ENVIRONMENTAL
INDICATORS
TRANSITION
PROJECT
Briefing Package
April 27, 1993

-------
"While assessment of program performance is a critical component of an agency's
management system, the inability to link that performance to environmental results
deprive the agency of the true measure of its success and precludes the agency from
developing the visionary perspective it needs to meet future environmental needs."
     Strategic Assessment of Florida's Environment (March, 1992).
"Resistance to seeing the strategic threats often focuses on the lack of complete
information and perfect understanding. We should acknowledge that we will never
have complete information. Yet we have to make decisions anyway; we do this all the
time.  And one way we draw conclusions from incomplete information is by
recognizing patters."
    Earth in the Balance, Vice President Al Gore (January, 1993).

-------
                                      Environmental Indicators Transition Project


      The Environmental Indicators Transition Project was an intense three month multi-divisional effort.  The project was
designed to provide an analysis of the status of the Region's forests, rivers and streams, and human health.  This was
accomplished by evaluating existing information as it relates to the quality and quantity of and associated risks to these
resources to the Strategic Planning Team as an input into the  FY'94 Strategic Planning Process.  To the extent the data,
information and analysis allow, the goals of the project were to:

      * describe the current condition of the selected resources,

      * identify potential causes of impacts and threats to the resources,

      * describe the flaws, biases and gaps in the data and information,

      * present recommendations to management based on the information for strategic planning, and

      * identify relationships to existing programs and make recommendations for agency response.

      The Project has three deliverables: 1) this briefing book, 2) a presentation to the Strategic Planning Team on April
27, and 3) a technical support document, providing detailed descriptions and explanations of the information provided in
summary form in the briefing book, which will be available in a draft final form in May.

-------
Project Background:
       The project originated at the November, 1992 Senior Managers' meeting where it was decided that the Region
would focus its resources over the following months in three Strategic areas: Strategic Planning; Environmental Indicators
and Team Building.

       The first step in the project was a Regional Workshop to develop a workplan for the Transition Project.  The
participants at the workshop focused on three general resources:  aquatic ecosystems, terrestrial ecosystems and human
health.  These subgroups identified the questions they believed, if answered, could describe the health of these resources
and identified potential data sources which would help answer these questions. After considering budget and time
constraints and comparing the needed information with the available data, the core project team decided  to focus on three
resource subsets: rivers and streams, forests, and human health. These subsets were selected because they are important
and because the team believed that data was available for these resources and would allow presentation of meaningful
information for strategic planning.

       On January 11  the Senior Managers approved the Project Proposal and use of the resources necessary to implement
the proposal.  Shortly  thereafter the Rivers and Streams, Forest and Human Health Teams were formed.  The members of
those teams are  listed on the following page.

       The data  included in each team's analysis was determined by common criteria. Although the teams considered some
additional factors, all of the teams focused on data that: a) was available within the project time frame, b) was regional in
scope and c) could be used in strategic planning and linked to agency programs.

       What follows is the result of an exceptional effort by all Project Team Members.  The GIS Team headed by David
West deserves special  recognition for the support and dedication they gave to the project.

       The project has already had many successes: 26 additional data layers have been  added to the GIS system and are
available for use by us all. The participants in the Project have learned a tremendous amount about the condition of the
environment in their own area of expertise,  as well as other areas in which they do not traditionally work. We have all
learned that focused work designed to address true environmental causes  can call forth from a multi-disciplinary team
almost limitless energy and enthusiasm.  However, the true measure of success for this Environmental Indicators Transition
Project will be in the use you make of it. If you find the information important and use it in selecting regional
environmental goals and objectives for the FY'94 Strategic Plan, all of the work of the past months will have moved us
closer to the goal of real environmental improvement, returning to us all many times the amount of our investment.

