA, on
October 22,1991, to mark
the first completion of a
Superfund site cleanup in
New England.
PHOTO: FRANK MclNTYRE
First Superfund Cleanup in
New England Completed
The cleanup of a Superfund site involves cooperation among federal, state, and local agen-
cies, particularly given the lengthy period of time this process requires.
Beginning in 1974, the Cannons Engineering Corporation (CEC) used its property in
Bridgewater to handle, store, and incinerate chemical wastes. In the late 1970s, CEC began
taking in more waste than it could process and began shipping excess waste to sites in Plym-
outh, MA, and Nashua and Londonderry, NH. The company was convicted of falsifying
reports stating that waste had been legally incinerated at Bridgewater, when actually it was
dumped after dark into septic systems and into open fields near residential neighborhoods at
the New Hampshire sites. The Bridgewater operation was closed by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts in 1980 for waste handling and reporting violations.
In 1988, EPA and the States of Massachusetts and New Hampshire reached what
were termed "mega settlements" valued at nearly $50 million with more than 300 parties
identified as potentially responsible for waste disposal at the four Cannons sites. A group of
transporters and generators of the waste dumped at the sites agreed to conduct the cleanup
at three of the four sites, including Bridgewater.
In March 1988, after extensive site investigations to identify the nature and extent of
site contamination, EPA selected the Bridgewater cleanup plan. The plan was developed to
control both the source and spread of site contamination. Under the plan, the responsible
parties decontaminated and removed buildings, and treated more than 11,000 tons of con-
taminated soil using an innovative process called low temperature thermal desorption. This
process involves a heating process that causes the physical sep-
aration of contaminants from the soil to which they are attached.
The cleanup also involved the installation of wells for long-term
monitoring of contaminant levels in groundwater to ensure con-
tamination does not spread from the site. EPA projects that the
level of contamination remaining in the groundwater will dissi-
pate naturally over the next 15-20 years now that the source of
contamination to the groundwater has been eliminated.
The completion of cleanup activities means that the
Town of Bridgewater can use the industrial park site for future
industrial or commercial purposes. The town has adopted
restrictions to insure the site will remain as an industrial site.
The town also has adopted restrictions on groundwater use until the groundwater is
returned to drinking water quality.
14
-------
ENFORCEMENT
Multi-Media Enforcement: A Case Study
In the past, EPA enforced each law "one statute at a time." For instance, a Clean Water Act
enforcement team would inspect a facility for violations of its Clean Water Act permit.
However, this team might not have been trained to notice that hazardous wastes being gen-
erated by this facility were not being handled properly. Following this approach, it might take
EPA several years and several separate lawsuits to finally clean up a facility and bring it into
compliance with all federal environmmental statutes.
Over the years, our understanding of how to protect the environment has become
more sophisticated. Reflecting this increase in knowledge, our environmental statutes and
the manner in which EPA seeks to enforce them have become progressively more complex.
Today, the EPA strategic planning process is committed to assessing and correcting all envi-
ronmental problems detected at a facility. In addition to their areas of environmental
expertise, EPA inspectors are now trained to notice and record those clues that might lead
to the discovery of additional environmental problems on-site. Improved communication
between the air, water, and waste divisions allows each inspector to alert the appropriate
divisions of relevant findings. If warranted, additional multi-media inspections are scheduled
and all violations of environmental statutes enumerated in a single enforcement action.
EPA's judicial action against the Columbia Manufacturing Company and its prior
owner, MTD Products, Inc., demonstrates this new multi-media approach. Columbia has
been electroplating and manufacturing bicycles and school furniture in Westfield, MA, for
over 100 years. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) had
been attempting to regulate Columbia under both the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which regulates the handling, storage,
transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes. DEP was dissatisfied with Columbia's per-
formance and formally requested that EPA Region I take whatever action was necessary to
bring Columbia into compliance with both acts. EPA conducted two separate multi-media
inspections at the Columbia facility, which disclosed multiple violations of both RCRA and the
CWA committed by the facility's present and former owners. EPA filed a complaint against
both corporations for their respective violations of the CWA and RCRA in U.S. District
Court for the District of Massachusetts in February, 1991.
