MULTI-MEDIA TARGETING
OF
THREATENED
ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION Iff
-------
, !><
)^
(U
Regional Center for Environmental Information
US EPA Region III
1650 Arch St.
Philadelphia, PA 19103
V
-------
903R9201
MULTI-MEDIA TARGETING
OF
THREATENED
ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION
:.n III
r ibr Environmental
A 19103
-------
PREFACE
Everyday we are faced with a multitude of environmental problems -
acid rain, ozone depletion, habitat destruction, species extinction,
drinking water contamination. However, resources for environmental
protection are limited. Realizing that, it is imperative that our limited
resources for environmental protection be focused on our most
important problems.
One way to focus our environmental protection efforts is to use
computer mapping and analysis tools to spotlight important
environmental information. The information presented in this report
concerns vulnerability and risk, in which data is presented visually
rather than in large tables of numbers. This enables relationships to be
observed in ways which are not obvious when reviewing tables of
numbers. The implications for environmental management are often
more clearly and quickly seen than by the traditional forms of analysis.
This visual approach not only points out areas where potential
problems exist, but can show past environmental conditions, thus
indicating changes over time. It is also possible to look into the future,
to present the results of alternative courses of action, and to illustrate
these and compare them to the present conditions.
You are invited to provide any comments, especially what your needs
are, what you liked about this report, and what can be done to improve
this document. Feel free to contact the staff who are listed in the
Appendix with your ideas and suggestions. EPA is pleased to work
with you to protect people and their environment.
Edwin B. Erickson
Regional Administrator
January 1992
-------
OBJECTIVES OF GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
- Foster Cross-Program Teamwork in Developing
Holistic Environmental Solutions
- Improve Data Collection and Management
- Help Set Regional Environmental Priorities
Develop a Process with Periodic Future Updates for
Improving Geographic Targeting
- Enhance Information Going to the Public
-------
PROJECT SUMMARY
The overall goal of this project is to support Region
Ill's on-going Strategic Planning efforts by using
Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to
assess the impact on the Region, by examining the
sources of pollution, where they are found, and what
they impact.
Data from many sources are being integrated to
determine the current condition of the natural
resources and public health risks in Region III. This
effort will provide a priority ranking of areas which can
be used to help target Agency resources and activities.
Targeting, based on these results can take a variety of forms such as:
- increased enforcement attention
- focused monitoring of environmental indicators
- reprogrammed funding for Agency staffing or state grants
- pollution prevention initiatives
- risk communication and outreach projects
- intensive studies (integrated environmental management
projects) to evaluate impacts in sensitive or high risk areas.
A primary focus of this project will be a risk
assessment to improve our understanding of the
various factors which converge to present a total
environmental risk.
Corollary goals of this project are: (1) to improve the usability and
quality of Regional databases to support multi-media management
decisions; (2) to create graphical presentations of risk which can be
shared with the public; and (3) to serve as a vehicle for displaying
progress using environmental indicators.
-------
PROJECT STATUS/MAPS
This project status report indicates our preliminary efforts. Much work remains to be
done. The first year has involved the retrieval and display of readily-available databases,
some of which are included here. The following maps are included in this status report.
1. ECOREGIONS
2. POPULATION COUNTS IN REGION III
3. POPULATION GROWTH RATES IN REGION III
4. OZONE NON-ATTAINMENT
5. THE IMPACT OF RADON ON PEOPLE
6. TOXIC RELEASES AND POPULATION DENSITY
7. HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES AND POPULATION DENSITY
8. HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES AND WATERSHEDS
9. HAZARDOUS SURFACE WATER DISCHARGES AND
WATERSHEDS
Maps 1, 2 and 3 are depictions of the natural and human settings in Region III. Map 4
indicates Ozone quality. The remainder of the maps are combinations of EPA program
data and human or natural settings. These maps enable a screening-level geographic
analysis, which will subsequently lead to more scientific investigations. Each map
includes text on Findings, Implications for Environmental Management, and
Source/Receptor analysis. These are initial remarks based on project team consensus,
in consultation with program specialists.
