United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Communication, Education,
And Public Affairs
(1704)
Volume 21, Number 1
Winter 1995
EPA175-N-95-001
EPA JOURNAL
Earth Day 1995-the 25th Anniversary
The Earth is in your hands
-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
~ol ~.Bro1Vner
Administrator
Communications, Education,
and Public Affairs
Loretta ~. Ucelli
Associate Administrator
~iles Allen
Director of Editorial Services
Karen Flagstad, Ph.D.
Senior Editor
Catharina Japikse
Assistant Editor
Ruth Barker
Photo Editor
Nancy Starnes
Assistant Editor
~arilyn Rogers
Circulation Manager
Francheska Greene
Intern
Leighton Price
Editorial Consultant
Design Credits
Ron Farrah
James R.lngram
Robert Hanagan
Front cover: EPA Administrator
Carol Browner and friends at
"Early Environments," EPA's day care
facility for children of employees.
Steve Delaney photo. EPA.
EPA JOURNAL Subscriptions
&EPA JOURNAL
A Magazine on National and Global Environmental Perspectives
Winter 1995 Volume 21. Number 1 EPA 175-N-95-001
From the Editors
On a fine April day 25 years ago, some 20 million Americans took
part in the first Earth Day. The turnout exceeded even the best
hopes of those involved in planning the event, including then-Senator
Gaylord Nelson, who conceived the idea of a nationwide Earth Day.
Earth Day-April 22, 1970-was an unprecedented show of support
for environmental causes that reverberated from the streets to Capitol
Hill. According to historians of the environment, it was also a turning
point-a watershed event marking the advent of environmental
issues on the national agenda. From the momentum of Earth Day
came the passage of environmental statutes and the December 1970
creation of EPA as a federal agency.
This coming April 22 marks the 25th observance of Earth Day, an
anniversary which occasions this issue of EPA Journal. As Earth Day
1995 approaches, once again we are at an important juncture, a time
when national priorities are being reexamined in light of fiscal austeri-
ties. Earth Day 1995 is thus a time for reflection and assessment as
well as a time for renewed commitment to environmental citizenship
for individuals and nations.
From EPA's standpoint, this anniversary is a time for taking stock
of environmental accomplishments over the last 25 years and for
sizing up the work that remains to be done and how to do it most
effectively and economically. From that perspective, in this EPA
Journal some of the connections between environmental protection,
economic considerations, and public priorities are explored in a
feature called "Environmental Protection: Is the Public Willing to
Pay?"; the feature is based on a forum discussion in which current
Administrator Carol M. Browner joined several former EPA adminis-
trators at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Govern-
ment last December. Several articles in the issue look to the future,
including Raymond Loehr's article on trying to anticipate environ-
mental problems for the purposes of pollution prevention ("Looking
Ahead to the Planet's Future").
Last but not least, Earth Day 1995 is a time for celebrating the
resources of the Earth. It is a time for renewed environmental stew-
ardship on the part of all citizens. For truly, the Earth is in your
hands. 0
The annual rate for subscribers in the United States is $7.50. The annual rate for subscribers in foreign countries is $9.40. The price of a single copy of EPA
Journal is $3.25 in United States and $4.06 if sent to a foreign country. Prices include mailing costs. Subscriptions to EPA Journal as well as other federal
government magazines are handled only by the U.S. Government Printing Office. To subscribe to EPA Journal, send a check or money order payable to the
Superintendent of Documents. The requests should be mailed to: P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. To change address, call or write: The U.S.
Government Printing Office, Public Documents Department, Superintendent of Documents, Washington, DC 20402; (202) 512-2262.
EPA Journal is printed on recycled paper with vegetable-based inks.
/
"'
-------
L-
Be nice to yourself, or to someone else special
The $7.50 Gift that
keeps right on giving!
&EPA JOURNAL
INFORMATION, NEWS. TRENDS, ISSUES, VIEWPOINTS, PEOPLE, POLICIES,
AND PROGRAMS -from local to global
If you are currently a subscriber, you
know how the special people on your
list, friends, college students, or family
members. will appreciate your
thoughtfulness in sending them a gift
subscription to EPA JOURNAL.
IT you're not a subscriber, it's about time
you were nice to yourself.
What else can you give or receive that
comes four times a year. is dedicated to
making ours a better world, and is
ONLY $7.50? EPA JOURNAL makes for
an imaginative. educational, year-round
gift and is a real bargain, too!
Simply check the boxes on the other side
and fill in the name and address of the
person you want to receive a subscription.
MORE THAN ONE? You can copy and fill out the reverse side of this card for as
many subscriptions as you wish to give.
WINNER! EPA JOURNAL took FIRST PLACE in the 1991 "Blue Pencil
Competition," a prestigious Award that makes a subscription even more valuable.
-------
EPA JOURNAL ORDER FORM
*
Order Processing Code 5401
D YES, enter - subscriptions to EPA JOURNAL for $7.50 per year ($9.40 foreign).
The total cost of my order is $ -' Price incl~des re~lar d?mestic postage
and handhng and 1S subject to change.
Company or personal name
Please type or print
Additional address/attention line
. City, State, ZIP Code
Purchase Order No.
May we make your name/address available to other mailers?
DYES
Daytime phone including area code
ONO
Please Choose Method of Payment:
o Check payable to the Superintendent of Documents
o GPO Deposit Account =
o Visa or MasterCard Account
ITITI Credit card expiration date
Authorizing Signature
To fax your orders (202) 512-2233
Mail to:
New Orders
Superintendent of Documents
P.O. Box 371954
Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954
Thank you for your order!
This form may be photocopied.
-------
Contents
Articles
£j~
Up.
) 1 S 1
)\)-qS-
--DO\
4 The Earth is in Your Hands
by Carol M. Browner
(j
C'f)
\.Q
0-
LA
~
~
*'
7 EP A Earth Day Contacts
9 Earth Day 25 Years Later
by Gaylord Nelson
11 Environmental Protection: Is the Public Willing to Pay?
A Forum
17 What Voters Say About the Environment Today
by Bill Line
20 Experienced Help for the Environment
by Tom Benjamin
22 Looking Ahead to the Planet's Future
by Raymond Loehr
5
r--
23
--,
18 Good News for Waste Watchers
by Roy Popkin
G
o
Departments
2 EPA ROUNDUP
I
I
l
l
I
I
I
I
'6
~
-------
EPA ROL1NDUP
--',-,':;~~-~..~--'::'-~"/L'''~~;-. "0, -~.7-;.;'-".:'\~>~ :' , .
TRI List of Chemicals Nearly Doubled
In a final rule, EPA has
expanded the Taxi<: Release
Inventory (TRI) to include
an additional 286 chemicals.
Companies must report
annually any release to the
environment (or transfer off
site) of those chemicals
listed on the TRI, whi<:h was
established under the
Emergency Planning and
right-to-know laws are a
common-sense way to protect
public health, and I encourage
citizens to use the data to work
with local facilities to address
pollution issues in their commu-
nities." EPA publishes TRI data
in several formats, including on-
line access to computer data-
bases, CD-ROM, and computer
diskettes. For general informa-
Community-Right-to-Know Act.
The expansion brings the total
number of listed chemicals to
654, effective January I, 1995.
Administrator Carol Browner
said: "This vital information
about pollution in our communi-
ties allows citizens to be
informed and involved in
environmental decision making
as never before. Community-
-.....'i'::'."
."
~
""
&
<'3
~
~
~
oS
i:1
E
~
------..... .... -
..
I
""" -
tion on access to any data
formats, call 202 260-1531.
EPA also maintains a technical
hotline to help the public
understand TRI reporting at
800 353-0202. EPA also has
made it easier for small
businesses to comply with TRI
reporting requirements by
allowing them to use a shorter,
less time-consuming report
form.
The Washington Post
reported: "... Private
industry had expected the
broadening of the so-called
Toxic Release Inventory, a
community right-to-know
program enacted by
Congress in 1986. The EPA
proposed expansion 18
months ago. . .. At the
same time, the EPA said it
was making it easier for
small businesses to comply
with reporting requirements
by allowing them to use a
shorter, less time-consum-
ing reporting form. The
shorter forms may be used
if a company released less
than 500 pounds of a
chemical. . .. Environmen-
talists have argued for some
time that more chemicals
should be covered by the
reporting requirements,
which apply to more than
23,600 factories and plants
nationwide. They also have
criticized the law for not
requiring release data from
incinerators, electric power
plants and other facilities.
In April, the EPA said
chemical plants and other
EPA's Toxic Release Inventory gives
citizens access to information on
chemical releases in their
communities.
2
EPA JOURNAL
-------
factories reported 3.2
billion pounds of toxic
chemical releases in 1992,
a 6.6 percent decline from
the previous year. The
1992 figures are the latest
available. Among the
releases were 197 million
pounds of known or
suspected cancer-causing
chemicals and 166 million
pounds of chemicals that
damage the earth's
protective ozone layer. Of
the 3.2 billion pounds of
chemicals released, nearly
58 percent went into the
air, 10.8 percent was
deposited on land, 8.6
percent was discharged
into water and 22.8 percent
was injected deep into the
ground."
The Wall Street Journal
said: "... The regulation,
which will take effect
Jan. I, will substantially
increase reporting require-
ments for pesticide
manufacturers and
processors under the 1986
Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-
Know Act. The list is
slightly smaller than the
one proposed in January,
however. About half of the
chemicals on the new list
are pesticides. The EPA
last January proposed
expanding the so-called
Toxic Release Inventory by
313 chemicals. Some
chemicals were dropped
and other listings were
deferred because of
technical questions, so that
the final additions number
286."
WINTER 1995
Ongoing Enforcement
Stop Sale Ordered
on Drinking Water
Filters
EPA has revoked the
registration and has
prohibited the further sale
and distribution of two
drinking-water filters
manufactured by AccuFilter
International of Beaverton,
Oregon. The devices consist
of a straw and a bottle, each
of which is equipped with
a silver-impregnated
activated-carbon filter
designed to remove sources
of odor and taste. The
Agency has determined that
data submitted by
AccuFilter in support of its
application for registration
was false: Data from the
actual laboratory tests of the
filters showed a higher level
of silver released into the
water than did the submit-
ted data. The principal
owner of AccuFilter, Bruce
G.Spangrud,hasbeen
indicted by a federal grand
jury on felony charges that
he submitted false state-
ments to obtain an EPA
pesticide registration. A
criminal trial has been
scheduled in the Federal
District Court in Portland.
Excessive exposure to
silver can cause argyria, a
permanent discoloration of
the teeth and skin. While
not a toxic effect, argyria is
an undesirable cosmetic
change. EPA is also con-
cerned that advertisements
for the two filters may lead
consumers to believe the
devices can purify raw
water, when they cannot-
the registration, now
revoked, was for use with
potable water only. The
Agency recommends that
consumers stop using any
of the filters in their posses-
sion and dispose of them.
Manufacturer
Fined $1.5 Million
in Death of Two
Boys
A federal district court
judge in Tampa, Florida,
has imposed a $1.5 million
criminal fine, the maximum
allowable penalty, on the
William Recht Company,
Inc., for violations of the
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) that
resulted in the death of two
nine-year-old boys. The
judge also placed the
company on probation for
five years and ordered an
environmental education
program 'for employees.
The company, which does
business in Tampa as
Dunex Industries Inc.,
manufactures rollers for the
printing industry. The two
boys, who had been playing
in the company's trash
dumpster, were overcome
by fumes from toluene, a
liquid used by the company
as a cleaning agent. Investi-
gation revealed that the
company routinely-and
iIIegally--disposed of spent
toluene in the dumpster.
Last year, a federal grand
jury indicted the company,
plant manager William
Whitman, and shop
foreman Duane Whitman
for illegally treating,
storing, and disposing of
hazardous waste without a
permit and for knowing
endangerment. The
company entered a no-
contest plea to the indict-
ment. The Whitmans were
subsequently convicted by a
jury on the first count but
acquitted on the second-
knowing endangerment;
each was sentenced to 27
months in prison.
Tug Captain Guilty
in Puerto Rican
Spill
Roy A. McMichael Jr.,
captain of the tugboat Emily
S., has pleaded guilty in U.s.
District Court, San Juan,
Puerto Rico, to negligently
letting a barge break loose
and run aground to spew
heavy fuel oil into the waters
off a popular beach. Emily
S., with the Morris J. Berman
under tow, was underway at
night from San Juan to
Antigua when its towing
cable parted, was repaired,
then parted again. With the
second break in the cable,
the barge drifted out of sight
and could not be found with
searchlights and radar. It
ran aground off Escambron
Beach to discharge 750,000
gallons of Number 6 oil into
the water. According to the
Department of Justice and
EPA, Captain McMichael
knew the towing cable was
in poor condition but failed
to replace it before depar-
ture. He also failed to notify
the Coast Guard that the
Morris J. Berman had broken
loose and was adrift. Under
the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, he is subject to a
maximum sentence of one
year imprisonment and a
fine twice the amount of the
monetary loss, which is
estimated to be in the
millions of dollars. 0
3
-------
The Earth is in Your Hands
Working together,
we can achieve
a new generation of
envi ronmental
protection
by Carol M. Browner
It is the job of
government to protect the
public. But government
cannot do the job alone.
(Brawner is Administrator of EPA.)
4
Earth Day 25 is a time to reflect on
how we're doing in protecting our
environment. Twenty-five years
ago, in the wake of the first Earth Day,
our nation created, virtually from
scratch, the most advanced system of
environmental protection in the world.
In the course of a very short history-a
mere quarter-century-we have made
tremendous progress. We no longer
have rivers catching on fire. Our skies
are cleaner. And u.s. environmental
expertise and technology are in demand
throughout the world.
In the years since the first Earth Day,
EPA banned lead in gasoline, lowering
lead levels in our air by more than 90
percent and protecting millions of
children from harm. We banned danger-
ous and widely used pesticides like DOT.
We closed unsafe local garbage dumps
all over the nation and helped to make
recycling a household habit. We pro-
vided American towns with substantial
funding for wastewater treatment-the
second biggest public works effort in
U.S. history, resulting in cleaner rivers all
over the United States. All cars and
trucks now have standards for fuel
economy, set by EPA, that allow consum-
ers to choose a car for its energy effi-
ciency. And EPA has played an impor-
tant role in ensuring that companies and
others comply with our environmental
laws or face stiff penalties.
Perhaps most important, the nation
has gained a new understanding. More
Americans than ever understand that to
ensure a good quality of life for our-
selves and our children, we must act as
responsible stewards of our air, our
water, and our land.
More to Do
But much remains to be done.
Thirty years after Rachel Carson
warned us in Silent Spring to reduce our
dependence on pesticides, we have
doubled our pesticide use. Twenty-five
years after the garbage-filled Cuyahoga
River spontaneously caught on fire, 40
percent of our rivers and lakes are not
suitable for fishing or swimming.
In 1993, people in Milwaukee, New
York, and Washington, DC, were ordered
to boil their drinking water. In Milwau-
kee, hundreds of thousands of people got
sick from contaminated water; 100 died.
Twenty years after passage of the Clean
Air Act, two in five Americans still live
in areas where the air is dangerous to
breathe. Fourteen years after Love
Canal, one in four Americans lives
within four miles of a toxic dumpsite.
Asthma is on the rise. Breast cancer is on
the rise.
And the past 25 years have left us with
a complex and unwieldy system of laws
and regulations and increasing conflict
over how we achieve environmental
protection.
The result of this history? An
adversarial system of environmental
policy. A system built on distrust. And
too little environmental protection at too
high a cost.