-------
                  ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS TRANSITION PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS
Champions:
Cynthia Giles (ORC)
Randy Pomponio (ESD)
Human Health Team
Project Leader:    Carol Stokes-Cawley (ESD)

Rivers and Streams Team
Team Leaders:
Team Members:
Forest Team

Team Leaders:


Team Members:
Margaret Passmore (ESD)
Sumner Crosby (WMD)

Francisco Cruz (WMD)
Ghassan Khaled (WMD)
Helene Drago (WMD)
Glenn Hanson (ARTD)
Karen Angulo (ARTD)
Jennifer Hubbard (HWMD)
Ron Preston (ESD) (advisor)
Art Spingarn (ESD)
Susan McDowell (ESD)

Dave Cutter (ESD)
Pat Flores (ARTD)
Karen Angulo (ARTD)
Thomas Stolle (HWMD)
Catherine Brown (ESD)
Fred Suffian (WMD-SCS)
Randy Piersol (ESD)
Team Leaders:


Advisor:

Team members:
Lorna Rosenberg (OPM)
Nancy Rios (HWMD)

Bruce Smith (OPM)

John Noble (ARTD)
Jeffrey Burke (ESD)
Debra Forman (ARTD)
Carol Ann Gross (WMD)
Alice Chow (ARTD)
Jack Kelly (ATSDR)
                                                 GISTeam
                                                 Team Leader:     David West (OPM)
                                 Team Members:
                Brian Burch (OPM)
                Don Evans (CSC)
                Nancy Coleman (CSC)
                Mike Perpiglia (CSC)

-------
GIS Team: (left to right):  David West, Brian Burch, (missing: Don Evans, Nancy Coleman, Mike Perpiglia).

-------
Rivers & Streams Team

-------
                                          WATERSHED FRAMEWORK


This map depicts the watersheds defined by the United States Geological Survey as hydrologic units.  The hydrologic units
are grouped into larger basins such as the Delaware, Susquehanna, and Ohio.


Findings:

*     A watershed is defined as an area of land from which water drains to a single point or given place on a stream. Its
      boundary is usually delineated by following topographic divides.

*     Hydrologic Units of the United States Geological Survey have a stream coding system that allows a standardized
      base for locating, storing and retrieving hydrologic data.

*     The watershed framework is useful for many water management activities.

*     The watershed framework may not correspond to patterns in vegetation, soils, land forms, land use and other
      characteristics that control water quality and biological potential.


Management Recommendations:

*     The watershed framework provides a logical framework for managing water quality and addressing diverse impacts.
      Watersheds should be used to organize water quality control activities in place of political frameworks such as state
      or county boundaries. Natural variation in water quality has been observed to follow ecoregion rather than
      watershed boundaries, so the ecoregion effects need to be considered as well.

*     Non-water resources, such as air and wildlife do not observe watershed boundaries.  Therefore different frames of
      reference may be needed for different analyses.

-------
                                    RIVERS AND STREAMS INDICATORS

                                MAJOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

                                                                                                  t
Management Recommendations:

*     As a federal agency, we should ensure consistency in assessment and management of waters crossing political
      boundaries.  We must recognize inequities in income and resources available to address problems. For example,
      West  Virginia appears to have minimal resources and widespread water quality problems.

*     We should identify sources of contamination in areas with contaminated fish and evaluate or initiate remediation
      efforts.

*     We should integrate fish tissue data with other identified stressors to human health, especially in populations
      consuming larger quantities of fish, to locate communities for priority attention.

*     We should develop criteria to identify other possible high risk fish tissue sites, based on the criteria used in the
      National Bioaccumulation Study and other applicable information on toxics sources.

*     We should continue to work aggressively with the agricultural community to mitigate the widespread impact from
      this source.

*     EPA and the Office of Surface Mines (OSM)  should develop a better relationship to ensure remediation of existing
      mine impacts and prevent additional impact.  On a parallel track, we should consider existing tools within EPA to
      address this extensive problem.

*     We should develop a plan with adjoining Regions to reduce emissions contributing to acid deposition.