We will be improving the data and refining its analysis through your participation as peers
in this process. Geographic displays and statistical analyses will permit checking and
correcting data quality. Once the known and suspected constraints with the databases
are corrected, environmental management decisions will then be possible. This project
will attempt to depict vulnerable geographic areas within the Region. Further analysis will
be a risk assessment to determine the spatial extent and degree of risk. Geographic
targeting of program resources can then proceed based on a collaborative effort within
EPA Region III, and with State and local governments.
-------
ECOREGIONS
-------
ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
FINDINGS:
- The Ecoregion map is a geographic framework based on Regional patterns in
land-surface form, soils, potential natural vegetation and land use which vary
across the Region.
- Eleven different Ecoregions have been distinguished for Region III. Each has
been classified in two parts, the typical geographic area for that particular
Ecoregion (in darker tint on the map), and the area of transitional or incomplete
display of typical conditions (in lighter tint).
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. Biological reference sites should be established by Ecoregion
across State lines to determine baseline ecological conditions for
the purpose of developing biological criteria.
2. States are required by the Clean Water Act to establish
narrative biological standards by 1993 and numeric biological
standards by 1996.
3. Reference sites should be established for use by the Remedial
Investigations/Feasibility Studies prepared under the provisions of
CERCLA for determinations of ecological risks.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
Not applicable. Ecoregions mapping by
James Omemik, EPA Corvallis,
1986.
-------
Ecoregions of
Region III
KC!imi!l SMSiiCBISN PLAlEtL' AKB (IMAM'S
EIIE o N i * 1 1 o itii
MIDDLE !U»MIC CO.MUL M » I »
SOETlEiST [II. »:il>-
. \Ci!iKi IlCCIi
(HIIWIITllK AFP Ai iCB I
-------
POPULATION COUNTS IN REGION III
o _o
J
-------
POPULATION COUNTS, 1990 CENSUS
FINDINGS:
- The 1990 population counts indicate that the largest populations are in
Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, with over one million residents each. Other sizeable
populations are in Baltimore and several of the suburban Philadelphia, Baltimore
and Washington counties.
Low population densities are in the mountainous areas, some of the
Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic coastal area.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. The traditional high-population areas of Philadelphia,
Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Washington continue to be the Region's
centers of population. However, managers should recognize that
there is a population shift within the metropolitan areas to the
suburban counties.
2. Any population can be considered both a source and a
receptor of environmental contamination.
3. Urban, suburban and rural populations all have their own
environmental management needs. The severity of environmental
protection issues should include actual populations which are
vulnerable, besides total numbers of affected populations.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
Populations are both a source and a receptor of environmental stress.
Census data from the US Bureau of the Census.
-------
Population by County
.
1
5
1
2
5
7
0
0
0
5
0
5
1
1
0
0
0
0,000
000
000
,000
,000
,000
,000
49,9
99,9
249
499
749
1,0
V9
99
, 9
, 9
, 9
0 0
9
t
9
!
9 9
0 0
0
1,000,090
E fA legion [11
ttgional 1 n r e | r » t e d Sti
Cartographic Project
Bill F C p t 1 i i i i
[,c» li. t
t II ! Ml III : tli
? ridKtl tj : i r
1.
1 i
f t
'"1
i i
< >]
Id i
fll
;:!'
to
1 1 1
'i!
t *
r
t i
14
t
r t
t
1
HI Ct*in
r f di t ikl ** . M
citir, Zn» 11
1 1 | F I ; 1 r i s f
-------
POPULATION GROWTH RATES IN REGION III
O
-------
POPULATION CHANGE, 1980-1990
FINDINGS:
- Between 1980 and 1990, areas showing the highest rates of growth were in
Northern Virginia near Washington, the Virginia Beach area, and Northeast
Pennsylvania. The highest population numerical increases were in Northern
Virginia.
- Most of the Appalachian Mountains area, and other rural areas, experienced
population decreases.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. Areas of high population growth may produce greater impacts
on public health and the environment than those with lower
population growth, because of increased land use and resource
use impacts.