The Challenge We Face
In the next 25 years, we must maintain
the progress we have made, and we
must build on that progress. We must
continue to protect the health of the
people of this country, the health of our
communities, the health of our economy,
our air, our water, and our land.
The environmental problems of the
future will be more complex than ever.
We can work together to address these
problems today, or we can handle them
as expensive crises tomorrow.
When President Clinton and I arrived
in Washington two years ago, we
believed that we needed a fundamen-
tally new system of environmental
protection. One that protects more and
costs less. And one that builds on the
strengths of the last 25 years but over-
comes the deficiencies of the past.
We have an opportunity to reinvent a
system of strong public health and
environmental protections-to find
solutions that work for real people in real
communities. We must do it with
common-sense, cost-effective measures
that produce the very best environmental
results for the least cost. In this new
system, we need a firm commitment to
public health and environmental goals--
combined with flexibility, innovation,
and creativity in how we achieve those
EPA JOURNAL
-------
~
iJ
~
I
~:..
j
~
is
~
~
-:s.
~
'"
'"
~
<::>
Prompted by a June 1973
enforcement action, this Gary,
Indiana, steel plant reduced its
emissions to comply with the
Clean Air Act.
Sewage-disposal problems triggered this
1962 protest in Scottsdale, Arizona.
Aided by EP A fundin~! towns across
America have butit wastewater-
treatment plants.
goals. We must move beyond the one-
size-fits-all approach of the past. We
must work industry by industry, com-
munity by community to prevent pollu-
tion, rather than clean it up after the fact.
We must involve those who will live
with environmental decisions, to ensure
that they have every opportunity to be a
partner in making those decisions.
New Strategies for the Future
In the last two years, the Clinton Admin-
istration has initiated a variety of
strategies to reinvent environmental
protection-to move beyond a one-size-
fits-all approach and move toward a
flexible yet firm approach to pollution
protection. These strategies will allow us
to achieve results that are cleaner,
cheaper, and smarter.
Last year we launched the Common
Sense Initiative, a fundamentally differ-
ent way of doing business that takes us
.~
1j
i
'"
:2:
WINTER 1995
5
-------
beyond the pollutant-by-pollutant, crisis-
by-crisis approach of the past to an
industry-by-industry approach for the
future. Beginning in six industries, we
are bringing together leaders of business,
state and local government, the commu-
nity, labor, and the environmental
movement-to sit down and examine
environmental protection in these
industries from top to bottom.
By working together, we will be able to
find answers to the tough questions and
arrive at solutions never before thought
possible-solutions that will be cleaner
for the environment, cheaper for the
taxpayer and industry, and smarter for
the future of this country.
Through our Brownfields Action
Agenda, we are working in partnership
with state and local government, com-
munities, industry, and small business, to
clean up the contaminated pieces of land
that sit idle in cities across this country-
to bring them back to life, to remove a
blight on the neighborhood, to create
jobs, to create hope. We recently lifted
the Superfund stigma from 25,000 sites
around this country.
Recognizing the need for quality
science in all that we do, we recently
launched our STAR program-Science To
Achieve Results-bringing the best and
the brightest from across the scientific
community to assist us in our work, so
we can direct our resources to the highest
risks and do it using the highest quality
data. Five thousand graduate students
in science are competing for 100 fellow-
ships in research at EPA. We've ex-
panded our use of risk assessment and
cost-benefit analysis. In fact, the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences has recog-
nized EPA as a world leader in using risk
analysis.
These are some of the strategies we are
using to reinvent environmental protec-
tion. All of these strategies work for
business, for communities, and for
people across the country. All of these
are new strategies that will take us to the
future.
We Must Reinvent, Not Repeal
Last month, the President, the Vice
President, and I announced the Clinton
Administration's regulatory reinvention
of environmental protection. Through a
package of important reforms, we will
trust honest business people as partners,
not adversaries-without sacrificing one
ounce of public health protection.
We will cut paperwork by 25 percent,
saving 20 million hours a year for
6
business and communities. Time and
money should be invested in making a
product, not filling out forms.
We will allow a six-month grace
period-to give small business owners a
chance to fix compliance problems
instead of paying a fine. We will reward
companies that take responsibility for
finding and fixing environmental
problems. Our goal is compliance with
the laws that protect public health and
the environment-not punishment.
We will institute one-stop emissions
reporting and consolidate our air-
pollution rules. Instead of a dozen
different rules and a dozen different
forms, our goal is one rule, one permit,
one report.
Under our new Project XL-excellence
and leadership-we will choose 50
businesses and communities and say to
them, "Here's the pollution reduction
goal. You know your operation better
than anyone else. If you can figure out
how to reach the goal and exceed that
goal, then you can throw out the rule
book."
Through the Clinton Administration's
regulatory reinvention, we are refining
environmental protection to make it
more flexible, more effective, more
sensible, and more affordable-to
achieve the very best environmental
results for the least cost.
These reforms will move us beyond
~:~.",
..
t
'1::'
J .~
t,
~i \
,~) - - .
"r,
r~ ~
~: '><
\'I..~
.~
"t.
;r: 1 '~
''':-
j
l.
'~i'""
Robert Visser photo Greenpe8ce. Copyrighted
rigid, one-size-fits-all regulation. But
unlike proposals for regulatory reform
being debated in Congress, these reforms
do not cross the line to one-size-fits-all
deregulation.
We need to reinvent environmental
regulations-not repeal public health
protections. The Clinton Administration's
regulatory reinvention will help us work
together to protect our health and our
environment-and do it through com-
mon-sense, cost-effective measures.
After all the progress we've made
since the first Earth Day 25 years ago, we
cannot go back. We must go forward.
Every American Must Help
It is the job of government to protect the
public. But government cannot do the
job alone. We need every American to
help ensure strong public health and
environmental protections. Joining
together is not a matter of choice-it is a
necessity. We all breathe the same air,
drink the same water, and work and play
in the same environment. That's why
EP A is using this 25th anniversary of
Earth Day to remind parents and kids,
communities and companies that "the
Earth is in your hands." If we join
together, we can take the common sense
steps we need to take-and be proud to
pass along a safe, clean world to our
children and our children's children. 0
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Recycling-a step
toward
becoming an
environmental
citizen.
Polluted runoff in
the making: Oi(,md
debris from parking
lots and streets end
up in our rivers,
lakes, and streams.
EPA Earth Day Contacts
EPA Headquarters
Melba Meador
Earth Day Coordinator
401 M Street, Sw. (1101ED)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 260-1128
Fax: 202 260-3384
Region 4
(AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN)
Alice Chastain
Office of Public Affairs
345 Courtland Street, NE.
Atlanta, GA 30365
Phone: 404347-3555 ext. 6747
Fax: 404347-3721
Region 1
(CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT)
Frank McIntyre
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
(REA)
Boston, MA 02203
Phone: 617 565-9028
Fax: 617565-3415
Region 2
(N], NY, PR, VI)
Ann Rychlenski
290 Broadway
New York, NY 10007
Phone: 212637-3672
Fax: 212637-4445
Region 3
(DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV)
Virginia Moseley
841 Chestnut Building (3EA20)
Philadelphia, PA 19107-4431
Phone: 215597-9904
Fax: 215580-2009
Region 5
(IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI)
Nancy Sullivan
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago,IL 60604-3507
Phone: 312886-6687
Fax: 312 353-1155
Region 6
(AR, LA, NM, OK, TX)
Alfredo Coy
1445 Ross Avenue (Mail Code 6X)
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Phone: 214665-2206
Fax: 214665-2118
Region 7
(lA, KS, MO, NE)
Bill Landis
Office of External Programs
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone: 913551-7314
Fax: 913551-7066
Region 8
(CO, MT, NO, SO, UT, WY)
Linda Woodworth
(80EA-EISC)
999 18th Street, Suite 800
Denver, CO 80202-2466
Phone: 303391-6219
Fax: 303391-6216
Region 9
(AZ, CA, HI, NV, AS, GU)
Ida Tolliver
75 Hawthorne Street (E-2)
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: 415744-1581
Fax: 415744-1605
Region 10
(AK, 10, OR, WA)
Sally Hanft
1200 6th Avenue (MS 50-141)
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: 206 553-1207
Fax: 206553-1809
ORO Laboratories
Research Triangle Park Lab
Research Triangle Park, NC
919541-5552
Cincinnati Lab
Cincinnati,OH 513 569-7773
Robert E. Kerr
Environmental Research Lab
Ada, OK 405436-8511
Environmental Research Labs
Gulf Breeze, FL 904 934-9208
Athens, GA 706546-3524
Duluth, MN 218 720-5500
Corvallis, OR 503 754-4601
Narragansett, RI 401 782-3000
WINTER 1995
7
-------
I -~-::.- --......: -. ..
......,......~
-
-- -----
- ",,':J/i--
~
-
-
.
~
~4<
-
... . .;.. .,.
....-:'"It.:.
,..
Documerica pharo by Chester Higgins, Jr Nationa' Archives
Unwelcome arrival-an oil slick invades New York Harbor (1973).
8
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Earth Day 25 Years Later
We must strive to achieve a sustainable society
by Gaylord Nelson
On April 22, 1970, Earth Day was
held, one of the most remarkable
happenings in the history of
democracy. Fully 10 percent of the
population of the country, twenty
million people, demonstrated their
support for redeeming the American
environment. . . . American politics
and public policy would never be
the same. (American Heritage
magazine, October 1993)
The idea of Earth Day 1970 was to
have a national demonstration of
environmental concern big
enough to shake up the political
establishment-get its attention, get
some action, force environmental issues
onto the political agenda of national
priorities. The idea worked, thanks to
the spontaneous response of millions of
concerned Americans, and the event
served as a wake-up call to the political
establishment. Suddenly, the environ-
ment became a national political
priority.
Since Earth Day 1970, Congress has
enacted nearly 40 major federal
environmental laws addressing a wide
range of issues, including clean air,
clean water, energy conservation,
hazardous wastes, and herbicides and
other pesticides. Dozens of individual
public land bills have been enacted
since 1970 to designate or expand
wilderness areas, wild and scenic
rivers, national parks, and wildlife
refuges. Perhaps most important, more
than 80 percent of Americans now
regard themselves as environmentalists.
Since 1970 we have come a long way.
After 25 years of researching, debating,
and learning, increasing numbers of
people recognize that the state of the
environment is the key factor in
determining our way of life and the
quality of it.
WINTER 1995
Increasingly, we are coming to
understand that air, water, soil, forests,
minerals, rivers, lakes, oceans, scenic
beauty, wildlife habitats, and
biodiversity constitute the wealth of the
nation. This is our capital. In short,
these resources are all there is. That's
the whole economy. That's where all
the economic activity-and all the
jobs-comes from.
Nonetheless, this simple proposition
is conveniently overlooked when doing
so serves some immediate political or
financial interest. That's why we so
frequently hear political and business
leaders, economists, and others who
should know better vacuously assert
In the jargon
of the business world,
the economy is a
wholly owned subsidiary
of the environment.
that they "are for the environment if it
doesn't cost jobs," This misses the
obvious point that a healthy environ-
ment and a prosperous economy are
inextricably tied one to the other.
In the jargon of the business world,
the economy is a wholly owned
subsidiary of the environment. All
economic activity is dependent on that
environment, on its underlying re-
source base. If the environment is
finally forced to file under Chapter 11
because its resource base has been
polluted, degraded, dissipated, and
irretrievably compromised, then the
economy goes bankrupt with it because
the economy is just a subset within the
ecological system. When the environ-
ment is sacrificed in the short-term
of
, ,%
~
Gaylord Nelson today.
interest of creating jobs, the cost and
long-term job loss always exceed the
immediate benefit. Consuming capital
and counting it as income-this is the
road to bankruptcy.
At this point in history, no nation
has managed to evolve into a sustain-
able society. All are pursuing a self-
destructive course; we are all fueling
our economies by consuming our
capital-that is to say, by degrading
our resource base.
Recently, in a joint statement, the
United States National Academy of
Sciences and the Royal Society of
London, two of the world's leading
scientific bodies, addressed the state of
the planet in the following words:
If current predictions of population
growth prove accurate and patterns
of human activity on the planet
remain unchanged, science and
technology may not be able to
prevent either irreversible degrada-
tion of the environment or contin-
ued poverty for much of the world.
(Population Growth, Resource
Consumption, and a Sustainable
World, 7992)
This sobering observation confronts us
with the challenge to significantly
reduce population growth in the next
few years and achieve population
stability before the mid-21st century.
Right now, we are dealing with a
9
-------
~ 1SIW~
~ ~\Ji ' .:~
tnu ~ iIA
'11
- '~.'i:~..:.
,~~ .
Earth Day marchers in New York City in 1989.
Nancy le Vine photo Greenpeace CopYf/ghted
social, ecological, and economic
challenge unlike any other in our
history. This challenge is far more
serious than the military threat to the
democratic West in World War II.
Nations can recover from lost wars-
witness Germany and Japan-but there
is no recovery from a destroyed
ecosystem.
On December 5,1962, Dean Acheson,
in a speech at West Point, observed that
"Britain has lost an empire and has not
yet found a goa1." Ironically, that
describes the current American dilemma.
The Soviet superpower has disinte-
grated, the Communist menace has
dissolved, and the Cold War is over. As
yet, as a nation, the United States has not
found a unifying theme, a moral cause to
replace the Cold War-this despite the
fact that a monumental moral cause is
near at hand, a far more serious chal-
10
lenge than the Cold War ever was. It's
the war against the planet. How do we
bring it to an end, and where do we
start? We must start in the United States.
We cannot and should not wait for the
rest of the world.
Truly understanding that sustainability
is the ultimate issue will bring America
face-to-face with the political challenge
of forging a sustainable society during
the next few decades. It is a challenge
America can meet if we have the leader-
ship and the political will to do so.
Nearly 60 years ago, in a speech in
Philadelphia on June 27, 1936, President
Roosevelt said:
There is a mysterious cycle in
human events. To some generations
much is given. Of other generations
much is expected. This generation
of Americans has a rendezvous with
destiny.
This eloquent exhortation fits well the
generation now coming of age. The
challenge of creating a sustainable
society implies a bigger rendezvous with
history and a bigger destiny than
Roosevelt was thinking about in 1936.
With enough determination, Americans
can measure up to the challenge. I am
optimistic the generation now preparing
to take the helm will have the foresight
and will to do so. 0
(Nelson,formerlya U.S. Senator from
Wisconsin, was founder of Earth Day 1970.
He is currently .~unsel~r for t!te Wilderness
Society. In addItIOn, he IS ChaIrman of Earth
Day XXv, a group that is helping to organize
a national Earth Day event on the Mal! in
Washington, DC)
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Environmental Protection:
Is the Public Willing to Pay?
Last December, current
EPA Administrator
Carol Browner and
three fomler adminis-
trators participated in
a forum at Harvard
University's John F
Kennedy School of
Government. They
shared their views on
whether the American
public continues to be
willing to pay the
economic costs of
protecting the environ-
ment. Robert Stavins,
Associate Professor of
Public Policy at the
Kennedy School,
moderated the forum,
which was broadcast
on C-SPAN. Excerpts
from the program
follow.
Ahead of their time:
Earth Day 1970
marchers recognize
links between
environmental and
economic concerns.
WINTER 1995
Robert Stavins
It has frequently been suggested that
the modern environmental policy
era began in 1970 at the time of the
first Earth Day. That's also the year that
marked the founding, not coincidentally,
of EPA. Since that time, I think it's fair to
say that there has been a gradual but
ever increasing awareness that there are
linkages between our desires for envi-
ronmental protection on the one hand
and economic realities on the other.