-------
                                     RIVERS AND STREAMS INDICATORS

                                MAJOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Findings:                                                                                          '

*     Based on the initial analyses, there are several large impacted watersheds as well as many minimally impacted areas.
      The most impacted areas are the urban corridor from Philadelphia to the District of Columbia; the coal bearing
      regions of Pennsylvania, West Virginia  and Virginia; and portions of agricultural areas of the Delmarva Peninsula,
      central Maryland and central Virginia.  The minimally impacted areas are northeastern and northern Pennsylvania,
      the Clinch River, and portions of eastern Virginia.

*     Potentially significant risks from the ingestion of contaminated fish do exist, particularly near urban and industrial
      areas.

*     State fish consumption advisories may not always be adequate to protect against such risks.

*     In streams assessed by the states, nonpoint sources cause the greatest impact.  Resource extraction and agriculture
      are the major nonpoint sources.

*     The lesser impact of point sources may be due to the greater amount of legislation, resources and time historically
      spent addressing point source problems.

*     Acid deposition poses an additional major threat to streams in the Mid Appalachian Highlands and the Atlantic
      Coastal Plain.


Management Recommendations:

*     In areas where the available data suggest severe impact, we recommend a comprehensive, cross-program approach
      which addresses all impacts in the watershed.

-------
RIVERS & STREAMS TEAM: (left to right): Sumner Crosby (co-leader), Margaret Passmore (co-leader), Karen Angulo,
Jennifer Hubbard, Francisco Cruz, Helene Drago (missing: Glenn Hansen).

-------
Dieldrin  Fish  Tissue  Concentration
       FILLET SAMPLES

       Small Mouth Bass

       Channel Catfish

       Large Mouth Bass

       All Other

       WHOLE BODY SAMPLES

       White Sucker

       Carp

       Channel Catfish

       Redhorse Sucker

       All Others
COLORS REPRESENT
CONCENTRATION in PPB (ng/g)

No Detection


> 0 - 0.032, No significant risk


0.0321 -7


7.01 -25


25.1 -70


70.1 -300


> 300, Above FDA level
      Gwly louiln. /« 1:2000001 USGS DLC1
            i r_« Oft ,-njr, UST/(
  Fn«d Sy  US EP/1 X>iai O (-»»)
  0*.  Aiidi 9. 1MB
   0  10  20 30 40  60
         MUES

         1 :
                   EM Regie, ID

                   Environmental Indicators

                   Initiative

-------
   PCB  Fish  Tissue  Concentration
E
E
a
FILLET SAMPLES


Small Mouth Bass


Channel Catfish


Large Mouth Bass


All Other


WHOLE BODY SAMPLES


White Sucker


Carp


Channel Catfish


Redhorse Sucker


All Others
COLORS REPRESENT
CONCENTRATION in PPB (ng/g)

No Detection


> 0 - 0.065, No Significant Risk


0.0651 -50


50.1 -140


140.1 -1080


1080.1 -2000


> 2000, Above FDA level
      CM. mi M~rmf P*t~i f* On HA %™ m
        hptt
        OS CPA f**» a CM.^a Mm*
   0  IB 20 30  40  M
         MILES


         t : 3600000
                   EfM Rryion ///

                   Environmental Indicators
      CaMy fa»l«» /m 1 MOOOOO LBCS DLG3 fib
           H* I—1. OK tan USDM 1M2 .M«»W Shjy of
                   « H*. EEUU-JMJ-OOt.

-------
DDE  Fish  Tissue  Concentration
FILLET SAMPLES


Small Mouth Bass


Channel Catfish


Large Mouth Bass


All Other


WHOLE BODY SAMPLES


White Sucker


Carp


Channel Catfish


Redhorse Sucker


All Others
                                     COLORS REPRESENT
                                     CONCENTRATION in PPB (ng'g)
                                     No Detection


                                     > 0 - 1.5, No Significant Risk


                                     1.51 -32


                                     3Z1 -250


                                     250.1 -5000
                                     > 5000, Exceeds FDA Action
                                     Level
                   Region III