EPA's multi-media inspections revealed additional environmental problems at the
facility. It appears that hazardous wastes disposed of on-site have been released to the soil
and groundwater. Until May 1983, Columbia routinely pumped its metal hydroxide sludge
(hazardous waste containing metals from its electroplating operations) into two unlined pits
on site. Columbia's own analyses of the soils around these former impoundments reveal
levels of cyanide. Analyses of groundwater under and in the vicinity of the former impound-
ments reveal significant levels of hazardous wastes in the water, including chromium,
cadmium, trichloroethylene, vinyl chloride, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). EPA is
now developing a strategy to deal with these further problems. The amended complaint will
request that the court order Columbia and MTD to investigate and, where necessary, clean
up any hazards to human health or the environment.
Congress has charged
EPA with the responsibility
to enforce environmental
statutes, which separately
seek to protect all three
media (air, water and soil)
from pollution through the
Clean Water Act,
Clean Air Act, and
Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act.
PHOTO: DANGRANZ
15
-------
THE STATE
PERSPECTIVE
PaulKeough,
Deputy Regional
Administrator
PHOTO: JOHN KENNARD
The federal government
offers a wide variety of
grants and other forms of
financial and technical
assistance to the states
that help them carry
out their regulatory
programs.
EPA and the States
Cleaning up the environment is not just a federal job. In fact, the bulk of the environmen-
tal activity takes place at the state and local level. In New England, our states have
extremely active environmental agencies. They are truly our partners in the effort to
improve the quality of life for all New Englanders.
The federal government offers a wide variety of grants and other forms of financial
and technical assistance to the states that help them carry out their regulatory programs.
This year, in our region, we supplied approximately $200 million to the states. EPA has initi-
ated programs that give the states as much flexibility as possible with regard to how they
utilize these funds. This source of revenue is particularly important as the states try to grap-
ple with funding cuts due to the region's economic problems.
EPA also shares many of our program responsibilities with the states. For instance,
state agencies do the bulk of the compliance inspections in our region and can take direct
enforcement action or refer cases to EPA for federal action. Both our agency and the states
are doing more multi-media compliance inspections, in which inspectors from both the state
and federal agency review a facility at the same time. We are also working closely together
on criminal enforcement actions. Our criminal investigators work with and support efforts
by the states as well as the U.S. attorneys throughout the region.
One area in which I expect to see increasing cooperation at the federal-state level is
pollution prevention. All of our New England states have established individual pollution pre-
vention offices and receive financial assistance from EPA for pollution prevention programs
that support outreach efforts to business and industry. They have also adopted toxic use
reduction programs that are leading the federal government in developing creative
approaches to solid waste problems.
Finally, I see an increasing emphasis on environmental education that will bring EPA
closer to the states. A new national Environmental Education Act has been enacted, which
has resulted in the creation of a new Office of Education at EPA and has provided funding to
support environmental education programs in the states.
With budgetary cutbacks and economic problems, our states face some severe tests
in the years ahead. It is essential that the federal and state governments work together
closely to ensure that we are achieving the maximum benefit for each dollar spent.
16
-------
THE STATE
PERSPECTIVE
Connecticut
It was a year of change. Connecticut's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) felt the first
effects of a new administration. The previous year's reorganization and bureau chief appointments
coupled with a new governor, commissioner, and deputy commissioner brought an influx of talent and
enthusiasm to the agency.
Major initiatives to protect and improve conditions in Long Island Sound and to promote
cleaner air are discussed below. In addition, programs were created to expedite the agency's permit-
ting process and to administer the underground storage tank program. These were the issues at the
heart of the DEP's administration.
Long Island Sound
Connecticut has many priceless natural resources,
but by far the jewel in the crown of the nutmeg state is
Long Island Sound. The sound, which gives Connect-
icut so much of its character and charm, is in ill
health. Fish, lobsters, and marine life are in grave
danger as pollution and decay cut off their oxygen
levels.