This recognition has been absolutely
bipartisan. For example, it was the Bush
administration that explicitly recognized
the connection between environmental
and economic policy when it insisted in a
1990 report that "economic growth is a
"
~
J
~
~
!
'"
'"
~
~
"
~
'"
is:
(3
"
:!!
"
0:
~
1i.
"
~
c\5
'"
:!!
11
-------
FORUM
necessary condition for environmental
improvement." The Clinton Adminis-
tration carried that recognition further
when the President, in his 1993 Earth
Day speech, described "environmental
protection as a necessary condition for
economic welfare."
In any case, the perception among
all participants in the environmental
policy process is fundamentally that
the linkages between the environment
and the economy have never been
greater than they are now. This
program, then, should not only be of
great interest to all of us but also of
great relevance. Does environmental
protection inevitably corne at some
economic cost? Is the public begin-
ning to express resistance to further
increases in that cost? Or is the public
continuing to demand greater levels
of environmental quality despite the
economic costs that may be forthcom-
ing? Or are those very questions
themselves misleading? Is there no
real tradeoff between environmental
protection and economic welfare in
the first place? Is it, as Vice-President
Gore and many others have asserted,
a false dichotomy? [See Gore's article
in EPAJournal's Fall 1994 issue.]
Americans spend $2 billion
yearly on bottled water-
half the amount the
country spends to protect
tap water.
12
Carol~. Bro~er
Next December, EPA will cele-
brate its 25th anniversary. If
we look back to 1970, we will recall that
the public was angry. They were
alarmed when thousands of leaking
barrels of toxic chemicals were discov-
ered in Love Canal, when farmers in
Michigan had to shoot their cows
because they'd been contaminated by
toxic chemicals in their feed, when the
water in New Orleans became so
contaminated that people could not
drink it, when a river in Cleveland
caught fire. It was these and other crises
that caused us to corne together as a
nation and pass some very important
environmental laws.
When I look at what my predecessors
have been able to accomplish in their
tenures at EPA, I think it is truly remark-
able. Not only can we point to very real
environmental improvements, but our
Steve Delaney phoro EFA
EPA JOURNAL
-------
environmental technology is in demand
around the world. Yet I think we would
also agree that there is a tremendous
amount that remains to be done. The
problems that remain are still very real
despite the progress we have made as a
country. [See article by Administrator
Browner on page 4.]
Is the public still willing to pay? It is
clear, as poll after poll shows, that the
public is still deeply concerned about
environmental protection. They are
particularly concerned about threats to
their health, to the health of their
children. Many believe we haven't gone
far enough.
At the same time, we hear people
saying: "Well, I don't know if I want to
pay for it. I'm confused about whether
the solutions that are proposed are really
the common-sense answer to the prob-
lem."
>~
I / I
/f
I t
~".
~~
.j. .
~'-
~'1
/
.
"",
, 1-" -hi'
"
1
WINTER 1995
So I think that the question is not
simply, "Are people willing to
pay?"-that's a piece of it-but "For
what are they willing to pay?" Let me
use an example that I think demon-
strates how confused the public is.
As a country, we spend $4 billion a
year to deliver clean water to the tap.
That's the bill for safe drinking water
that each and everyone of us chips in
for. We point out to people the
problems we are beginning to see in
our drinking-water supply, such as
those that occurred recently in
Milwaukee, New York, and Washing-
ton, DC, and we ask them if they are
willing to pay more. They say they
don't think so. Yet the people in one
out of six households spend $2 billion
a year for bottled water.
In other words, when people have
control over the decision, they are
willing to spend more. When they
can go into the grocery store and
make a consumer decision, they're
willing to do it. As a nation, we are
now actually spending $6 billion for
the water we drink, but a third of that
is being spent outside the traditional
system designed to provide safe
drinking water.
What this demonstrates, I think, is
that we need to change the process,
that we need to find new ways of
achieving our goals. Above all, we
need to find new ways of involving
the public in developing solutions. It
does not mean that we should change
our commitment to standards that
will protect human health and protect
our natural resources.
Clearly, government has an impor-
tant responsibility, but we can't do the
job alone. We have to reach out to
communities, to the people who will
live with the decisions we make. We
have to involve them in shaping
decisions, give them access to
information so that they can feel they
are participating in the process.
(Browner is the current EPA Administrator.)
William Ruckelshaus
Woodallen pharo.
I have thought about what I might
say that could help, and I have come
up with three modest objectives for
environmental policy for the next two
years. We can't be sure what these next
two years will bring, although they will
undoubtedly be much different than the
two years that preceded this one.
Hopefully, they will bode some good for
the environment and for the environ-
mental policy of the country.
In the first place, I think advancement
of the public's knowledge about the
nature of environmental problems, to the
point where public demands for environ-
mental protection could match their
collective interest, would be a very good
thing. To accomplish this public educa-
tion will entail using the bully pulpit of
the EPAAdministrator, of the Congress,
and of the White House. I think we
desperately need more knowledge
transfer from our leaders in this coun-
try-and less opportunistic advocacy-
if we are to reverse literally decades of
erosion of public trust in our government.
Secondly, we should seek to adjust
current statutes and regulations so that
we can derive more environmental and
public-health benefits from them at a
reasonable cost. This means, first and
foremost, providing more flexibility to
the Administrator of EPA.
EPA simply needs a bigger tool box. It
needs not only to be able to use com-
13
-------
FORUM
mand-and-control, which has fallen on
bad times of late, but instruments that, in
effect, align our economic and environ-
mental incentives and goals. This means
an honest look at what should be done to
protect the environment and at what
level of government. We could certainly
start with a law that everybody acknowl-
edges doesn't work, Superfund, and see
if we can make our laudable desire to
clean up past messes become more
efficient and effective.
Third, let me suggest to my newly
empowered Republican colleagues:
Please avoid wild swings of the pendu-
lum away from regulation and toward
laissez-faire environmental policy,
because once swung the pendulum will
inevitably come swinging wildly back,
thereby destroying the predictability
which is so terribly important to progress
in the environmental area.
Finally, in response to Robert Stavins'
question about whether the public is
willing to pay for environmental protec-
tion, the answer is yes: People do
support social regulations governing
public health and the environment when
the cost of that regulation is perceived as
remote-whether remote in the sense of
how the requisite money is expended by
the public or private sector, or in the
sense of how the regulation burdens
them. If you go to an average city in this
country and ask the question, "Are you
in favor of more strict enforcement of the
Clean Air Act?" 80 percent of the people
will probably say yes. If you go to that
same city and say, "Are you willing to
spend 20 minutes a year to get your car
inspected in order to help achieve those
standards?" 80 percent are likely to say
no. As Carol Browner suggested in her
remarks, there is an obvious disconnect.
At some point there has to be acceptance
of civic responsibility as well as the
assertion of rights to things like clean air.
We complain a lot in this country that we
haven't got the right kind of leaders; we
need the right kind of followers as well.
(Ruckelshaus was EPA Administrator fram
December 1971 to April 1973 and fram May 1983
to January 1985. He is currently Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer of Browning-Ferris
Industries.)
14
Douglas Costle
I remember the 1970s as a time when
we were trying to put into place a
legislative base for dealing with environ-
mental problems. I also remember the
tremendous bipartisan congressional
support that was there all through the
70s. There was a tradition of bipartisan-
ship and political consensus around
trying to deal with these problems right
from the beginning.
I think it is also true to say that the
focus of much of that legislative base was
to play catchup and that the chosen
instrument was command-and-control
regulation. And I think a consensus
emerged early on, even back in the
Carter years, that it was time to begin
experimenting with other models for
decision making.
I am reminded that in Woodstock,
Vermont, where I now live, we have an
annual celebration called the Wassail
Parade. Everybody dresses up in old-
fashioned costumes, and if they've got a
horse, they ride it in this parade that
passes through Woodstock and circles the
town green. It marks the beginning of
the holiday season and it's very colorful.
A friend of mine, who is also the town
chimney sweep, is always the last person
in the parade. He rides around on the
tailgate of a wagon with a great big
garbage can and a shovel. His job is to
scoop up the droppings and dump them
in the can. When he goes by, you know
the parade is over. Well, this year,
instead of riding on the tailgate of a
truck, he showed up on Rollerblades.
I suppose he wanted to show that the
world changes even in Vermont.
I always think of that story as analo-
gous to our situation with the environ-
ment. We've been involved in a catch-
up, clean-up kind of game, and we've
made a lot of progress. The street is
cleaner, certainly, than it was when we
started. And there will be a residual
requirement for command-and-control
regulation for some time to come.
But we've been dealing with technolo-
gies that were conceived without
reference to their environmental conse-
quence. You name it-steelmaking,
chemical manufacturing, automobiles,
consumer products-the cumulative
burden finally caught up to us in the 60s.
And so we've been going around trying
to fix them, like a plumber called in for
an emergency.
I think the challenge now is to recog-
nize that our job is a lot more than just
trying to fix the past mistakes. We must
find ways to catch the train that's already
leaving the station in terms of future
investment in new plant equipment and
new technologies. We can bend that
investment by incentive or by regula-
tion-I would prefer incentive-in the
direction of technologies that are more
resource efficient and that pollute less,
reflecting a more realistic understanding
of the constraints on global resources. In
the case of energy; I think it's the same
thing: We're talking about much less
wasteful energy consumption. We
cannot, for example, solve the global
warming problem if we don't somehow
assist China to choose a new direction in
terms of energy-generating capacity. The
same can be said for virtually every form
of economic activity right through
agriculture.
The challenge, then, is not just to come
up with quick fixes. It's going to require
some thoughtful redesign of our tax
EPA JOURNAL
-------
code, of our incentives, a redefinition of
what we mean by economic well-being.
I worry that in the short term we may
see a radical change in the political
institutions that have brought forth our
legislative base of environmental law
and regulation. I think we could lose an
opportunity to ensure that environmen-
tal objectives are a part of the destination
of that train into the future. But I don't
think we can ever turn the tide back, for
several reasons. The environment has
become a permanent part of our political
value system. We now have a whole
generation of Americans who under-
stand in their gut what we were only
coming to understand in our head: This
DocumenC8 pharo Naaonal ArchIVes
,~~
is important. This is a matter of the
survival of the global commons. It is an
issue that cuts uniquely across the socio-
economic spectrum and across interna-
tional boundaries; it cuts across ethnic
boundaries and across religious, na-
tional, and economic boundaries. It will
increasingly be the stuff of international
affairs and geopolitical debate and
discussion. The problems are real. And
that in the end is what matters: The
problems are, in fact, real.
(Castle was Administrator of EPA
from March 1977 to January 1981.
More recently, he served as Dean of
the Vermont LAw School.)
r _~I_-~-
9~f-p't~HNINC.
: \' Q.~L ure D ~
'v. \\ ~.W~ 1 ~ ~.' ~
./ ~ . r., R~-",
,'; N Or~ "
~IJJ .. .
t!IM"" .~. I
- \"" .
..
Thanks to a sewage-treatment plant opened in July 1962, a park in Seattle,
Washington, is reopened to swimmers-an early success story.
WINTER 1995
William Reilly
Sreve Delaney pharo EPA
I would begin by reaffirming what
some of the others on this panel have
already said about the tremendous
progress we have made on the environ-
ment. I think it is the single most
successful public policy of modern
American history It's quantifiable, it's
measurable, it's really indisputable. Yet
nobody knows it. The columnist Mark
Shields has advanced a theory as to why
this is so. He claims that the reason no
one knows what progress we've made is
that there is a conspiracy between
Republicans, who don't want to admit
that government works, and Democrats,
who don't want to acknowledge that
most of the progress occurred under
Republican presidents. So they both
keep quiet about it.
I personally think it is vital that the
country understand that this is an area of
tremendous success and achievement.
We build on a foundation of success.
Not long ago I came across a piece of
advice in a directive from the Hemlock
Society, an organization which assists its
members in relieving themselves of the
burden of existence in this vale of tears
we call life. Their advice, in paraphrase,
was: "If you are planning to take
extreme action, under no circumstances
rely on the carbon-monoxide emissions
15
-------
FORUM
from any automobile manufactured after
1993." This is our car; this is the Clean
Air Act of 1990's car. Let's advertise it
and be proud of it.
My second point is that, when you get
right down to it, the techniques and
methods that we have relied upon to
take us so far have been-what? Public
spending for all those wastewater-
treatment plants on the one hand and
command-and-control regulations with
their concomitant unfunded mandates
on the other. These are no longer to any
really significant degree available to us.
They are yielding diminishing returns.
We need to move beyond them.
We need not fear scrutiny
of environmental policy
from skeptical scientists.
Yet, I think we need not fear the new
era. We have over the past few years laid
the conceptual foundation for new
departures toward far more cost-effective
policies. To a considerable degree, when
a new environmental initiative is under
consideration, congressmen and senators
now ask the questions: "How many lives
does this affect? What is the health
impact of the problem we are trying to
address here?" That didn't really used to
be true. I think in the early 70s there was
very little science involved in the crafting
of our environmental laws and priorities.
There still is a great asymmetry between
what the public considers serious-
largely oil spills and hazardous waste-
versus what the scientists consider most
important-indoor air pollution, ozone
depletion, climate change, and so forth.
But I think those divergent lines of public
and expert opinion have come closer
together. The right questions increas-
ingly are being asked.
16
I think that the degree to which we
have legitimized science should put the
Agency in a very good position to take
seriously the claims from so much of the
regulated community, and of some
portion of the scientific community, that
in some areas-I am thinking particu-
larly of hazardous waste-we have been
regulating with a preposterous conserva-
tism in terms both of unreasonable
inferences from animal data and unreal-
istic human-exposure assumptions.
I think we need not fear scrutiny of
environmental policy from skeptical
scientists. I think we ought to lead the
great review, the overdue sorting-out of
environmental priorities that science,
politics, and economics all are forcing.
We ought not be defensive about current
environmental priorities, or fearful of
reconsidering them. Environmentalists,
EPA professionals particularly, have the
tools to undertake the overhaul.
Finally, we should put to rest another
view that prevailed during the first
generation of environmental laws, and
that is that the states typically are merely
recalcitrant backwaters of the special
interests. Rather, they are increasingly
the cockpits of innovation, of new ideas,
of programmatic initiatives that work-
initiatives that are copied by other states,
and that then find their way to Washing-
ton. Now is a moment, therefore, in
which we can consider delegation to a
degree that probably was not possible 10
or 15 years ago. By increasingly encour-
aging states to make their own decisions,
we can begin to eliminate the tremen-
dous duplication that characterizes the
administration of federal environmental
laws. We can save some bureaucracy
and some money. And we may also
foster more diversity and innovation in
the great enterprise of protecting health
and natural systems in this country.
(Reilly was EPA Administrator from February
1989 to January 1993.)
o
EPA JOURNAL
-------
What Voters Say
About the Environment Today
Poll shows widespread support for green causes
by Bill Line
Despite last November's election
results, Americans in all parts of
the country say they did not
vote to weaken or undermine the
nation's environmental laws and regula-
tions, according to a nationwide poll.
The poll of 1,201 people who voted in the
November general election was con-
ducted from December 1 to 4, 1994. The
poll has an overall margin of error of
plus or minus 3.2 percent.
Commissioned by the National
Wildlife Federation and conducted by
the polling firm of Peter 0. Hart Associ-
ates, the poll shows respondents over-
whelmingly support the environment
and the regulations designed to protect
it. Forty-one percent of all voters said
existing laws don't go far enough in
protecting the environment. In both
major parties, a plurality of voters agreed
that current laws need to be tougher-50
percent of all Democrats and 34 percent
of all Republicans. Among voters as a
whole, 21 percent said existing laws
strike the right balance. Just 18 percent
said existing regulations go too far.