                Emtronmeittal Indicators
   CoMy Iw4« fn. 1 WOOOJC USCi OLG1 H.
        f«* T«u« Du /ton U97A
                ii n*.
     . OS DM S»«" HI
   M»di 9. 1393

-------
   TEC  Fish  Tissue  Concentration
e
FILLET SAMPLES

Small Mouth Bass

Channel Catfish

Large Mouth Bass

All Other

WHOLE BODY SAMPLES

White Sucker

Carp

Channel Catfish

Redhorse Sucker

All Others
                                       COLORS REPRESENT
                                       CONCENTRATION in PPT (pg/g)
                                       No Detection

                                       > 0 - 0.003, No Significant Risk

                                       0.0031 -0.5

                                       0.51 -7.2

                                       7.21 -10.8

                                       10.81 -25

                                       25.1 - 50,  Above  1st  FDA Level
                                       (reduce consumption)
                                       > 50,  Above 2nd  FDA level
                                       (consumption not recommended)
  Sun. GwOy Iqmjmm t*m 1.2000000 LEGS DLG1 Om,
           M 7»uc Dtu tan LEZ3M 1M2 lUa* Auk of
           Om*d Kmivm « F«k. BMIlS-Jt-M-OJI.
          tmid Aim Pxwtm
     : D** mi Mar*t ^f' )br IV OM X«ill m
  rn««ld Sy: IU QM Jteni II rij^lli M
  OtbT AMI 9 LM3
   0  10  20  30  40  50
         MILES

      Salt 1 : 3500000
                    Em Region HI

                    Environmental Indicators

                    Initiative

-------
Mercury  Fish  Tissue  Concentration
 B
 E
 a
 a
FILLET SAMPLES

Small Mouth Bass

Channel Catfish

Large Mouth Bass

All Other

WHOLE BODY SAMPLES

White Sucker

Carp

Channel Catfish

Redhorse Sucker

All Others
COLORS REPRESENT
CONCENTRATIONS in PPM (ug/g)

No Detection


> 0 -0.15, No Significant Risk


0.15 -0.7


0.7 -1.0


> 1.0, above FDA level
      »y OS DM Xfix IH (-»^*, kf
      Aid* ». 1MJ
   0  10  20 M  40  50
         MILES

         1 :
                   Em Region m

                   Environmental Indicators
                   Initiative
      CxMy loudm /m : 20OOOX USGS OLC1 him
           Fi* Tmu, D*i /Km US&A ml Ntfoid Shjy aj
               tmlum «i R*.

-------
                    NONATTAINMENT OF DESIGNATED USES IN RIVERS AND STREAMS

Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act requires each state to submit a water quality inventory report to Congress, through
the EPA, every two years. This report provides information to the EPA and the public on the overall condition of water
quality including whether or not each assessed waterbody meets its designated use, as defined by the states' water quality
standards (eg aquatic life use, primary contact, etc.).  This map represents percentages of only those rivers and streams that
have been assessed by the states and that do not fully support the States' designated  uses for those waterbodies. This map
does not depict the extent of the problem, only the percentage not meeting designated uses.  River mile estimates of
impaired rivers and  streams are available.

Findings:

*     The states use different assessment methods and assessment criteria, so the quantitative estimates of impacted
      stream miles  are not readily comparable among states.

*     In many states, monitoring and water quality assessments are biased toward impacted areas. States often assume
      unassessed reaches are probably not impacted.

*     In many watersheds in each state, more than 40%  of the assessed stream reaches in the watershed are impacted and
      do not support their designated use.

*     The most impacted areas are the urban corridor from Philadelphia to the District of Columbia; coal bearing regions
      of southwestern Pennsylvania, the Scranton-Wilkes Barre area, West Virginia and Western Virginia; and portions of
      agricultural areas of the Delmarva Peninsula, central Maryland and central Virginia.

*     The minimally impacted areas are northeastern and northern Pennsylvania, the Clinch River, and portions of Eastern
      Virginia.