2. Managers should distinguish between high rates of population
growth and actual large increases in the population count, in any
given geographic area. High growth rates are not necessarily an
indicator of high population increases.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
Population dynamics can be considered both a source and a receptor of environmental stress.
Census data from the US Bureau of the Census.
-------
Population Growth
1980 to 1990
I
I' 5 \
J - 1 0
11-20
2 1 - JJ
: 1 4 0
4 0
ID t i r e
: F A I « g i o B III
Regional Integrated
Cartographic Prelect
ll I I
If II
: El :
!
-------
INE NON-ATTAINMENT
-------
OZONE NON-ATTAINMENT AREAS
FINDINGS:
- High ozone non-attainment readings of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxide
emissions are in the Washington-Baltimore-Philadelphia corridor.
- The cumulative effect of hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxide emissions from many
sources in the Northeast Corridor is causing widespread violations of the ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. Air quality violations are most pronounced in the most densely
populated areas of the country. However, lower-populated areas
also are in non-attainment.
2. Pollution emission control requirements will benefit not only the
emitters but some of the receptor populations in the transport
path.
3. Managers should attempt to correlate human and ecological
health impacts from ozone non-attainment areas.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
Ozone emissions Population
Population is depicted by political unit (state and local jurisdictions).
-------
Ozone Non-Attainment
by County
Ozone Design Values (ppmi
C
o
.Ill t. .It*
.III I* l»»
.III I* .III
.lit I* .11*
.1*1 I* .!«*
.11* II .IT*
II* I* .!«*
. I** III |MI|«I
lr*«*
*r«t«
IlUlMltl
EPA K e 2 i c n III
8 e 2 i o n i 1 Integrated
Strategic Csitojraphic
Project
-------
THE IMPACT OF RADON ON PEOPLE
o
-------
RADON AND SCHOOL POPULATION
FINDINGS:
- High radon readings predominate in south-central PA, the Reading Prong, a
geological formation conducive to high radon levels in the soil.
- Some high radon counties in Pennsylvania have a high density of schools, thus
indicating a general population at greater risk of radon-caused lung cancer.
- Other regional areas of lower radon concentrations also have comparably high
density of schools, and presumably high population density, but at lower risk of
lung cancer to the general population.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. Encourage all areas within the Region to get tested.
Because geological structures and soil conditions vary widely,
even within small areas, significant variations of radon
concentrations will occur.
2. Target schools in high radon areas for testing.
3. Foster radon education and measurements in the home
builder/buyer market.
4. Process radon concentration data by ZIP code areas to focus
attention to specific locales of concern.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
Indoor radon readings, Schools
mostly residential.
County-aggregated data Darkest red shading indicates that 70% to 80% of all radon readings
exceed 4 Pico-Curies/Liter. 4 PCI/L level is believed to be cancer-causing.
Point data of individual school locations.
-------
SOURCE ;
RADON
% of Readings
Above 4 p C i / 1
m
n
n
a
G
n
B
m
70%
§0%
50%
40%
307,
20%
1 0%
0%
t n
I 0
1 0
1 0
to
to
to
1 0
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
1 0%
RECEPTOR:
SCHOOL S
School Location
Insufficient Data
Less Than 15 Readings
IPA legion III
I e 2 i o n i I Integrated
L- Strategic Cartographic
11 o j (( \
t;,
Fit
rr.4
ttll>i.
Ill;
ttil I)
Fr.litK l.r
lileft
Illil
litCk
rti i
1TI 1
iilii
irl i
lilir
lt|l*
C.rl i
1
!i
k
i.
il
.
>
n
u 1
i lr<
fiil
n
in
in
i l<
liter
kic t
FIB OSGS 1:!
(.*.. i In
-------
TOXIC RELEASES AND POPULATION DENSITY
-------
TOXIC RELEASE INVENTORY (POTENCY / TOXICITY)
AND POPULATION
FINDINGS:
- The Philadelphia and Pittsburgh areas appear to have the highest potential for
human health impacts from TRI-reported sources.