The poll found only a small percentage
of voters considered environmental
positions when choosing candidates,
with issues like crime and the economy
playing a far greater role in influencing
decisions.
"Candidates weren't talking about the
environment, and the voters had other
things on their minds," explained
pollster Peter D. Hart. "But when we
asked them about the environment, they
had very strong opinions."
The poll found public support for
several protection measures that do not
mesh well with the stated positions of
many new congressional leaders.
(Line is Manager of Education Communications
at the National Wildlife Federation. Founded in
1936, the National Wildlife Federation works to
educate and assist individuals and organizations
to conserve natural resources and to protect the
Earth's environment.)
WINTER 1995
'--"
. ...
,/
..' "
~
. .
~, . ~
.~.--.....
-,
,
,
"' ,II
II
"
..~
"~
Voters don't want environmental protection rolled back.
Steve De/Bney photo EfA
Among those findings:
. 76 percent favor strengthening safe
drinking water laws.
. 56 percent oppose requiring compen-
sation to property owners prevented by
environmental regulations from doing
what they want with their land.
. 57 percent favor maintaining the
strong provisions of the Endangered
Species Act.
. 63 percent say mining, ranching, and
logging operations should be charged a
"fair market fee" for use of public land.
. 64 percent favor redirecting crop
subsidies to encourage farmers to keep
pesticides out of food and water.
Support was equally strong among
voters expressing particular concern for
the economy, jobs, and the cost of
living-often cited as a reason for
limiting environmental protection. The
poll found that 41 percent of respondents
said current laws don't go far enough
and that there is little sympathy for
claims saying environmental laws place
an undue burden on businesses. While
21 percent of voters said those laws
properly balance the needs of business
and the public, 46 percent said the
businesses should be required to do
more.
"Voters clearly believe existing envi-
ronmentallaws provide insufficient
protection," said Hart. "And they don't
want those protections rolled back."
"Conserving this Earth isn't liberal or
conservative, Republican or Demo-
cratic," said National Wildlife Federation
President Jay D. Hair. "It's the only way
to ensure [that] our grandchildren enjoy
a quality of life at least as good as what
we have."
Hair cited upcoming legislative action
on the Farm Bill and Safe Drinking Water
Act as opportunities for bipartisan
progress that benefits all Americans. 0
17
-------
Good News for Waste Watchers
Recycling, composting show results for the future
by Roy Popkin
Recycling-perhaps the most
common household practice that
benefits the environment-has
boomed in the 25 years since the first
Earth Day. And all that effort is paying
off: More Americans are recycling and
composting, and those efforts are
reducing waste headed for landfills and
incinerators.
Even more promising are the future
trends: In the year 2000, Americans may
be contributing measurably less to the
municipal solid-waste stream than they
did in 1993. The downward trend-from
4.4 pounds per person per day in 1993 to
4.3 in 2000-is projected in a recent EPA
publication, Characterization of Municipal
Solid Waste in the United States: 1994
Update (EPA530-S-94-042). If this
happens as projected, it will be the first
such drop since 1960, the first year for
which comparable data were analyzed.
Two developments in particular are
driving this trend. Manufacturers are
making efforts to reduce the amount of
packaging they use, and composting is
on the upswing. Trimmings left on
American lawns or piled in backyards
have steadily increased since 1990.
According to this report, more than half
of the 50 states now require yard trim-
mings to be diverted from the waste
stream.
The total amount sent to landfills or
incinerators is projected to decline-from
162 to 152 million tons (see graph)--€ven
though consumer demands and popula-
tion growth will boost the amount of
waste generated over the next several
years from 207 million tons per year in
1993 to 218 million tons in 2000.
Among the report's other highlights:
. Recovery of waste for recycling and
for composting at community facilities
was estimated to be 22 percent of the
total waste stream in 1993, up from 17
percent in 1990, an impressive growth in
just three years. The amount recovered
rose from 33 to 45 million tons. Over
half the increase was paper and paper-
board. Yard trimmings for composting
showed the next greatest increase. In
1985,83 percent of all municipal solid
waste was dumped in landfills; in 1993
the percentage had dropped to 62.
Nevertheless, land filling will continue to
be the predominant waste-management
method into the year 2000.
. Combustion, usually with energy
recovery, currently accounts for 16
percent of municipal solid-waste dis-
posal (in the early 1960s about twice as
much was incinerated), and it is pro-
jected that combusted tonnage will
increase only slightly by 2000.
Municipal solid waste comes from
homes, office buildings, retail and
wholesale establishments, restaurants,
schools, libraries, hospitals, prisons, and
from industrial packaging and adminis-
trative sources (not from industrial
processes). It includes such items as
newspapers, clothing, disposable
Municipal Solid Waste Management, 1960 to 2000
:3 240
E
c:
.51
~ 200
160
120
80
40
1960
18
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
EPA JOURNAL
-------
r- -
T
Students protest refuse build-up on Earth Day 1970. Twenty-five
years later, recycling has taken hold.
tableware, packaging, cafeteria and
restroom trash, yard trimmings, office
papers, tires, old furniture, appliances,
and the like.
EPA endorses source reduction as the
preferred way to red uce the municipal
waste stream. Source reduction includes
reusing products (glass bottles, for
example) and composting yard waste-
any measure that keeps waste from
having to be disposed of in the first
place. Recycling is next in preference.
Waste combustion and landfilling are the
least desirable of available waste man-
agement practices.
The report indicates that the amount of
waste generated nationally fluctuates
with the economy and with family size-
oddly, families living in smaller homes
create more waste per person than those
in larger ones. The amount often reflects
WINTER 1995
the introduction of new kinds of throw-
away products into the marketplace.
Waste generation is projected to increase
in areas including paper products,
specifically corrugated and paperboard
packaging and third-class mail. Says the
report, "It is difficult to predict which
innovations and new products will affect
the amounts and types of [municipal
solid waste] discards. For example, there
have long been predictions of the
'paperless office' due to improvements in
electronic communications, but in fact,
facsimile machines, high-speed copiers,
and personal computers have caused
increasing amounts of paper to be
generated in offices. . . ."
Recovery of durable goods such as
furniture, appliances, and office machin-
ery for re-use seems to be increasing,
especially in industrial plants. And
Don Hogan Charles pharo The New York Times Copyrighted
recycling of glass bottles, metal cans,
tools, and wood used in shipping is on
the increase. This latter kind of activity
is often undertaken by community
organizations or charitable groups,
which also gather clothing and other
nondurable goods for resale or distribu-
tion. All of this, of course, keeps such
materials out of the landfills or incinera-
tors.
The report can be obtained electroni-
cally on Internet through the EPA Public
Access Server at "gopher.epa.gov." For a
copy of the executive summary, call the
RCRAjSuperfund Hotline at 800 424-
9346. 0
(Popkin is a WriterlEditor in EPA' s Office of
Cammunications, Education, and Public Affairs.)
19
-------
Experienced Help for the Environment
Seniors volunteer for their communities-and themselves
by Tom Benjamin
HoW can communities draw on
the life experiences and
professional skills of one of
our most precious and underutilized
natural resources to help solve environ-
mental problems at the local level? Get
senior citizens involved.
Founded in January 1992 by a
partnership of environmental, govern-
ment, and senior volunteer organiza-
tions (see box), the Environmental
Alliance for Senior Involvement (EASI)
identifies ways to foster senior involve-
ment in environmental issues. The
members of EASI have developed an
extensive network of environmental,
senior volunteer projects across the
country. These projects include every-
thing from recycling to monitoring
Superfund sites.
One project that received national
attention and was a model for others
coordinated a survey of potential
sources of groundwater contamination
in and around El Paso, Texas. Local
officials used the survey's information
to help identify potential problem areas
and reduce the possibility of contami-
nants entering the groundwater.
This is an example of members of a
community taking on a problem and
helping to solve it collectively. Twenty-
six senior volunteers were trained to
find and identify contaminants. They
conducted a house-to-house survey in
three and a half days and saved the
Texas Water Commission $35,000.
Seniors identified 2,000 potential
pollution sources, ranging from
underground storage tanks to leaking
municipal sewer lines. A unique
advantage they brought to the survey:
Many could remember where gas
stations had once stood on what are
now vacant lots.
This project led to the guide, Volun-
teers and the Environment: A "How To"
Manual For Groundwater Protection
20
~ --
;, H -
~.,._....."
Leonard Schombel analyzes hydrology maps at Milltown Dam.
RSVP phoro
Projects, published in 1992 in cooperation
with the National Association of RSVP
Directors, Inc. The manual has become a
widely used tool for other projects
around the country.
In Missoula, Montana, the recently
formed Senior Environmental Corps,
among its other projects, assigns seniors
with scientific and engineering skills to
help a citizens' group monitor activities
at one of the nation's largest Superfund
sites, the Milltown Reservoir Site.
Volunteer senior Leonard Schombel, a
retired petroleum geophyicist, analyzes
hydrology maps for the Milltown
Technical Assistance Committee, a
citizens' group. Schombel reports that
prior to his joining the Missoula Corps
he'd found it difficult to find volunteer
work in which he could use his skills.
In another project, volunteers from
Missoula's Senior Environmental Corps
grow food for such organizations as the
Missoula Food Bank and the Family
Food Assistance Program, which assist
the community's needy population. On
a remarkably small plot of land, these
volunteers grew more than 700 pounds
of produce, including potatoes, carrots,
onions, cabbages, Swiss chard, lettuce,
and tomatoes, all of which went to feed
the hungry. They grew the food organi-
cally, meaning that they used no chemi-
cally formulated fertilizers or pesticides.
Missoula's television station KECI-TV
13 supported the garden project by
producing and broadcasting public
service announcements that described
the good works of the Senior Environ-
mental Corps and called for more
volunteers. The station also featured
volunteers offering organic gardening
tips during the weather portion of its
6:00 p.m. news program.
These are but three of 85 projects
highlighted in Environmental Senior
Volunteer Resources Guide to be published
by EASI this spring. For information on
the guide or on EASI itself, write to:
EASI, 8733 Old Dumfries Road, Catlett,
VA 22019, or call 703 788-3274. 0
(Benjamin is President of the Environmental
Allumce for Senior Involvement.)
EPA JOURNAL
-------
RSVP phorn
Founders of EASI
. Alliance for Environmental Education
. American Association of Retired Persons
. Cooperative Extension Service
. U.S. EPA
. Izaak Walton League of America
. National Park Service
. National Wildlife Federation
. North American Coalition for Religion and Ecology
. National Association of RSVP Directors
. Renew America
. Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP)/ ACTION
(now part of President Clinton's National Service
Program and known as The Corporation for
National and Community Service)
. Scientific Environmental Research Foundation
. Senior Environment Corps
. The Nature Conservancy
. USDA Soil Conservation Service
WINTER 1995
~
~
J
Missoula seniors
use organic
gardening
practices to grow
food for the
needy.
"
"
-
RSVP photo
Senior volunteer
and younger
AmeriCorps
workers collect
groundwater
samples near El
Paso.
21
-------
Looking Ahead to the Planetls Future
IIFutures" research is a facet of pollution prevention
by Raymond Loehr
For the past quarter century, the
basic approach to environmental
protection in this country has been,
for the most part, reactive. Institutions
have been established, laws passed, and
regulations written in response to
problems that already were posing
substantial ecological and public-health
risks and costs-or that already were
causing deep-seated public concern.
Since its inception, EPA-like the
nation-has focused its attention almost
exclusively on the present and the past.
The political will to establish the Agency
grew out of a series of highly publicized,
well-advanced environmental problems,
like the fire on the Cuyahoga River, smog
in California, and the near-extinction of
the bald eagle. During the 1970s and
1980s, the U.S. Congress enacted a series
of laws intended to solve serious existing
environmental problems, and EPA was
given the responsibility to administer
most of them. The Superfund program,
by definition, was intended to clean up
the environmental mistakes of the past.
Even those EPA activities that are
intended explicitly to avoid future
problems, like pollution-prevention
programs and new source performance
standards, are given impetus by prob-
lems that already exist.
Despite the nation's demonstrable
success in arIleliorating a number of
existing environmental problems, an
almost exclusive reliance on after-the-fact
response will not protect the environ-
ment adequately in the future. It is
essential for EPA-and for other agencies
and organizations whose activities affect
the environment-to begin to anticipate
future environmental problems, then
take steps to avoid them, not just
(Loehr is a Professor of Civil Engineering at the
University of Texas. In addition to having
chaired the SAB Environmental Futures
Committee, he previously served as Chairman of
the SAB (1988 to 1993) and also cochaired the
Relative Risk Redudion Strategies Committee,
which produced the 1990 report Reducing Risk:
Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environ-
mental Protection.)
22
respond to them after the fact. Indeed,
one of the most important lessons taught
by this country's environmental history
is that the failure to think about the
future environmental consequences of
prospective sociat economic, and
technological changes may impose
substantial-and avoidable---economic
and environmental costs on future
generations. We can try to anticipate and
minimize future environmental problems
early on-or handle expensive crises later.
We can try to anticipate
and minimize future
environmental problems
early on-or handle
expensive crises later.
Thinking about the future is more
important today than ever before
because ever-faster change is shrinking
the distance between the present and the
future. Technological capabilities-in
computers, for example-that seemed
beyond the horizon just a few years ago
now seem old-fashioned. Scientific
understanding and the flow of informa-
tion are accelerating. Similarly, the
environmental effects of global economic
activity are being felt more rapidly by
both nations and individuals.
As a result, traditional responses to
environmental problems will not be
effective enough, or take effect quickly
enough, to protect vital economic and
environmental resources. It for ex-
ample, the terrestrial and oceanic
ecosystems needed to sustain our food
supply and our quality of life began to
deteriorate slowly but extensively, it
probably would be too late to save
indigenous species by the time popula-
tion declines were noticed. In short, the
pace of economic and technological
change dictates an increased emphasis
on foresight to protect the environment
over the long term.
Initiating thought and analysis well in
advance of anticipated change can
shorten the time needed to respond to
such change and red uce-or avoid
entirely-the kind of losses that result
when pollution problems persist over
time. Because such losses may be
irreversible, response time may well be a
critical measure of society's ability to
protect environmental quality in the
future. The bald eagle has soared back
from the edge of extinction, but we
should not forget that the loss of that
species very nearly became irreversible,
and only because we failed to pay
attention to the possible side effects of
some useful pesticides. Even when
losses are potentially reversible, like the
respiratory effects that result from short-
term human exposure to ground-level
ozone, high costs may be imposed on
human health or the economy before
they are reversed.
Thinking about the future also is
valuable because the cost of avoiding a
problem is often far less than the cost of
cleaning it up. The national experience
with hazardous-waste disposal provides
a compelling example. Some private
companies and federal facilities un-
doubtedly saved money in the short term
by disposing of hazardous waste
through provisional means, but those
savings were dwarfed by the cost of
cleaning up hazardous waste sites years
later. In that case, foresight could have
saved private industry, insurance
companies, the federal government, and
taxpayers billions of dollars, while
reducing pollutant exposures-and
resulting anxieties-in neighboring
communities.
Besides reducing both the response
time and the cost of protective actions,
To avoid future ecological
crises, the health of the Earth's
oceans bears watching.
EPA JOURNAL
-------
,
thinking about the future can preserve a
wider variety of response options. For
example, there are several ways to limit
the potential effects of solid-waste
disposal on groundwater. There are
fewer-and more expensive-alterna-
tives for cleaning up groundwater after
contamination.