To combat the loss of life caused by these low
levels of oxygen, or hypoxia, the DEP instituted a "no
net increase" program. The overall goal is to reduce
the levels of nitrogen discharged into the sound by
municipal wastewater treatment plants. In Connecti-
cut, the state has committed up to $15 million to make
water quality improvements that will reduce nitrogen
discharges into the sound. One element of the plan
includes modifying permits of existing sewage treat-
ment plants to ensure that nitrogen entering the sound will not become hazardous to the marine
ecology.
An Office of Long Island Sound Programs (LISP), formerly the Coastal Resources Manage-
ment Unit, was created and is dedicated to dealing with relevant environmental issues. This is proof
positive of Connecticut's strong commitment to the improvement of the sound. The Clean Water Fund,
which contains provisions for Long Island Sound, has committed more than $445 million since 1986
toward wastewater improvements.
Protection of Long Island Sound is our number one priority.
Clean Air
Hand in hand with the goal of clean water is the goal of clean air. DEP's Bureau of Air Management is
hard at work devising strategies that will reduce air pollution while maintaining personal comfort.
In response to the Clean Air Act of 1990, Connecticut is busy developing and enacting man-
dated regulations that will encourage everyone to help achieve clean air. Mass transit, clustered
neighborhoods with essential services nearby, and smaller, more efficient automobiles are on the
drafting board for Connecticut residents.
Connecticut's Future
These are just two of the issues that will continue to challenge us as we celebrate our agency's twen-
tieth year. As we mark this important milestone we will look back on those years of progress and
reflect on the issues that most profoundly affected us. We will use the lessons we have learned and will
plot a course for Connecticut's environment that will guide us into the future.
Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection
Timothy R.E. Keeney,
Commissioner
PHOTO: 6C.W. MORGAN/POSITIVE IMAGES
Connecticut has many
priceless natural
resources, but by far
the jewel in the crown
of the nutmeg state
is Long I stand Sound,
17
-------
THE STATE
PERSPECTIVE
Maine Department of
Environmental Protection
Dean C. Marriott,
Commissioner
PHOTO: ©JACOBMOSSER
POSITIVE IMAGES
Maine
The State of Maine experienced severe budgetary problems during 1991, and the Department of
Environmental Protection was no exception. Revenues fell short of what was needed for programs
and staff, but the department kept up its work in spite of adverse circumstances. The year's highlights
include legislation on non-point source pollution, oil-spill preparedness, and mining, as well as depart-
mental reorganization, and the initiatives described below that will help us to better protect Maine's
many resources.
Oil Spill Response
Work by the Commission to Study Maine's Oil Spill Preparedness led to the passage of legislation and a
departmental reconsideration of relevant rules. "An Act to Improve Marine Oil Spill Prevention, Plan-
ning, and Response" requires vessels and oil terminal facilities to file federally required contingency
plans with the state Department of Environmental Protection. Licensed oil terminal facilities are now
also required to hold drills and undergo inspections on an annual basis.
In addition, the state must prepare its own marine oil spill contingency plan. It will develop
computerized plans for identifying and protecting sensitive areas and for wildlife rehabilitation. As a
related initiative, DEP is currently revising its regulations governing the licensing of oil terminal facili-
ties and the transfer of oil.
Cranberries and Wetlands
Legislation facilitating the cultivation of cranberries was passed follow-
ing testimony by both the DEP and the Department of Agriculture,
Food, and Rural Resources. The law establishes a "general permit"
with a 45-day review period, eliminating the need for a wetlands
alteration permit under certain conditions. Applicants must submit
professional certification that the project is not in, or within 250 feet of
a coastal wetland or in a great pond, and that it meets other require-
ments involving plants and natural resources. Applicants must also
submit a plan that meets design specifications and a plan for pesticide
and fertilizer management.
I Office of Pollution Prevention
DEP's new Office of Pollution Prevention was created in 1991 by an
amendment to Maine's Toxics Use Reduction Law. Its internal goal is to review DEP programs and to
make recommendations regarding means of incorporating pollution prevention into existing and pro-
posed department initiatives.