- The Baltimore and Charleston, WV areas have elevated, but somewhat lower,
potential for human health impacts. Washington, DC is the only major population
center without a significant TRI source.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. Investigate ambient concentrations surrounding major TRI Air
sources in the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh areas first. These
sources may be regulatable under the Clean Air Act.
2. Investigate TRI discharges to water in the Philadelphia and
Pittsburgh areas, where aquatic ecosystems are already stressed
by large human populations. If effects are found, it may be
possible to address them via NPDES permits.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
Toxic Release Inventory, Population
air and water media,
top 50 emission sites out of
the 2,000 from the 1989 study.
Chemical toxicity and cancer potency, for air and water emissions that are weighted using the
reference dose for the compound emitted or the cancer potency slope factor.
County-aggregated population data, classified ranging from populations under 10,000 to over
1,000,000.
-------
SOURCE :
POTENCY [OX i C TY
HI Air
HI w a ; - :
111 \ : C & r!
HI Water C h n
i :
-
1 licitv
r j i 11; i 5
RECEPTOR
P U P U L A T I 0 N
[50,000 J ? . 9 9 Y
i (i n , no 1; ; -
12 5 u ii 0 0 i '! " , f ' ''
5 on . u "I ii ; .i
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
AND POPULATION DENSITY
-------
RCRA/CERCLA SITES AND POPULATION
FINDINGS:
- Pattern of fewer sites within the most populated counties, which are surrounded
by less populated counties which contain large numbers of sites.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. Managers should focus on suburban counties adjacent to
large population centers.
Many suburban counties have high population densities which are rapidly
increasing, so the potential for actual human exposure is high. County
ecosystems which are already stressed due to population growth may be
particularly fragile.
2. Assessment of both ecological and health impacts should
consider possible effects of multiple sites.
3. Risk communication with residents (often former urbanites who
thought they had moved away from such toxic threats) may be
challenging.
4. Suburban counties may also contain a large number of
undiscovered sites.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
a) RCRA facilities - Population
Corrective Action sites;
Treatment, Storage and Disposal sites;
b) CERCLA Sites -
National Priority List,
Removal sites.
-------
SOURCE
RCRA CE RC l A
RECEPTOR
POPULATION
C .M 5 5 i t * i
1SD Silts
N P 1 i t t i
C e r < ! i t - E
; F A i e g i o > II!
iejional Integrated Strategic
Carte-graphic project
-------
-------
RCRA/CERCLA SITES AND WATERSHEDS
FINDINGS:
- Highest concentrations of sites occur in the Delaware River Watershed, less so
in the Monongahela-Ohio Watershed.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. Health and environmental assessments involving surface water
in the Delaware, Patapsco, Upper Ohio, and Kanahwa watersheds
should be done with special care. Streams in these watersheds
may be impacted by contaminants from multiple sites.
2. These areas also have large populations, and therefore a
greater potential for human health impacts than in other
watersheds.
3. Ecosystems stressed by large populations may be more
vulnerable to effects of site-related contamination.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
a) RCRA facilities - Watersheds
Corrective Action sites;
Treatment, Storage and Disposal sites;
b) CERCLA Sites -
National Priority List,
Removal sites.
-------
SOURCE:
RCRA/CERCLA
RECEPTOR
WATERSHEDS
CARS sites
ISD Sites
NPL Sues
Cercli Bem
f" ]
Silt:
Oil Iroi I I.III.Ill 0 i C S D1C
ftfdnjc lor lt|ittil !|[»r|riit4 ilriuiu
Cirloirtphi< ! i * k l»n
frt-dt(f( Sr
5.1. M^,. HII
f t A i » j i in II
5 lejionil iBlrgrtted
'" i r; r ; r < p h r Project
-------
HAZARDOUS SURFACE WATER DISCHARGES
AND WATERSHEDS
-------
HAZARDOUS DISCHARGES TO SURFACE WATERS
AND WATERSHEDS
FINDINGS:
- The largest concentrations of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) facilities with toxic discharges are found in the Schuylkill Watershed,
tributary to the Delaware River, in Pennsylvania.