Actions driven by environmental
WINTER 1995
The bald eagle
came close to
extinction
before DDT
was banned.
lane Wi/Iiams photo Copyrighted
foresight can help strengthen
inter generational equity by preserving
the environmental inheritance of future
generations. When one generation's
behavior necessitates environmental
remediation in the future, a burden of
environmental debt is bequeathed to its
children just as surely as unbalanced
government budgets bequeath a burden
:"'..
.., ".
'\'';J. 1'.'
.,
,A-'"'}I:' .,..
-------
professionals who provide technical
advice and information to the Adminis-
trator and other officials of the Agency
Administrator Browner solicited the
SAB's advice on the value of anticipating
environmental problems that might
emerge in the future, the tools that might
be used to anticipate them, and examples
of possible emerging ecological and
human health problems. In response, the
SAB formed the Environmental Futures
Committee (EFe) to undertake a study of
environmental foresight with the
following objectives:
. Assess different methodologies
currently being used to study possible
futures and anticipate likely future
events
. Identify some environmental issues
that could emerge over the long term
(through the year 2025)
. Advise EPA on ways to incorporate
futures research into the Agency's
activities.
To meet the objectives of this study, the
EFC first outlined a formal system of
inquiry capable of anticipating possible
environmental issues that could emerge
over the next five to 30 years. Then it
tested that system in order to define
specific issues that could emerge. Thus
the EFC not only delineated the various
methodologies currently available to
futures research, but it tested one of
them. Both elements-the generic
analysis and the specific application-
contributed to the EFC's conclusions and
recommendations.
From the outset, the EFC recognized
that it was not possible to anticipate
future environmental problems without
attempting to identify the large social,
economic, and technological forces that
were likely to drive future changes in
environmental conditions. Such drivers
can generate environmental stressors
that cause adverse effects on human
health and ecological systems. Although
there are many such drivers, the EFC
identified four as especially important:
population growth and urbanization,
economic expansion and resource
consumption, technological develop-
ment, and environmental attitudes and
institutions. Then the EFC reviewed the
methodologies currently available for
anticipating environmental issues that
could emerge in the future. And finally,
by applying one of the foresight method-
24
ologies, the EFC compiled an initial list
of possible future environmental issues.
The resulting report, entitled Beyond the
Horizon: Using Foresight to Protect the
Environmental Future, summarizes the
results of the EFC study and offers
several recommendations that have
broad, future-oriented policy implica-
tions (see box).
The process of assessing and applying
the formal system of inquiry called
futures research led the EFC to the major
conclusion of this report: EPA, and other
agencies and organizations whose
activities affect the environment,
should give as much attention to
avoiding future environmental prob-
lems as to controlling current ones. In
particular, EPA should establish a
strong environmental futures capability
to serve as an early warning system for
emerging environmental problems.
Because EPA is responsible for protec-
ting the environment now and over the
long term, the Agency has an obligation
to search for the "weak signals" that
portend future risks to environmental
health and that provide early clues about
how to ameliorate or avoid those risks.
EPA's capability to detect and analyze
these signals should be global in scope,
eclectic in its use of information sources,
and quantitative whenever possible. It
should be continuous, interactive with
other organizations, and subject to
scrutiny from outside the Agency It
should be linked to the "futures" efforts
of other agencies and organizations, and
its results should be shared openly with
the public.
EPA's traditional ways of identifying-
and solving--environmental problems
will not be adequate to protect against
problems that may emerge several
years---or decades-from now. For
example, the costs of future environmen-
tal problems, and the benefits of actions
taken today to avoid them, will be
difficult to estimate accurately. More-
over, futures research has to be extraordi-
narily tolerant of omissions, uncertain-
ties, inaccuracies, and errors because any
view beyond the horizon is inevitably
dim.
Yet, looking beyond the horizon is
essential to the nation's future success in
protecting the environment. Protecting
the future with foresight is a critical part
of EPA's responsibility, and it is a
forward-looking extension of the
pollution-prevention concept.
EPA, however, is not solely responsible
for looking beyond the horizon to protect
future environmental quality Many
other organizations, both inside and
outside of government, have substantial
roles to play The EFC's report contains
detailed recommendations intended to
help EPA, other federal agencies, the
private sector, and the nation clarify their
view of, and better protect, the environ-
ment of the future.
.!J!
~
~
~
c
c
~
~
2t
S
~
"
&
...~R1\1. ~'{ C.~ENN\M.. (E\..t;~w..T1oN...
EPA JOURNAL
-------
It is the hope of the SAB Environmen-
tal Futures Committee that EPA will
consider and take into account the
approaches and recommendations made
in Beyond the Horizon. By taking appro-
priate steps, we can begin to protect our
environmental future today. 0
At Hawaii's Mauna Loa
Observatory, scientists were
able to detect and read telltale
signs of an unprecedented hole
in the Earth's ozone layer.
Editor's note: Reilders mny call 202 260-
8414 to obtain a copy of the overview report
entitled Beyond the Horizon: Using
Foresight to Protect the Environmental
Future. The overview report draws upon a
more detailed Technical Annex as well as
stand-alone reports from five other Science
Advisory Board committees (namely, the
SAB Committees on Drinking Water, on
Ecological Processes and Effects, on
Environmental Engineering, and on Indoor
Air Quality([otal Human Exposure, and the
Radiation Advisory Committee): All of
these documents are available by calling the
telephone number given above.
~~(7',.t: ';:Jf.,:-.:-./.:t-",.
'~ );
~
<>.
~
«
The Recommendations
The Environmental Futures Committee did not predict or
even suggest that environmental calamities are inevitable in
the future. Rather, by investigating future possibilities, it
attempted to draw attention to the value of anticipating,
understanding, and-if necessary-responding now to
environmental problems that may emerge in the future,
rather than continuing to play "catch-up" with problems
after they emerge. The following recommendations are
intended to strengthen the nation's ability to protect the
future by using the tools of foresight available now.
. As much attention should be given to avoiding future
environmental problems as to controlling current ones.
EPA should incorporate futures research into all its pro-
grams and activities, particularly strategic planning and
budgeting.
. As an essential part of its futures capabilities, EPA
should establish an early warning system to identify
potential future environmental risks. EPA should establish
a look-out panel-made up of individuals from inside and
outside government-to provide the Agency, and the nation,
with an early warning of environmental issues that may
emerge in the future.
. To initiate its efforts, EPA should consider evaluating
five overarching problem areas related to a number of
potential environmental issues: sustainability of terrestrial
ecosystems; human health effects other than cancer; total
air-pollutant loadings; nontraditional environmental
stressors; and the health of the oceans.
. EPA should stimulate coordinated national efforts to
anticipate and respond to environmental change. Since an
integrated, national effort is essential to environmental
protection, EPA should spur cooperative activities among
federal agencies, different levels of government, and the
private sectors in four key areas: improving and integrating
environment-related futures studies; focusing attention on
the broad causes of environmental change, not just the end
results; improving environmental awareness and education;
and establishing a broad-based data system for anticipating
future environmental risks.
. EPA, as well as other agencies and organizations, should
recognize that global environmental quality is a matter of
strategic national interest. Recognizing that the United
States is part of a global ecosystem that is affected by the
actions of all countries, EPA should begin working with
relevant agencies and organizations to develop strategic
national policies that link national security, foreign relations,
environmental quality, and economic growth.
WINTER 1995
25
-------
Anishnabe:
The Original People
Poetry from Charmaine Benz
Writing, for me, has been very healing. It has given me
an avenue for sharing my ideas and thoughts
with others. I am a member of the Saginaw
Chippewa Tribe in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Americans
gave us the name of Chippewa or Ojibwe, but our real name is "Anishnabe."
It means the original people. Our homelands at one time included Michigan,
Minnesota, Wisconsin, and a large part of
Canada (before there were any borders).
I am the mother of two children, daughters, and
will be a grandmother this spring. When I am
not writing, I direct the Saginaw Chippewa
Tribes substance-abuse program. We
provide a wide array of services aimed
at preventing substance abuse
through teaching wellness.
The term Anishnabe refers to who we are.
The poem is about our relationship with the land
and how we are connected to it. As Anishnabe
we often migrated, and we ate whatever food
was available. We believe it was put there by the
Creator for us to enjoy. Our diet included fish, deer,
and other wild game, as well as potatoes, squash,
berries, wild rice, and dried meat. We had an
abundance of food.
Our spirituality remains intact: We believe
that the Creator put us here and that the land is
part of us. The Anishnabe world view is that
nature is a vital and integral part of ourselves
and our everyday living.
My influences come from my family, especially
my mother and grandmother, from my tribe, my
community, and my nation. My cultural
influences are strong. This poem defines a
sense of spirituality in who and what
and where we have come from.
Native Americans were the first
environmentalists. We never tried
to conquer or control the land.
We appreciated it, saw beauty in
it, and revered it.
Ahho.
26
I am Anishnabe
I am Anishnabe
I come from the woods and the water
and
I have been here forever.
I have come from the womb of our Mother
The Earth,
In a handful of soil.
I am the spirit of the forest
Who walks along the shores of Lake Superior,
And lives in the shadows of the
Sacred Cedar.
I exist in consecrated song,
Trickster story and
Ojibwe legend.
If you look,
Like a soaring hawkwing,
I'll be there.
You can taste me like maple sugar,
You can hear me speaking
In pine forests and summer's twilight magic.
I am Anishnabe
I come from the woods and the water
and
I have been here forever.
"[ am Anishabe"
OJpyright @ 1994 Charmaine Benz
(Poem first printed in The American Nature Writing
Newsletter, Fa1/1994; vol. 6, no. 2.)
EPA JOURNAL
-------
CROSS CURRENTS
Sara Stein is the author of numer-
ous children's books and two
gardening books for adults: My
Weeds: A Gardener's Botany
(1988), and Noah's Garden:
Restoring the Ecology of Our
Own Back Yards (1993).
Stein and her husband spent
more than a decade transforming
their semi-wild, nearly six-acre back
yard into gardens, only to discover
the destructive nature of their work.
Many of the birds, butterflies, and
other animals had gradually
vanished as they "civilized" the
land. Although beautiful, the
gardens had ceased to feed or shelter
the abundance of life that once
thrived there. To make them more
hospitable, Stein studied ecology
and discovered a new way of
gardening. In a book as readable as
it is practical, she shares her own
experiences and the lessons she
learned. As the following excerpt
suggests, Noah's Garden offers an
enchanting education in back-yard
ecology and functional advice on
how readers can renew their own
small portion of the planet.
From the book NOAH'S GARDEN:
RESTORING THE ECOLOGY OF
OUR OWN BACK YARDS by Sara
Stein. Published by Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston. OJpyright@ 1993 by
Sara Stein. Reprinted by permission of
Houghton Mifflin; electronic publication
by permission of the Wallace Literary
Agency, Inc.
WINTER 1995
ANew
Back-Yard Ecology
From Noah '5 Garden by Sara Stein
One can't advise Arizonans to plan
their gardens around saguaro
cacti that take forty years to
reach chest height, insist to Kansans that
prairie yards must annually be trampled
by bison, sway Californians to the view
that canyon fires are ecologically refresh-
ing, or talk a Yankee into entertaining
bears. The preservation or restoration of
the wilderness is critical but not possible
in one's own back yard.
One can, however, set aside a portion
of this yard to plant, if not altogether
naturally, then at least in a way not alien
to the theoretical ecosystem in which one
lives. The planting can be brought along
through stages of succession or halted at
a particular stage, and it can be encour-
aged to express apparent deficiencies in
becoming ways that, since one is unac-
customed to the curly winter blades of
switch grass or the fuzzy yellow balls of a
blossoming buttonbush, strike one as
surprisingly exotic. So cleverly as to
make one chuckle like a tickled baby, the
suburban landscape can be teased to
control its own pests, maintain its own
soil, conserve its own water, support its
own animal associates, and altogether
mind its business with minimal interfer-
ence from us.
But first one must make space.
The only way to do that is to take up
less space oneself.
I read that the average lot size in
suburban America has climbed to 10,000
square feet-roughly a quarter acre.
Older lots tend to be smaller, but since
house size has if anything grown faster
than lot size, the pie of our land contin-
ues to be sliced pretty thin. On acreage
subdivided into such portions, just the
space required to maneuver excavating
and road building equipment guarantees
that little if anything will be left of the
natural landscape; the cheapest way for a
developer to leave the scene will be to
throw grass seed in his wake. Into this
intimidatingly blank surface the
homeowner incises a bed that cringes
along the foundation of the house and
perhaps plants a weeping ornamental.
The finished effect, in which the lawn
serves as background for some baubles
of exterior decoration, seems so normal
to us that it is hard to view a piece of
land in any other way.
It seemed so normal to us that even
though we bought a glutton's portion-
and there was no lawn at all-we
immediately proceeded to "develop" it
by clearing the brush and mowing. We
started near the house. First, a back
lawn, then lawn to either side, then a
strip along the driveway, then loppings
and mowings to roll the green rug over
the land in all directions.
The first indication that we were doing
something wrong was the disappearance
of the pheasants. In those early days, we
had planted behind the house a kitchen
garden encircled by a hedge of currants
whose brilliant berries were regularly
enjoyed by a mother and father pheasant
and all their little chicks. The distance
from the hedge to the unmowed, tall
grass cover was about twenty feet-a
critical distance, it seems, for when we
mowed a broader strip, the pheasants
were cut off from their breakfast as
though by an invisible fence. The more
we extended it the less we saw of them,
and finally we realized that there were
none.
In this way we were introduced to a
rather different concept of space than is
implied by developers' and Realtors' use
of "spacious." Spaciousness to us means
not only roomy in area but visually open,
expansive, uncluttered, uniform in
texture, low in growth, without impedi-
ment to view. To others, "spacious" is
closer to the biblical paradox, "My
father's house has many mansions." The
diversity and complexity of vegetation
creates a spacious landscape for animals
by offering each kind the opportunity to
earn its living in its unique way. Remove
27
-------
Michael McKeag's site plan for his lot in a
tract development:
a. meadow: sedges, grasses, wildflowers
b. artificial pond
c. wetland for bog plants
d. hedgerow, mostly berrying species
e. corner woodland
the pheasant's cover or the butterfly's
flower and you have erased its space.
The less variety of habitat the landscape
offers, the less space there is until, when
all is mowed, even an expanse the size of
a golf course becomes just a hole in the
world.
Suburbia has more holes already than
a slice of imported Swiss, and the routes
along solid ground are becoming more
and more difficult for animals to negoti-
ate. They (we, too) customarily take
paths both for the efficiency that comes
with familiar routes and, like pheasants
under brush or us along bright streets,
for safety from predators. When mother
woodchucks place their children in
separate dens, they visit them daily
along a set itinerary. Mice and shrews
take tiny paths through grass. Deer
forged the trails that the Indians used
and that later were often widened into
roads. Certainly the pheasant family,
exposed to hawks by our ignorant
mowing, appreciated the "space" we
created across their path about as much
as I'd appreciate the space created by the
Triborough Bridge's collapsing.
With animals' fear of exposure and
fondness for paths in mind, we began to
envision basic changes in our landscape.
If ordinary garden design begins with
the blank space of a lawn which is then
cut here and there to create beds of taller
plantings, we can aim for the obverse: a
tall growth of grass, shrubs, and groves
cut by mowed or mulched paths that
occasionally open into clearings.
Once one begins to think in terms of
paths, one realizes that they already
exist, although invisibly. One doesn't
walk across a lawn every which way,
only in the particular ways that get one
from place to place. Some of the places
are spaces in the human sense of the
word-open areas for sitting, eating,
playing. These are the clearings. Others
might be spaces in the more usual animal
sense of resources that are visited
regularly: garbage pail, woodpile,
vegetable garden, sandbox.