The office will perform many external functions as well, including establishing priorities for
pollution prevention in the state; developing workshops and seminars to educate and train the public
as well as the regulated community; instituting a pollution prevention awards program; and working
with the state procurement system to encourage the purchase of products consistent with pollution
prevention objectives.
Casco Bay Estuary Project
The Casco Bay Estuary Project has celebrated its first anniversary with studies done aboard the EPA
research vessel Anderson, a sediment sampling project, and the award of federal grants.
In July, the Anderson worked in Casco Bay for a week, with scientists using underwater cam-
eras to help characterize the distinctly different "ecoregions." One month later, extensive sediment
sampling was done, which should provide direction for future studies.
Two projects in the Bay's watershed that received federal funds during the summer will also
contribute to the program's goal of protecting and improving water quality in one of Maine's most sig-
nificant natural resources. Funded directly by EPA headquarters in Washington, DC, one project will
restore two miles of the Pleasant River; the other will provide statewide comprehensive planning.
18
-------
THE STATE
PERSPECTIVE
Massachusetts
T'he challenges those of us in the environmental community face in the coming decade are daunting,
« exciting, and extremely significant.
Perhaps nowhere is this more true than in our efforts to implement the Clean Air Act. Massa-
chusetts has been declared in serious non-compliance with the ozone provisions of the new federal
Clean Air Act amendments. That declaration set the stage for our taking some strong steps to solve
our air pollution problems. Strong steps are needed.
9 Mobile Sources
Air pollution has many sources, but emissions from motor vehicles are
the prime culprit, producing as much as 70 percent of the ground level
ozone that causes serious health problems for Massachusetts residents
on hot summer days.
Unfortunately, most people think cleaning up the environment is
limited to pollution control measures adopted by big industry and big
business. That must happen, of course. But to clean our air, individuals
must think seriously about changing their driving habits. Either they will
have to drive less, buy more fuel-efficient cars, buy cars with cleaner-
burning exhaust systems, buy cars that run on alternative fuels like nat-
ural gas, or use more sensitive emissions inspections and maintenance
systems.
Massachusetts has already made some progress on curbing motor-vehicle pollution: Stage II
vapor recovery nozzles have been installed in thousands of service stations; Massachusetts is on the
list to receive reformulated, cleaner gasoline for use in 1995; mass transit improvements have been
required as a condition of new road construction, like the Central Artery; Massachusetts has passed a
law and now is in the midst of adopting regulations to require the introduction of California's low emit-
ting vehicle program in the Commonwealth; and cleaner cars and cleaner alternative fuels are being
introduced.
m Wetlands
An effective open space protection policy means taking a strong position on the protection of state
wetlands. In Massachusetts we are working to make no-net-loss of wetlands a reality, and we are con-
cerned about the changes the federal government is considering in its implementation of wetlands
protection law.
Massachusetts can be proud that it has one of the most effective wetlands programs in the
country. We are considered a leader in wetlands protection and wrote the nation's first wetlands pro-
tection statute.
1 Need for Public Education
Clean-air, recycling and resources conservation, land preservation these are a few of the critical
issues that confront us. But one of the real challenges for policy makers in the environmental area
involves engaging the private sector in the public agenda, ensuring that the choices made by the public
are informed and intelligent choices, made with full understanding and appreciation of the real environ-
mental impacts and economic costs of the options they select.
Today, most people don't face up to the environmental consequences of their actions. In an
economic sense, there is no cost for making the wrong decision that is, the decision that's wrong for
the environment. If people don't understand the value of the environment, and if it costs them nothing
to ravage it, is it any wonder they overuse and abuse natural resources?
It is our responsibility to ensure that decisions made by individuals and society reflect the
costs of those choices to the environment and to society. Whether we succeed or fail will depend on
how well we engage others in the environmental agenda by consensus, we hope, and by incentives
where possible, rather than with hammers and sticks and by force of arms.
Massachusetts
Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs
Susan F Tierney, Secretary
PHOTO: FILE
If people don't
understand the value of
the environment, and if
it costs them nothing to
ravage it, is it any wonder
they overuse and abuse
natural resources?