- Other concentrations of sites are in the Upper Chesapeake (Baltimore),
Monongahela (upstream from Pittsburgh), and Lower Susquehanna (tributary to
the Chesapeake Bay) areas.
IMPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
1. The Lower Delaware Watershed should be given priority
management attention, followed by the other watersheds with high
concentration of facilities.
2. Other areas of the Region which have NPDES facilities can be
managed on a localized basis.
SOURCE: RECEPTOR:
304 (LJ Sites Watersheds
Toxic discharges to surface waters are from NPDES sites.
Major hydrologic units per US Geological Survey.
-------
SOURCE:
304(1)
304i 11 5 i(*s
RECEPTOR:
WATERSHEDS
[ |
CD5'""1
I I :ta*i]'ttiE3tt
I I ..... """
I I
Uilfti Ukr Irie
laitken li it lr;e
»«t t-.
(Of ri»i«le f« Lite ni:iii
Viler I* 1 1 j i lo i c d i r
£st)-Wiunkerf lo
ititf IfliiJjrj
Ohio nc l*iieii*t l
li tt* I* it «( Htitc4. tht
.
Crtu 1 s t ' i * i i c - lt|iin
t« lit ii 1 1 n j ( Oc tn
lltt C III f
1HI.I III!
t ! !0 I I Iff
lf'«Y.1
bj: Ilk
1:1.Ell,III 8 t C !
fill
{j It k E ftri.r Co p . J I r : t S / i ' ( < M. i
)1 Triat it M* 11-rcilDi 2««i II
-------
Project Phases
PHASE I PROTOTYPE OCT 1990 - JUNE 1991
PHASE II INITIAL PROJECT RESULTS JULY 1991 - SEP 1991
PHASE III PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION STARTING IN OCT 1991
Project Context
Region III Comparative Risk Project, 1987-1988
Regional Ground Water Assessment, 1988-1989
TRI Data Utilization Workgroup, 1989-1990
Multi-Media Strategy (Auerbach Report), 1990
Ten Regional Initiatives, 1991-Present
Data Quality Objectives
SCALE AND DETAIL
Collect the Most Specific Data in the Best Available Detail
Aggregate the Data into the Most Useful Scale
Work with Data by Point, Centroid, Zip Code and County Level
Prepare Appropriate Base Layers for Different Environmental
Media
ACCURACY
Use Both Point-Source and Area Data
Quality Assure the Data
Move Toward EPA 25 Meter Accuracy Goal by Correcting Project
Data
-------
We are interested in your thoughts and comments. Feel free to contact any of these
project members.
NAME
Dr. Alvin R. Morris
Chair
Peter Weber, AICP
Group Leader
Jon Capacasa, P.E.
David West
Rill GIS Team Leader
Israel Milner, P.E.
John Armstead
Daniel Ryan
Roy Smith, Ph.D.
Stuart Kerzner
Susan McDowell
Russ Bowen
Leonard Mangiaracina
Charles Kanetsky
Jed Callen, Esq.
Project Members
OFFICE
Water Management Division
Director
Water Management Division
Chesapeake Bay Program
Office of Policy & Management
Air, Radiation & Toxics Division
Hazardous Waste Management Div.
Office of External Affairs
Hazardous Waste Management Div.
Water Management Division
Environmental Services Division
Office of Policy and Management
Air, Radiation & Toxics Division
Environmental Services Division
Office of Regional Counsel
PHQNE/MAILCODE
(215) 597-9812
3WMOO
597-4283/3WM42
597-8228/3CBOO
597-1198/3PM53
597-9090/3AT11
597-9965/3HWOO
597-9816/3EA10
597-6682/3HW15
597-8826/3WM40
597-0355/3ES43
597-9964/3PM60
597-6723/3AT01
597-8176/3ES11
597-9882/3RC13
MAILING ADDRESS (Use Appropriate Mail Code)
US EPA Region III
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
A TECHNICAL APPENDIX is available upon request to EPA Information Resources
Management Branch, Mail Code 3PM50.
------- |