28
\ ~~ ....- "1\ ~ .~ > J:
'." -r.}1~j',~ ~~~~ Te'.
~ .~~ ~.
4~ -".
\ ;r~ ~.
;I ;1
J
a
b
,.
"
.
t'
f'
It's astonishing how little land a family
really uses and how much can be left as
Lebensraum for others. Who ever uses the
front yard? Who strolls along the fence?
When does anybody sit in the corner of
the yard?
I could have offered-indeed, I
originally intended to-an illustration of
a hypothetical suburban lot planted the
way I envision. I was saved the trouble
of having to make that drawing from
scratch by a letter from a reader, Michael
McKeag, who had enjoyed My Weeds.
Not knowing I was working on this book
but realizing from the first one the
direction of my own gardening, Michael
sent a drawing of the landscape plan for
his one-eighth acre lot on a cul-de-sac in
a tract house development in Oregon,
along with a plant list and a map of the
- -- - .. --
Dlawmg by Sala Stem Copyrighted
neighborhood. . .
We don't have to-indeed, we neither
can nor should--each provide all
habitats, every sort of food. You plant
nut trees and I'll plant spruce, you keep a
berry thicket and I'll do the tall grass, or
the bog, the woodlot, the crowds of
fruiting shrubs and beds of wildflowers.
But let us weave them together into
something big enough to matter by
connecting each patch with others at the
corners and along the boundaries. This
is the rich, new landscape; this is the new
kind of gardener who asks not whether
he should plant this ornament or another
but which patch is missing from his
community, how he can provide it, and
how animals will move from his patch to
the next.
This is the ark. 0
EPA JOURNAL
-------
A teacher's guide to
hands-on environmental activities
FOR THE CLASSROOM
YOU Can Make a Difference.
The Earth is in your hands
At home, at school, at
work, and in your
community, you play
an important part in protect-
ing our health and our
environment. Pollution is a
problem that can't be solved
by federal and local govern-
ments alone.
You-working by yourself
and in cooperation with
friends, neighbors, industry,
government, nonprofit
organizations, and schools and
colleges--can make a differ-
ence. You and your students
can plant trees, restore wildlife
habitats, or launch a recycling
program. Or you can work for
cleaner streams and parks.
EPAencourages you to take
a hands-on, common-sense
approach to cleaning up the
environment. The Earth is in
your hands. Following are
some suggestions you can use
where you live to make a
difference in our environment.
For information on activities
specifically related to Earth
Day, you may want to call or
write either the EPA Head-
quarters Earth Day Office
(phone: 202260-1128; fax: 202
260-3384) or one of the
regional EPA Earth Day
contacts given on page 7.
WINTER 1995
Recycle paper, glass,
plastic, aluminum, scrap
metal, motor oil, and yard
wastes.
Reuse, repair, and recycle as
often as possible. Don't throw
away what can be used again.
Avoid filling landfills with
disposable items. Consider
using reusable mugs, glasses,
dishes, cloth towels, and
sponges.
Save your leaves, grass, and
bush clippings and use them
as compost.
Participate in a recycling
program. Encourage your
community and your school
to begin recycling.
Maintain and repair
products. Donate usable
materials to charities or thrift
shops.
For further information, call:
u.s. Environmental
Protection Agency
Solid Waste Hotline at
800 424-9346 or
703412-9810.
Be careful around surfaces
covered with lead-based
paint, and urge parents and
workers to be cautious when
children are nearby during
renovation or repair work on
old buildings.
Be especially alert for lead-
based paint in older homes in
poor repair or in need of
painting. The fine dust from
deteriorating old paint and dust
created during renovation of
older buildings may contain
A lead particles. This dust can
travel throughout your house
and even outside. Workers
should wear protective clothing.
Parents should seek expert
advice before undertaking
extensive do-it-yourself repairs.
Be sure drinking water does
not contain harmful levels of
lead or other contaminants.
EPA has found lead and other
unhealthy contaminants in
drinking water in some areas.
Especially if you live in an older
house with lead pipes, it is a
good idea to have your tap water
tested to make sure it is safe.
Two drinking water pre-
cautions include: running the
water until it changes tem-
perature to ensure that stagnant
water has been drained, and
using only the cold-water tap
for drinking and cooking,
especially for making baby
formula. Lead can slow
children's physical and mental
development and cause other
neurological, reproductive, and
circulatory problems.
For additional information,
contact:
. u.S. Environmental Protec
tion Agency Safe Drinking
Water Hotline at 800 426-4791
. Your local water company
. Your community or county
health department.
.
.
Buyenergy-efficient
automobiles and other
vehicles and keep them
tuned. A well-tuned engine
makes your car, boat, or
tractor safer for you and the
environment. To help curb air
pollution, carpool, bike, walk,
or use mass transit when
possible.
Disposal of auto waste is a
significant problem. Used oil
can contaminate water
supplies; used auto batteries
contain lead, lead sulfate, and
sulfuric acid that can contami-
nate soil. Take used oil,
batteries, and tires to a
recycling center or an appro-
priate disposal facility.
For further information, call:
. u.s. Department of Energy
at 800 523-2929
. Local Chambers of
Commerce and local
transit-oriented nonprofit
organiza tions
. Your state and local
environmental agencies
. Your chapter of the
American Lung Association.
29
-------
APply pesticides such as
insecticides and weed
klllers carefully if they must
be used, and use as little as
possible. Purchase only the
amount needed, and follow
label instructions carefully.
Use natural pest-control
methods whenever possible.
Pesticides can pollute air,
ground, and water. They can
harm beneficial insects as well
as wildlife, pets, and people.
hnproperly applied, they can
spread beyond the intended
area and into local water
supplies. Reduce run-off by
maintaining ample grass
cover and shrubs.
For further infonnation, contact:
. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Office of Pesticide Programs
401 M Street, Sw. (7501 C)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 703 305-7102
. National Pesticide Tele-
communications Network
at 800 858-7378
. Local garden clubs and
nature centers
. Local poison control center
(see front of your local
telephone book).
30
Household hazardous
waste-purchase
products containing toxic
ingredients only when you
cannot avoid using them, and
buy only as much as you
need. Do not buy bulk
quantities, as storing these at
home can create a hazard.
Always read product labels
to identify any hazardous
constituents, and payatten-
tion to container and disposal
information. Whenever
possible, avoid using prod-
ucts labeled with the words
"DANGER," "WARNING," or
"CAUTION." Use non-toxic
alternatives. For example,
clean your counter tops with
baking soda instead of
chlorinated cleaners.
Store hazardous products
carefully. Where possible,
recycle leftover hazardous
products such as oil-based
paint.
Find out your community's
policy on disposal of hazard-
ous waste. If the product
should not go down the drain
or into the rubbish, save it for
a household hazardous
waste-collection program. If a
program is not in place,
encourage your community to
institute one.
For additional information,
contact:
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Solid Waste Hotline
at 800 424-9346
Or contact your state and local
environmental agencies.
Environmental shopping-
buy recycled and recy-
clable products. Seek out
reusable or returnable packages.
Look for the recycling
symbol on products you buy.
Such symbols identify recycled
or recyclable products.
Buy durable products-don't
buy throw-aways. Borrow or
rent things you use infrequently.
Avoid buying products that
use unnecessary packaging-
either plastic or paper. Use
returnable or reusable contain-
ers. Look for pump dispensers
rather than aerosol sprays.
Buy rechargeable batteries for
flashlights, toys, and house-
hold items.
Carry your own reusable
shopping bag.
For additional information,
contact:
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Solid Waste Hotline
at 800 424-9346
Or contact your state and local
environmental agencies.
Use less energy. Set back
your thermostat, insulate
your water heater, and buy
energy-efficient appliances.
Setting back the thermostat
not only saves money, it saves
energy. It's an investment in
yourself and your environment.
Insulation conserves our
valuable fuel supply and saves
you dollars. Consider insulat-
ing your home and school with
fiberglass or cellulose fiber.
For more information, call:
. U.S. Department of Energy
at 800 523-2929
. EPA Public Information
Center at 202 260-2080
or 202 260-7751
. Your local utility company.
Plant trees, shrubs, and
indoor plants. They
replenish the Earth's oxygen
supply and help curb the
greenhouse effect.
Plant trees or bushes in
your yard or neighborhood.
Trees in your yard may
reduce heating and cooling
costs and curb soil erosion.
In addition, they beautify
your property and increase
its value.
For further information, call or
write:
. Your local garden club,
nature center, or arboretum
. Global ReLeaf (American
Forests) at 202 667-3300
. National Wildlife Federation
Backyard Wildlife Habitat
Program
1400 16th Street, NW.
Washington, DC 20036
phone: 202 797-6800
. National Arbor Day
Foundation
100 Arbor Avenue
Nebraska City, NE 68410. 0
EPA JOURNAL
-------
ON THE MOVE
Joseph K Alexander, Jr., is
EPA's new Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Science in
the Office of Research and
Development. He brings to
EPA widespread experience
in managing scientific
programs at the NASA
Goddard Space Flight Center
(GSFC).
As GSFC's Assistant
Administrator for Space
Science and Applications
(1993 to 1994), he was respon-
sible for the Center's science
management programs,
space-science spacecraft
operations, and data analysis
while serving concurrently as
Acting Chief of the Labora-
tory for Extraterrestrial
Physics.
Previously, as Assistant
Associate Administrator for
Space Science and Applica-
tions in NASA's Office of
Space Science and Applica-
tions (1987 to 1993),
Alexander had oversight of
research programs in Earth
science, space physics,
astrophysics, solar system
exploration, life science, and
microgravity science. He was
Deputy NASA Chief Scientist
from 1985 until 1987. He
served from 1984 to 1985 as
Senior Policy Analyst at the
WINTER 1995
Joseph K. Alexander, Jr.
White House Office of Science
and Technology Policy in
space science and technology
in the civil service program.
Alexander was awarded
NASA's Exceptional Scientific
Achievement Medal for 1981;
in 1991 he earned the Presi-
dential Meritorious Executive
Award.
He received a bachelor's
degree (1962) in physics from
the College of William and
Mary and completed the
Advanced Management
Program at the Harvard
Business School in 1991.
Henry L. Longest II is the
new Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Manage-
ment in the Office of Research
and Development. In this
position, he will work with
ORO's Assistant Administra-
tor on planning, policy
development, and the
implementation of EPA's
research and development
programs.
Longest has extensive,
diverse experience with EPA.
As Director of the Office of
Emergency and Remedial
Response in the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency
Response from 1985 to 1994,
he implemented federally
Henry L. Longest II
funded emergency and long-
term remedial cleanup
activities of hazardous-waste
sites under the Superfund
program. Before that (1984),
Longest was Deputy Assistant
Administra'tor for the Office
of Water, administering EPA's
major water programs. These
included water-quality
standards, permits, construc-
tion of municipal wastewater
treatment facilities, drinking
water, and oceans.
From 1979 to 1984, he
directed the Office of Water
Program Operations; he
previously served as Deputy
Office Director (1976 to 1979).
Other Agency assignments
included work for Regions 3,
5, and 6 (1975 to 1984) in
implementation of the Clean
Water Act. Longest was a
hydraulic engineer with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
before coming to EPA.
Among his numerous
awards are the Presidential
Meritorious Executive Award
and the Presidential Distin-
guished Executive Award.
He received a bachelor's
degree in civil engineering
from the University of
Maryland in 1962.
Elizabeth A. Cotsworth is
Deputy Director of the Office
of Solid Waste (OSW).
Cotsworth held several
positions in OSW before
becoming Deputy Office
Director. From 1991 to 1993,
she was Deputy Director of
the Waste Management
Division. There she helped
implement the RCRA land-
disposal restrictions program,
performed national waste-
management-capacity
analyses, and developed
regulations on the combus-
tion of hazardous waste. In
the Permits and State Pro-
grams Division, she held
positions that focused on
policy for hazardous-waste
permitting and technical
assistance to states and EPA's
regions. She served as the
Chief of OSW's Program
Support Branch from 1978 to
1982.
She joined OSW from EPA's
Office of International
Activities, where she special-
ized in the environmental
activities of multinational
organizations. She came to
EPA as a management intern
in 1973.
Cotsworth received a
bachelor's degree in history
from Chatham College in
1971 and a master's degree in
government and foreign
affairs from the University of
Virginia in 1973.
31
-------
Peter D. Robertson
Peter D. Robertson succeeds
Michael Vandenbergh as
EPA's Chief of Staff. In this
position, he advises the
Administrator on policy and
budgetary issues and serve as
White House liaison on
policy.
Robertson came to EPA last
June, when he became
Deputy Assistant Administra-
tor of the Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency
Response. Before his appoint-
ment at EPA, he specialized in
environmental and legislative
law as an associate attorney at
the law firm of Patton, Boggs,
and Blow (1987 to 1994). His
responsibilities in the envi-
ronmental area included
litigation, administrative law,
and client counseling.
Previously, he served a year
as a law clerk at the firm of
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind,
Wharton, and Garrison (1986
to 1987), where he performed
legal research. He also
monitored major trade
32
legislation in Congress.
As a staff member for the
Committee on the Budget at
the U.s. House of Represen-
tatives (1981 to 1986),
Robertson reviewed and
analyzed the President's
budget, briefed committee
members and others on
budget matters, and
developed supporting
documentation for the
committee's recommended
budget to the House of
Representatives. He
covered national security
matters as well as transpor-
tation, administration of
justice, and general govern-
ment issues for the commit-
tee.
Robertson received a
bachelor's degree in English
from the University of
Oklahoma (1978) and a law
degree from Georgetown
University Law Center
(1987).0
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
Tom Benjamin
President
Environmental Alliance for
Senior Involvement
8733 Old Dumfries Road
Catlett, VA 22019
Phone and Fax: 703788-3274
Charmaine Benz
7520 Ogemaw Drive
Mount Pleasant, MI 48858
Phone: 517772-5700
Carol M. Browner (1101)
Administrator
Environmental Protection
Agency
401 M Street, Sw.
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202260-47004
Fax: 202 260-0279
Douglas Costle
Rural Route #2, Box 480
Woodstock, VT 05091
Phone: 802457-1010
Fax: 802457-3746
Bill Line
Manager of Education
Communications
National Wildlife
Federation
1400 16th Street, NW.
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202 797-6645
Fax: 202 797-6646
Raymond Loehr
c/o Science Advisory Board
Environmental Protection
Agency
Phone: 202 260-4126
Fax: 202 260-9232
Gaylord Nelson
Counselor
The Wilderness Society
900 17th Street, NW.
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: 202 833-2300
Fax: 202 429-3958
Roy Popkin (1704)
Wri ter / Ed i tor
Editorial Services Division
Office of Communications,
Education, and Public
Affairs
Environmental Protection
Agency
Phone: 202 260-2069
Fax: 202260-0231
William K Reilly
Fifth Floor
1250 24th Street, NW.
Washington D.C. 20037
Phone: 202891-8393
Fax: 202293-9211
William Ruckelshaus
Chairman and CEO
Browning-Ferris Industries
P.O. Box 3151
Houston, TX 77253
Phone: 713 870-8100
Fax: 713 584-8686
Robert Stavins
Associate Professor of
Public Policy
John F. Kennedy School of
Government
Harvard University
79 John F. Kennedy Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
Phone: 617495-1820
Fax: 617495-1635
Sara Stein
c/o Wallace Literary
Agency
177 East 70th Street
New York, NY 10021
Phone: 212570-9090
Fax: 212 772-8979
EPA JOURNAL
-------
-
, l "-4. to'
,tl".'; #j.. ~
"'f~~~'.~~t.;, ~
33
-------
A New Generation of
Environmental Protection
34
Twenty-five years ago our nation created,
virtually from scratch, the most ad-
vanced system of environmental regula-
tion in the world. In the course of what is
really a very short history, we made tremen-
dous progress. We no longer have rivers
catching on fire. Our skies are cleaner. And
U.S. environmental expertise and technology
are in demand throughout the world.