19
-------
THE STATE
PERSPECTIVE
New Hampshire
Department of
Environmental Services
Robert W. Varney,
Commissioner
PHOTO: ©JERRY HOWARD
POSITIVE IMAGES
New Hampshire
The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services had a successful year, implementing
legislation such as a new state groundwater protection act and the federal Clean Air Act, dispens-
ing the new revolving loan fund to enable municipalities to upgrade wastewater treatment facilities,
and establishing new waste management regulations. Additional initiatives follow.
Wetlands Protection
The ability to protect New Hampshire's wetlands increased due to the adoption of revised regulations
and to the use of a new computer system funded by EPA. Specifically, the NH Wetlands Board's
regulations now include the federal method of designating wetlands, and the board's new Local Area
Network (LAN) computer system has opened up greater avenues for taking inventory of wetlands for
the state's data base.
Groundwater Protection
Three significant steps were taken to protect New
Hampshire's groundwater. The state legislature
passed the NH Groundwater Protection Act, which
provides a regulatory framework for local protection
by establishing a groundwater classification system,
creating best management practices over land use
activities, and protecting groundwater flowing to
public water supply wells. EPA granted approval for
the state's Wellhead Protection Program; and finally,
EPA also gave final authorization to New Hampshire's
Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program, the
first such authorization in New England.
Shoreland Protection
A milestone Shoreland Protection Act was adopted
by the New Hampshire legislature. It is designed to
(1) protect the shorelands of lakes, ponds, and
coastal waters so as to maintain and enhance their
water quality, (2) control the use of these waters and
the adjacent shoreland for the greatest public benefit,
and (3) protect these waters from uncoordinated,
unplanned, and piecemeal developments. The act
establishes minimum standards for development
within 250 feet of the shore.
Rivers Protection
The NH legislature passed a bill designating three
rivers and river segments as protected rivers: seg-
ments of the Pemigewasset and the Contoocook and
the North Branch of the Contoocook. This action
was taken under procedures established by the
state's Rivers Management and Protection Pro-
gram, begun in 1988. This year's action brings the
total number of protected river segments to eight.
Pease AFB
Significant interagency agreements were signed regarding recently closed Pease Air Force Base.
Notably, the state, EPA, and the US Air Force established agency roles and responsibilities during the
cleanup of Pease's hazardous waste sites. Also, EPA and the state signed a memorandum of under-
standing to address air quality issues associated with redevelopment.
20
-------
THE STATE
PERSPECTIVE
Rhode Island
This past year has been a year of successful change in the Rhode Island Department of Environ-
mental Management. The department has reorganized within its regulatory divisions, continued
the process of implementing the state's recycling program, begun implementing a drinking water
management program, and is in the process of completing the Narragansett Bay Project.
Recycling
Rhode Island has adopted the first statewide, mandatory recycling law in the country. The program
prohibits disposal of a broad range of recyclables not only the most common and marketable items
such as glass, aluminum, paper, and cardboard, but also steel and tinned steel containers, plastic soda
bottles and milk jugs, used motor oil, white goods, and car batteries.
Everyone from the smallest household to the largest business is required to recycle. Our
department and the Solid Waste Management Corporation work in partnership with municipalities and
the commercial sector to administer the program.
The Municipal Recycling Program currently serves more than 60 percent of the state's one
million residents. By the end of 1992, the entire state will be recycling. Eighty-five percent of the resi-
dents served participate in the program and already recycle 14 percent of the residential waste stream
Commercial recycling regulations mandate recycling programs for all of the state's 28,000
businesses. Each business employing more than 50 individuals must submit waste reduction and
recycling plans and annual reports quantifying the results of their programs. The DEM directs an
extensive technical assistance program. Seventy percent of the businesses employing 250 or more
individuals saved money or incurred no additional waste management costs as a result of recycling.