But the past 25 years have also left us with
a great deal of work left to do. Two out of five
Americans still live in communities where the
air is unhealthy to breathe. Asthma is on the
rise. Breast cancer is on the rise. Contamina-
tion of our drinking water is on the rise. Forty
percent of our rivers, our lakes, and our
streams are still too polluted for drinking,
fishing, and swimming. One in four Americans
lives within four miles of a toxic dump.
President Clinton and I believe we need a
fundamentally new system of environmental
protedion-one that builds on the strengths of
the last 25 years and seeks to overcome the
deficiencies of the current system. One that
will be equal to the challenge of the next 25
years. A new generation of environmental
protedion.
The challenge we face is to protect the
health of the people of this country, the health
of our communities, and the health of our
economy. We must protect the air, the water,
and the land that we all share. And we must
do it with common-sense, cost-effective
measures that produce the very best environ-
mental results for the least cost.
We need a firm commitment to public health
and environmental goals-combined with flexibil-
ity and innovation in how we achieve these goals.
We need to move beyond the one-size-fits-all
approach of the past. We must work industry by
industry, community by community.
We must involve those who live with environ-
mental decisions, to ensure that they have
every opportunity to be a partner in making
those decisions.
We need to build consensus, to find
solutions that will work for real people in real
communities. The Clinton Administration is
working hard to change how we do business-
to incorporate these principles of common
sense, cost effediveness, flexibility, and
consensus in all that we do.
Can we make our system of environmental
protedion more flexible and more sensible?
Yes, we can, and we're doing it. We are finding
strategies that work for business, for communi-
ties, for people across this country. We are
changing at EPA.
This publication provides you with an
overview of the many tools EPA currently uses
to protect our health and our environment. I
look forward to continuing to work with you,
to protect our health, our communities, our
economy-and to do it using common-sense,
cost-effective measures-so that all of us and
our children and our grandchildren can reap
the benefits.
Carol M. Browner
Administrator
-------
8
A Common-Sense
Approach
To protect public health and
the environment more
effectively and less expen-
sively/ EPA has launched a "Common
Sense Initiative.'1 This initiative looks
at pollution on an industry-by
industry basis rather than using the
pollutant-by-pollutant approach of
the past. It involves everyone
concerned with an industry-from
manufacturers to community organi-
zations-in fashioning new strategies
and approaches that emphasize
pollution prevention while providing
cleaner, cheaper, and smarter
protection for everyone. All aspects
of environmental policy-from
emissions reporting requirements to
needed changes in environmental
laws-are being looked at.
The Initiative has started by
focusing on six pilot industries: iron
and steel; electronics and computers;
metal plating and finishing; automo-
bile assembly; printing; and oil
refining. Together, they represent
nearly 11 percent of the Gross
Domestic product, account for one-
eighth of all toxic emissions reported
to EPA, and employ four million
people. Some are high-tech, others
industrial; some are dominated by
large companies, others by small
business. Teams for each industry
include top-level EPA representatives,
industry vice-presidents, representa-
tives of national and grassroots
environmental organizations,
unions, representatives of state
environmental commissions and
local government, environmental
justice groups, and other agencies.
The teams examine all aspects.of
environmental regulation as it affects
their industry and the environment,
including:
. Reviewing regulations to get
better environmental results at less
cost through increased coordination
among EPA programs. For example,
by coordinating compliance,
monitoring, and reporting cycles of
clean water rules and clean air
requirements, we can reduce
confusion and expense. The Initia-
tive also seeks to correct situations
where differing regulations wind up
simply moving pollutants from air to
water, or air to land rather than
eliminating them. This is part of
EPA's total effort to comply with
Presidential Order 12866 directing
government-wide reexamination of
existing regulations.
. Seeking ways to promote pollu-
tion prevention as a standard
business practice and central ethic
of environmental protection. Indus-
tries can change processes and
expand thei r recycl i ng efforts to
reduce the pollutants they create.
. Looking at ways to improve
environmental reporting require-
ments and the availability of the
information so it will be easier for
concerned citizens to obtain accurate
information about pollution in their
communities.
. Developing innovative ways to
assist companies that seek to obey
and exceed legal requirements while
consistently enforcing the law against
those that don/t.
. Looking at ways to change the
system through which permits are
issued to encourage innovation and
create more opportunities for public
participation.
. Seeking opportunities to give
industry the incentives and flexibility
to develop innovative technologies
that meet and exceed environmental
standards while cutting costs.
The Common Sense Initiative will
help us move beyond the traditional
methods of the past 25 years and let
us take the giant steps that are
needed. By taking these steps, we
are expanding the ways we protect
our air, water, and ecology in prepa-
ration for the environmental chal-
lenges of the next century.
35
-------
Working with Partners to
Protect Our Environment
The Environmental Protection
Agency leads the federal
government's effort to create a
healthy environment, yet it is but one
link in a chain of efforts. EPA works in
partnership with state, county, munici-
pal, and tribal governments to use a
range of tools to proted public health
and the environment. State and local
standards may exceed federal stan-
dards, but cannot be less stringent. EPA
is committed to working with states and
municipalities so that they can imple-
ment federal standards consistently but
use flexibility and common-sense
approaches in tai loring those standards
to local needs.
All states have environmental
agencies; some are separate agencies
and others are part of state health
departments. These state agencies are
responsible for implementing and
monitoring many Clean Air Act provi-
sions. Enforcement of drinking-water
standards is usually a state or local
responsibi lity. Many enforcement
actions require the resources of both
federal and state authorities.
36
In some areas, such as food safety
and radiation containment, EPA sets the
standards, but implementation and
enforcement may be the responsibility
of another federal agency. And within
the federal government, EPA sees to it
that projects are subjed to environmen-
tal evaluation before they are approved.
EPA also oversees and enforces the
cleanup of hazardous waste at federal
facilities.
Under many of the laws it imple-
ments, and in keeping with the EPA
philosophy of citizen participation, the
Agency makes extensive efforts to
involve the public in environmental
protedion. Some laws specifically
invite public monitoring. Others allow
individual citizens to bring legal action
against polluters or to bring violations
to the attention of environmental
agencies. Because an informed,
involved local community is essential
to protecting the environment, EPA
implements the community right-to-
know laws by providing the public with
information on the types and levels of
toxic releases in their communities.
Called the Toxic Release Inventory, this
database is available in public libraries
nationwide. EPA also conducts an
extensive public education campaign
so those who must live with federal
environmental decisions-businesses,
environmentalists, states, cities, small
communities-have every opportunity
to work with their government to make
those decisions.
-------
Achieving
Scientific Excellence
Sound science and technology
provide the basis for EPA decision
making, and guide the Agency's
use of risk assessment, risk manage-
ment, enforcement, and other tools and
strategies to prevent and solve environ-
mental problems.
The Agency's scientists and engi-
neers are concerned with issues that
may be world-wide or as local as a
neighborhood "cancer cluster." EPA has
reorganized its laboratories and re-
search and development offices into
three new national laboratories and two
national centers that assist the Agency
with tasks ranging from basic research
on potential impacts of global warming
to identifying pollutants that cause a
fish kill or contaminate a community's
drinking water.
EPA requires the best available
scientific and technological knowledge
and data to define and anticipate
environmental issues, determine trends
in environmental quality, and point to
the best ways to solve and prevent
problems.
To ensure that the Agency can draw
on the expertise of the nation's best and
brightest researchers in its scientific
endeavors, EPA has created the STAR
Program (Science To Achieve Results).
STAR provides graduate students in
science and engineering with fellow-
ships for research. In addition, the STAR
program has expanded grants for peer-
reviewed extramural research on
environmental subjects at the nation's
universities and non-profit institutions.
These grants and fellowships will
provide EPA with even more access to
cutting-edge research and information.
EPA research and development
directly support our programs and
enforcement investigations. They also
provide the scientific foundation for
newer environmental protection
approaches-such as innovative
technology, pollution prevention and
ecosystem-wide protection-and help
identify the basis for environmental
justice concerns. Our researchers
collaborate with other federal agencies,
universities, and industries in various
studies and investigations, and dissemi-
nate their findings to national and
international communities.
EPA focuses on research that
addresses central issues in environmen-
tal decision making, such as:
. What are the most effedive ways to
prevent pollution?
. What are the levels and national
distri butions of pollutants that affect
people and the environment?
. What are the major and minor
contributors to the public's overall
exposures to poll utants?
. What are the alternative strategies
and relative risks, costs, and benefits of
such strategies to ensure a clean
environment?
EPA has a Science Advisory Board,
established by Congress as a panel of
eminent non-EPA scientists who
counsel the Agency on scientific issues
and review the quality of its research.
37
-------
POLLUTION PREVENTION
Perhaps the greatest lesson EPA
has learned in the past 25 years is
that preventing pollution before it
starts is the cleanest, cheapest, and
smartest solution for the environment
and public health. This approach is a
top priority for EPA, and is far better
than waiting to clean up pollution after
the fad. It is a common sense, cost-
effective approach to proteding the
health of our communities.
pollution prevention is incorporated
into virtually every EPA program (and
supported by a special Act of Con-
gress). EPA promotes innovative
technologies and procedures that will
not just clean up pollution, but prevent
it from occurring in the first place.
38
Voluntary Programs
Serve as Prevention Models
EPA conducts a number of voluntary
programs to encourage business and
industry, local governments, and
individuals to prevent or reduce
pollution generated by their daily
activities. The rewards for participation
are two-fold: lower costs of daily
operations, and public recognition as
good environmental models that other
organizations can follow.
Under the Green Lights program,
businesses and industries, local govern-
ments and other agencies and institu-
tions are encouraged to convert their
lighting systems to bulbs and fixtures
that use less electricity. By the end of
1993 more than 1,180 participants took
actions that reduced the demand for
power, thus cutting pollutant emissions
from power plants. Many utilities urge
customers to do likewise in their homes
or small businesses.
EPA's 33-50 program is a strategy for
changing the way government and
-------
8
industry work together. It provides
incentives to lessen industrial output of
high-priority toxic wastes-by 33
percent in 1992 and 50 percent in
1995. Since 1991, over 1300 compa-
nies have joined and committed to
reductions of 355 million pounds of
toxic waste. The goal is to eliminate
more than 740 million pounds of
pollutants by the end of 1995.
Natural Gas Star encourages
natural gas producers to adopt pradices
that can profitably reduce emissions of
methane, the main component of
natural gas.
WAVE, Water Alliances for Volun-
tary Efficiency, encourages hotels and
motels to install water-saving tech-
niques and equipment.
The Energy Star program encour-
ages manufadurers to develop and
produce appliances and other products
that use less energy. Those that meet
such goals can use EPA's Energy Star
emblem on their products.
Other programs are being devel-
oped for different industries. Climate-
Wise encourages and recognizes
voluntary efforts to reduce greenhouse
emissions.
Pollution prevention by farmers and
ranchers is sought through soi I conser-
vation, integrated pest management,
and nutrient and animal waste manage-
ment. AgStar develops new techno-
logies that can profitably contain and
utilize greenhouse gases from animal
manure. AgStar's goals are to eliminate
or sharply reduce the amount of
agricultural pollutants that reach
surface or underground water sources
and to decrease the amount of green-
house gases released into the atmo-
sphere from poorly managed agricul-
tural wastes.
A Cool Communities program
encourages the planting of trees in
patterns that shade residential areas so
that less energy is required for heating
and coo Ii ng.
The Waste Wise program encour-
ages industry to reduce the amount of
packing materials used.
EPA encourages recycling to reduce
the amount of household and commer-
cial waste that ends up in already
overburdened landfills. Approximately
25 percent of the nation's solid waste is
now being recycled through more than
4,000 community-based, business, and
government recycling programs.
The Agency also encourages
composting of yard wastes for use as
fertilizers by home-owners and
communities.
EPA coordinates the recycling
program for all federal agencies, which
are required by Presidential Executive
Order to recycle and to purchase paper
and other items made with recycled
components. EPA conducts special
recycl ing programs for used motor oi I
and batteries.
Keeping the Environment
Safe from Health Threats
Some chemicals and other substances
are so dangerous to public health and
the environment that EPA bans or
severely limits their use. For example,
EPA banned the use of lead (which
poses a health threat, especially to
chi Idren) in gasoline, paint, water
coolers, and in solder used in residen-
tial and school plumbing. These adions
have helped to reduce the levels of lead
in children's blood, thus reducing the
incidence of mental and development
health problems. Most recently, EPA
urged purchasers of new submersible
well-water pumps with brass or bronze
parts to test the water for lead before
turning them on.
Because pesticides by their very
nature tend to be toxic, their use should
always be restricted to the particular
uses and directions on the label. EPA
bars or severely limits agricultural or
home use of more than 50 pesticides
bel ieved to be significant health threats,
among them once widely-used prod-
ucts containing DDT, chlordane,
heptachlor, endrin, and 2,4,5 T. The
Agency is reevaluating hundreds of
currently registered pesticides to see if
they should be banned or their use
restri cted.
EPA has ordered a stop (by 1996) to
produdion of CFCs (chlorofluorocar-
bons) and certain other compounds
emitted into the atmosphere, which
threaten the earth's protective ozone
39
-------
protedive ozone layer. CFCs are widely
used as refrigerants and in home and
car air conditioners. The Agency has
also ordered the phasing out of halons,
used in fire extinguishers. EPA banned
use of PCBs in transformers and
elsewhere because they contain
carcinogens that are a threat to those
exposed by accidents or fires. A
number of other compounds, including
dioxin, are now under review. EPA
scientists review all proposed formula-
tions of commercial compounds and
will approve them only if data indicate
they wi II not cause unreasonable harm.
EPA banned dumping of garbage
and other solid waste into oceans and
coastal waters to protect seashore
recreation, the fishing industry, and all
creatures that I ive in the sea. The
United States joins other nations in
enforcing international agreements
restricting dumping at sea.
40
New Approaches to
Pollution Prevention
EPA also advances pollution prevention
by providing our partners in communi-
ties, local governments, business, and
industry with information that helps
them apply research findings to adual
practice. EPA promotes a number of
different technologies and approaches,
and provides grants for pi lot and
demonstration projects.
Through information exchanges and
conferences, EPA promotes the sharing
of information on how companies have
successfully altered production pro-
cesses and expanded recycling efforts
to prevent pollution.
EPA closely monitors the develop-
ment of biotechnology and evaluates
the safety of genetically modified
produds, such as biological pesticides
or plants resistant to specific crop
diseases, before they are tested in the
field and distributed. When they are
proven safe, EPA encourages their use
as an alternative to potentially harmful
chemical pesticides.
EPA widely promotes integrated
pest management (lPM), an approach
that incorporates a variety of pest
control methods ranging from produdS
derived from biologicals and biotech-
nology to water conservation, organic
gardening, and judicious use of pesti-
cides. IPM can be incorporated into
pest control for farming and lawn care,
as well as in schools and homes. State
government agencies, environmental
groups, and gardening and farm
organizations join EPA in this effort.
-------
REDUCING ExiSTING POLLUTION
Prevention can reduce or even
eliminate many environmental
problems. EPA will continue to
do what it can to reduce the amounts
of pollutants that do invade our air,
land, and water. And EPA will do so in
ways that make economic and
environmental sense.