Recognition of the success of the Rhode Island program has
come in the form of awards from the National Recycling Coalition for out-
standing achievement in recycling, recognition from City and State Mag-
azine, and the EPA Administrator's Award for the best state recycling /
program. Y
Narragansett Bay Project
The Narragansett Bay Project, a member of the US EPA's National Estu-
ary Program, has progressed towards the completion of its comprehen-
sive conservation and management plan (CCMP) for the Narragansett
Bay watershed. This joint project between the EPA and the Rhode
Island DEM is completing its final year. The CCMP will present pollution
abatement and prevention strategies to improve and protect Narragan-
sett Bay water quality well into the next century.
The CCMP will serve as the blueprint for future policy to protect
Narragansett Bay. During the past year, the project has completed
major studies examining "wet weather" pollution and sediment contam-
ination, an inventory and assessment of bay habitats and species abun-
dances, and the development of a long-term monitoring plan to assess
future changes in the bay's health. Great effort has been made to
strengthen public participation in the development of the CCMP.
Carry In/Carry Out
This year the department was faced with difficult budget decisions. Out
of those cutbacks came an initially controversial, but in the end, very successful programCarry in/
Carry out. People using the state's parks and beaches were asked to take their trash home with them
in bags donated by private industry. This simple program allowed the state to remove all garbage bar-
rels from recreation areas and save in excess of $300,000 in solid waste disposal costs.
The parks and beaches were more attractive and littering both within the facilities and along
adjacent roads actually decreased. This program was well received by the public.
Rhode Island Department of
Environmental
Management
Louise Durfee, Director
PHOTO c JEROME PREZIOSO
POSITIVE IMAGES
21
-------
THE STATE
PERSPECTIVE
Vermont Agency of
Natural Resources
Jan S. Eastman,
Secretary
Vermont
PHOTO: VERMONT TRAVEL DIVISION
According to a new
state law, all household
hazardous products
must be identified with
shelf labels in the stores.
22
With Vermont state government facing an extremely tight budget in Fiscal Year 1992 and another
one projected for FY '93, the Agency of Natural Resources devoted much of the summer to
revising its priorities and refining its programs.
Our goals were to strengthen the agency's ability to carry out its mission of protecting the
long-term health of Vermont's environment, the long-term health of Vermont's people, and their quality
of life. We also wanted to reduce costs to taxpayers and society at large, to reduce remaining environmen-
tal risks, and to improve the way the agency deals with people and their requests for services. Many
of the proposals will require legislative approval in 1992, but we have already received legislative approval
of the creation of a new Pollution Prevention Division within the Agency of Natural Resources.
Vermont's comparative risk project, the Strategy for Vermont's Third Century, provided a
foundation for the program review. Information about the relative seriousness of the state's problems
helped focus the program review and provided insights into new risk management strategies and have
resulted in a new publication: "Environment 1991: Risks to Vermont and Vermonters."
Lake Champlain
Congress approved the Lake Champlain Special Designation Act in November, 1991, which adds the
Lake Champlain drainage basin in Vermont and New York to the Great Lakes Critical Program. A 31-
member management conference composed of private citizens, local, state, and federal representa-
tives will administer the five-year program. The act requires the management conference to develop a
comprehensive pollution prevention, control, and restoration plan for the lake. A $2-million federal
appropriation for 1991 will fund programs designed to improve water quality and natural resource man-
agement in the basin.
Energy Plan
The Vermont Comprehensive Energy Plan reviews all forms of energy used in the state and describes
how to modify energy use to achieve specific goals relating to environmental quality, affordability, and
renewability by the year 2000.
The plan's recommendations will reduce global warming gases and acid rain precursors by
15 percent; reduce per capita'consumption of non-renewable, primarily fossil fuels by 20 percent;
encourage a shift toward greater reliance on renewable, sustainable energy resources; and maintain
the affordability of energy without compromising environmental quality.
The plan calls for market incentives to increase the efficiency of private and fleet vehicles, including
the use of alternative fuels such as methanol and ethanol. The plan recommends a tax policy to adjust
the market price of unregulated fuels to account for external environmental consequences of fuel use.