Environmental Quality
Standards
Setting limits on pollutants to which the
public can be exposed is a basic EPA
role. Standards set by EPA are designed
to reduce levels of contaminants in the
air and drinking water, and in industrial
emissions and municipal waste streams.
They also cover the amount of pesticide
residue allowed on food, maximum
allowable levels of certain compounds
in some industrial produds, safe levels
of exposure to radioadivity (including
radon gas and accidental leaks),
automobile emissions, and technology
to limit pollutant releases. These
standards are used to measure the
effectiveness of control technologies
and other approaches to limiting the
release of pollutants. EPA also conducts
scientific assessments on the public
health risks associated with these
pollutants, and the costs and benefits of
proposed approaches, where appli-
cable. Before they are finalized they are
subject to public comment and discus-
sions between EPA, industry, state and
local governments, labor unions,
environmental groups, and other
parties.
These standards become the
underlying framework for a variety of
EPA approaches to environmental
protedion:
EPA works with states to help them
adopt plans for reducing air pollution
in areas where it exceeds federal
standards. In many cities where air
41
-------
pollution has been excessively high,
concentrated effort by state and local
governments, industry, and citizens has
resulted in cleaner air.
The goal of EPA's water-quality and
wastewater-treatment standards is for
all Americans to enjoy safe, reliable
water for drinking and outdoor activity.
These standards limit the discharge of
pollutants into our rivers, streams,
lakes, and offshore waters. Where the
water is used for human consumption,
specific rules limit various kinds of
bacterial and chemical contamination
and require users to be notified by the
supplier if safe levels are exceeded.
Other requirements apply to waters
used for fishing and recreation. These
laws are enforced by state and tribal
governments, and supported by EPA
through grants and technical assistance.
The Agency also establishes criteria
for wastewater treatment plants and
limits on the pollutants flowing from
municipal treatment systems into
surface and underground waters. EPA
has helped local communities nation-
wide to upgrade their wastewater
treatment systems and continues to do
so through federal loans to state
revolving loan funds. Wastewater
treatment programs have helped clean
up many major u.s. waterways that
were severely polluted, such as the
Potomac River in Washington, DC.
Likewise, EPA restrictions enforced by
the states protect community wells
from pollution resulting from under-
ground injection of wastewater dis-
charge, leaking waste sites, and indus-
trial activities that contaminate ground-
water.
EPA is also concerned about
reducing the greenhouse gases that
contribute to potential global warming.
EPA agricultural and tree-planting
activities are designed to reduce the
emission of greenhouse gases like
methane and boost the amount of
oxygen that trees emit into the air.
42
~ ~
~IIIIY.I~~~.
-------
Industrial Emissions
To protect public health from toxic air
emissions, particularly in communities
close to industrial facilities, EPA air-
quality regulations sharply limit pollut-
ant emissions from public utilities and
other industrial plants. For example,
EPA has reduced by almost 90 percent
the toxic air emissions from the chemi-
cal industry, one of the biggest indus-
trial sources of these pollutants. This
far-reaching Clinton Administration
effort is the biggest reduction of air
toxics in EPA's history.
Under recent changes in the clean-
air law, industries may "trade allow-
ances", which means an industry that
has achieved a better-than-required
level of pollution reduction can trade or
sell its allowances to another that is
having difficulty doing so. The result is
an equilibrium that keeps total emis-
sions in a region within legal limits.
Industries are also required to utilize
the best available technology to
eliminate or reduce toxic emissions at
the stack, exhaust vent, or effluent
discharge point.
Waste Incineration
Nearly five million tons of hazardous
waste are incinerated each year in our
nation. EPA encourages industry to
reduce waste, but is also strengthening
its oversight of existi ng faci I ities and
tightening permit requirements for new
ones. New rules governing waste
combustion will hold incinerators to
rigorous standards reflecting the best
available science, require risk assess-
ments for new permits, and mandate a
standard for dioxin and more stringent
controls on metals to better proted
public health.
.
43
-------
Motor Vehicle Emissions
models sold in the United States so that
purchasers can make environmentally
informed judgments about which car to
buy. EPA also encourages the develop-
ment and use of new, less-polluting
gasoline formulations and use of
alternative fuels such as liquid natural
gas, ethanol, and electric batteries. The
Agency also promotes the use of vapor-
catching nozzles on gasoline pumps
and has recently ordered the installa-
tion of vapor collectors in cars and light
trucks to capture emissions from
gasoline that evaporates while the
engine is running.
As part of its total effort to improve air
quality, EPA programs seek to reduce
the impact of motor vehicles on the
environment. These include setting
emissions standards for all new cars,
trucks, and buses, and working with
states and localities to establish pro-
grams that monitor the effectiveness of
vehicle pollution-control systems.
In conjunction with the Depart-
ments of Transportation and Energy,
EPA collects fuel economy information
on all new cars and publishes annual
Miles-Per-Gallon (MPG) ratings for all
.~
\~
~~ .-
- .---
.. -=-'-'(7)_.
~ ~.
.
- . a
E'~- ..
~
.
44
~
Pesticides
All pesticide products created for use
by homeowners and farmers in the
United States must be registered by
EPA. This process includes extensive
testing to determine the toxicity of the
produd and its potential for threatening
the health of people, wildlife, and the
environment. Laws and regulations
apply to all pesticides, including
disinfectants, fungicides, insecticides,
and weed-killers.
When a pesticide is registered by
EPA, the manufacturer is required to
label it with specific instructions as to
use, disposal and special precautions.
The label requires agricultural employ-
ers to provide their employees with the
many safety protections. If later
scientific developments indicate
unsuspected dangers, the registration
can be suspended, canceled, or
amended.
EPA is expediting re-examination of
the hundreds of pesticides registered
during the Agency's early years using
sound scientific standards.
The Agency sets specific limits on
pesticide residues in food, the limits
depending on toxicity and quantity of
those residues.
Once EPA establishes the levels of
pesticide that may remain on food, the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
and the US Department of Agriculture
(USDA) monitor the levels.
-------
Toxic Chemicals
Under the Community Right-to-Know
laws certain manufacturers, storers,
transporters, and users are required by
EPA to report annually the amounts of
several hundred toxic chemicals they
release into the environment. The
companies must also report information
about off-site transfers, waste manage-
ment, and efforts to reduce the quanti-
ties of toxic waste they generate or
have on hand. EPA compiles the report
in an annual Toxic Release Inventory
that is made available to state and local
public safety authorities, public librar-
ies, emergency planners, citizen groups
and other concerned parties.
To protect the safety of underground
water supplies, the Agency also regu-
lates the safety of underground storage
tanks such as those at gasoline stations
or that hold various chemicals. Storage
tank owners must meet safety require-
ments and are responsible for monitor-
in.g leaks and reporting them to local
authorities. Owners also must take
appropriate action if a leak occurs or
when a tank is replaced or abandoned.
Polluted Runoff
The biggest remaining source of water
pollution is the polluted runoff result-
ing from pesticides, fertilizers, animal
wastes, and other chemical com-
pounds that wash into streams from
nearby fields and roads. This polluted
runoff can make the water unfit for
drinking or recreation. The pollutants
also can wind up in estuaries or lakes
hundreds of miles away, where they
can kill off or contaminate shellfish
crops, ruin wildlife habitats, and curtail
the livelihoods of commercial fisher-
men.
EPA helps communities identify
sources of polluted runoff and upgrade
their storm sewers and urban runoff
controls to reduce contamination. The
Agency also provides technical assis-
tance and guidance to farmers to help
them keep waste out of nearby waters.
45
-------
46
PROTECTION AGAINST THREATS
To PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Some threats to public health and
the environment cannot be
removed by banning use or
installing control technology. For
example, 73 million Americans live
near the country's 2,700 worst hazard-
ous-waste sites, potentially endangered
by substances discharged or dumped
over many decades. And sometimes
there are accidents-massive oil spills
or chemical clouds or nuclear acci-
dents-that potentially can kill or injure
human beings, wildlife, and plants.
Since such threats cannot always be
prevented, EPA works to limit, isolate,
or contain them to protect the health of
the public and the environment.
Superfund
Superfund is a national hazardous-
waste cleanup program that focuses on
the most dangerous inactive contami-
nated sites in the United States. The
program was enacted by Congress to
remove wastes at those sites that pose
the gravest potential threat to public
health. EPA encourages public partici-
pation in determining the cleanup goals
and future uses of the sites and provides
assistance to community groups to help
them evaluate the cleanup options
avai lable.
Through its Brownfields Action
Agenda, EPA is working in partnership
with state and local governments,
communities, industries, and small
businesses to clean up contaminated
sites in cities across the country to bring
them back to life, remove a blight on
the neighborhood, and create jobs. EPA
has lifted the Superfund designation
from 25,000 sites around the country.
The Agency also sets standards for
waste storage and treatment facilities,
and works with states to monitor their
performance in preventing dangerous
environmental leaks and releases and
better protect publ ic health.
Toxic Spills And Leaks
EPA responds to environmental acci-
dents by providing leadership and
technical support for emergency
cleanup operations. Where spills occur
on navigable rivers or other waters, EPA
provides support to the Coast Guard,
which is the lead agency under such
circumstances, and may dired or assist
in efforts to contain or clean up oi I or
other spilled pollutants.
In natural disasters, EPA provides
technical guidance and support in
protedive and cleanup efforts as part of
the Federal Emergency Response Plan.
EPA works in partnership with state and
other federal agencies to monitor air,
water, or other pollutants that result
from unexpected emergencies or
accidents. EPA also supports, with
training, guidance, and operational
materials, the development of State
Emergency Response Commissions and
local Emergency Planning Committees
required under Superfund amendments.
-------
International Scope
The environment has no national
boundaries. Global warming, the
thinning ozone layer, chemical
contamination, and fallout from
nuclear accidents are examples of
problems that must be confronted by
the international community. So too,
are regional concerns about ocean
dumping, dwindling rain forests, and
the transport of hazardous waste
across national borders.
EPA is a major participant in the
international environmental protec-
tion effort. Agency special ists have
been assigned to provide American
expertise to other governments. EPA
works with the State Department,
United Nations agencies, and other
international groups on research and
technology exchange, and training
for environmental agency officials.
In North America, EPA works
with the Canadian government
through a Joint International Com-
mission on pollution of the Great
Lakes. EPA works with the govern-
ments of Mexico and Canada to
enssure successful implementation of
environmental aspects of the North
American Free Trade Agreement. EPA
experts and their Mexican counter-
parts are jointly seeking to upgrade
environmental protection and water
supplies in communities along the
US-Mexican border.
Strong Enforcement
EPA's goal is to ensure that enforce-
ment and compliance assurance
programs work to protect public
health in communities across the
country. It is EPA's aim to help
businesses comply with the law in
the most common-sense and cost-
effective way possible.
Enforcement may take the form
of promoting compliance with
regulations, negotiating schedules
for achieving required standards,
and, ultimately, civil or criminal
proceedings in federal court.
Increasingly, the courts have
shown they are willing to punish
willful polluters with stiff penalties
or with criminal convictions,
substantial fines and prison sen-
tences. Fines have run as high as
22 million dollars. In 1994, EPA
brought a record 2,247 criminal
and civil adions for fines and
penalties and referred 220 criminal
cases to the Justice Department for
prosecution. Another 1,597 cases
were brought before EPA adminis-
trative law judges.
EPA encourages the business
community to come forward and
receive assistance in complying
with the law. The Agency has
replaced the pollutant-by-pollutant
compliance approach of the past
with a common-sense comprehen-
sive approach. The cross-media
enforcement program complements
EPA's Common Sense Initiative-
the new industry approach that
brings industries to the table to
work with the Agency to find the
best blueprint for pollution preven-
tion.
EPA also oversees cleanups at
federal installations and can
penalize federal agencies for failing
to clean up sites or spi lis.
47
-------
Carrying Out the law
Among the environmental laws enacted
by Congress through which EPA carries
out its efforts are:
1938 Federal Food, Drug, and Cos-
metic Act (last amended 1988)
1947 Federallnsedicide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (last amended
1988)
1948 Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (also known as the Clean Water
Act) (last amended 1988)
1955 Clean Air Act (last amended
1990)1965 Shoreline Erosion Protection
Act
1965 Solid Waste Disposal Act (last
amended 1988)
1970 National Environmental Policy
Act (last amended 1975)
1970 Pollution Prevention Packaging
Act (last amended 1983) 1970 Re-
source Recovery Act
1971 Lead-Based Paint Poisoning
Prevention Act (last amended 1988)
1972 Coastal Zone Management Act
(last amended 1985)
1972 Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act (last amended 1988)
1972 Ocean Dumping Act
48
1973 Endangered Species Act
1974 Safe Drinking Water Act (last
amended 1994)
1974 Shoreline Erosion Control Dem-
onstration Act
1975 Hazardous Materials Transporta-
tion Act
1976 Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act
1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (last
amended 1988)
1977 Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act
1978 Uranium Mill-Tailings Radiation
Control Act (last amendecf 1988)
1980 Asbestos School Hazard Detec-
tion and Control Act
1980 Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act
1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act
1984 Asbestos School Hazard Abate-
ment Act
1986 Asbestos Hazard Emergency
Response Act
1986 Emergency Planning and Com-
munity Rignt to Know Act
1988 Indoor Radon Abatement Act
1988 Lead Contamination Control Act
1988 Medical Waste Tracking Act
1988 Ocean Dumping Ban Act
1988 Shore Protection Act
1990 National Environmental Educa-
tion Act
-------
--
Be nice to yourself, or to someone else special
The $7.50 Gift that
keeps right on giving!
&EPA JOURNAL
INFORMATION, NEWS, TRENDS, ISSUES, VIEWPOINTS, PEOPLE, POLICIES,
AND 'PROGRAMS -from local to global
If you are currently a subscriber, you
know how the special people on your
list, friends, college students, or family
members, will appreciate your
thoughtfulness in sending them a gift
subscription to EPA JOURNAL.
If you're not a subscriber, it's about time
you were nice to yourself.
What else can you give or receive that
comes four times a year, is dedicated to
making ours a better world. and is
ONLY $7.50? EPA JOURNAL makes for
an imaginative. educational, year-round
gift and is a real bargain. too!
Simply check the boxes on the other side
and fill in the name and address of the
person you want to receive a subscription.
MORE THAN ONE? You can copy and fill out the reverse side of this card for as
many subscriptions as you wish to give.
WINNER! EPA JOURNAL took FIRST PLACE in the 1991 "Blue Pencil
Competition," a prestigious Award that makes a subscription even more valuable.
-------
EPA JOURNAL ORDER FORM
- --*-
Order Processing Code 5401
o YES, enter - subscriptions to EPA JOURNAL for $7.50 per year ($9.40 foreign).
The total cost of my order is $ -' Price incl~des regl!-lar d?mestic postage
and handhng and IS subject to change.
Company or personal name
Please type or print
Additional address/attention line
City, State, ZIP Code
Purchase Order No.
May we make your name/address available to other mailers?
DYES
Daytime phone including area code
ONO
Please Choose Method of Payment:
o Check payable to the Superintendent of Documents
o GPO Deposit Account =
o Visa or Ma.sterCard Account
To fax your orders (202) 512-2233
Mail to:
New Or.ders
Superintendent of Documents
P.O. Box 371954
Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954
[[IIJ Credit card expiration date
Thank you for your order!
This form may be photocopied.
Authorizing Signature
-------
Detroit children plant a tree on Earth Day 1990.
-------
Earth Day 1990 on the Mall
in Washington, DC.
Wide World phorn. Copyrighted
U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents
Washington, DC 20402
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
------- |