Hazardous Waste
Vermont has launched a Household Hazardous Waste Shelf Labeling Program involving all retail stores
that sell products containing hazardous materials. According to a new state law, all household haz-
ardous products must be identified with shelf labels in the stores. Information on their toxicity and
alternative, non-hazardous products must be provided. The list includes such familiar items as clean-
ing supplies; hobby and repair materials; auto maintenance products; and lawn, garden, and pool
supplies, which contain toxic, corrosive, reactive, explosive, or flammable substances. The Agency of
Natural Resources is working closely with stores to identify products and set up educational displays.
A toll-free hotline for consumers (1-800-932-7100) has been widely advertised.
Bike Paths
The Agency of Transportation, working with the Agency of Natural Resources, gave a big boost to
community bike path efforts in 1991. Transportation earmarked $1,000,000 of federal highway funds
for investment in alternative transportation development. Natural Resources administered a competi-
tive grants program to distribute this money to communities who were well along in the planning
stages and needed construction funding. Five communities qualified for funds, and many more appli-
cants will be closer to the construction stage next year when Governor Howard Dean hopes to have
$4.5 million available for this project.
-------
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H FINANCIALS I
Financial Overview
Salaries &
Expenses Super fund L U '. 1
iVrsoillH 1
1 «ill|)vMis;i!i(i(i
K I'.rivtiiv $21,853,100 $10,847,100 $ 322,400
inn..! $ 848,700 $ 491,100 $ 40,100
( )|H-i ,i: iiii-
l,x|K, !-,«- $3,617,500 $2,129,300 $ 96,500
Inti r;t;.'.< :st
A^n/i-hH m-. $ 5,759,700
!'!..,.*,,,>
i '.i. -...! $40,070,150
i i *-?;>' - : ' '
i«u -!..;.:- $6,849,350 $4,649,400
i ,-
\\avlr-...;-,
"I-.M ;.>,,,
TOTAL $26,319,300 $66,146,700 $5,108,400
% OF TOTAL 8.0% 20.0% 1.5%
WasU'vVrUct
Abatement 1 reatrnt'ns
Control 'A fonstrixtior. Total EPA
f.i F.R.A Compiiasicc Gsaois Region 1
$20,300 $ 33,042,900
$ 9,900 $ 1,389,800
$ 5,700 $ 5,849,000
$ 5,759,700
$ 7,424,400 $ 47,494,550
$ 11,498,750
$34,944,600 $ 34,944,600
$190,234,855 $190,234,855
$26,000 $42,378,900 $190,234,855 $330,214,155
0.1% 12.8% 57.6% 100%
%of
Total
10.0%
0.4%
1.8%
1.7%
14.4%
3.5%
10.6%
57.6%
100%
100%
Employees for EPA Region I
as of August 24,1991 TOTAL: 752
Engineers
Environmental 191
Chemical 9
TOTAL: 200 27%
Life Scientists
Aquatic Biologists 8
Microbiologists 1
Other 8
TOTAL: 17 2%
Physical Scientists
Environmental Scientists 63
Geologists 10
Chemists 13
Hydrologists 6
TOTAL: 92 12%
Attorneys & Paralegals
Attorneys 59
Law Clerks 1
Paralegals 1
Legal Assistants 1
TOTAL: 62 8%
Environmental Protection
Specialists 91
Assistants 17
TOTAL: 108 14%
Technicians
Engineering Techs 1
Physical Science Techs 1
TOTAL: 2 <1%
Administrative Support
Finance 18
Personnel 11
Computers 17
Grants 12
Contracts 8
Mgt. & Prog. Analysis 14
Public Affairs 9
Support Services 27
Other 9
TOTAL: 125 17%
H Secretarial & Clerical
Secretaries 79
Program Assistants 28
Clerks 39
TOTAL: 146 19%
23
-------
-------
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency Region I
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Region I
John E Kennedy Building
Boston, MA 02203-2211
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
Forwarding and Address Correction Requested
Off ice of
External Programs
22K-1005
1992
Region!
Office of External Programs
(RPM)
John E Kennedy Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
First Class Mail
Postage and
Fees Paid
EPA
Permit G-35
------- |