Management Recommendations:

*     In areas where the available data suggest severe impact, we recommend a comprehensive, cross-program watershed
      approach.  A watershed protection approach can also be applied in minimally impacted areas to  protect high quality
      areas.  The maps following present problems and recommendations in more detail.

-------
      Percent   Non-Attainment  of
Designated   Uses  for  Waterbodies
                 No  Data
                 < 10%
                 10% - 20%
                 20% - 30%
                 30% - 40%
                 > 40%
     Under Section 305(b)  of the Clean Water Act, States must
     report to Congress, through EPA, on a biennial basis, on
     the condition of their  waters.  The report is developed
     by performing assessments  on a  subset of  a  Slate's
     waterbpdies;  for each  waterbody  assessed, the State
     determines whether or not the waterbody meets  its
     designated uses, as defined in the State's Water Quality
     Standards.

     This  map represents percentages  of only those waterbodies
     that  have been assessed by the  States and  do not fully
     support  the States'  designated uses for those  waterfaodies.
                   EPA Region III


                   Environmental Indicators


                   Initiative
Saaa: Qnmty BooKkno /mm 1:2000000 USGS DLGJ Ffa    V
           UK fttrnmmt Data /ran S!al«' 305(W Data Pin, 1
 Subnttxl to £P/ lbn«fc t/tc PC WifHioiy Syrian.
Pmfeclim: iVhen E^ual A« Pnjtchm
Pnject: Date aid Mapping Prepared /nr the
  frubcjtfon Project.
Pirptnd By: US EPA figian W VHa Mmfcmasl Diraxm
CUe  /V* W, 13S3
 0  10  20  30 40  50
        MILES


    Scan  1 : 3500000

-------
                   NONATTAINMENT OF DESIGNATED USES FOR RIVERS AND STREAMS
                                          POINT SOURCE IMPACTS

Where waterbodies do not meet designated uses, the states determine possible sources of nonattainment. This map shows
the percentage of river miles associated with particular sources that are regulated within existing EPA NPDES programs,
including industrial, municipal, and stormwater runoff discharges, construction, and sludge and wastewater land applications.

Findings:

*     Although there are only a few watersheds where nonattainment of designated uses is primarily due to point sources,
      this source category still has a large impact throughout the Region.  There are over 6000 miles of rivers and streams
      impacted by three principal point source types: urban  runoff/storm water, municipal, and industrial discharges.

*     Impacted watersheds  are located in the more heavily populated and urbanized areas.

*     Point sources are responsible for less than 20 percent  of the identified  impact in a majority of the watersheds in the
      Region. This lesser impact,  compared to nonpoint sources, may reveal benefits from the historical investment in the
      point source program.

Management Recommendations:

*     Watersheds most dominated by point source impacts offer an immediate opportunity to the NPDES program to
      affect improvement wholly from within their program.   In watersheds dominated by point source impacts, EPA
      should work with the  states to identify the facilities responsible for the  impact. Appropriate control measures should
      be taken.

*     For the majority of watersheds in the Region, a more  comprehensive cross-program approach will be necessary.  We
      should build on the concept  of watershed protection, applying tools such as the development  of Total Maximum
      Daily Loads  (TMDLs).  The TMDL process involves assessing relative  contributions from both point source and
      nonpoint sources within a watershed and allocating wasteloads to maintain water quality.

-------
        Point   Source  Impacts  on
               Non-Attainment  of
 Designated  Uses  for  Waterbodies
                 0
                 < 20%
                 20% - 40%
                 40% - 60%
                 60% - 80%
                 > 80%

     Under  Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, States must
     report  to Congress, through  EPA, on a biennial  basis, on
     the condition of their waters.   The  report is developed
     by  performing assessments on  a subset of  a State's
     waterbodies;  for each waterbody assessed,  the State
     determines whether or not the  waterbody meets its
     designated uses, as  defined in  the State's  Water Quality
     Standards.

     Where  waterbodies do not meet designated  uses, the  State
     determines passible sources and causes  of  non-attainment.
     This map shows the  percentage of  miles associated with
     particular sources that  are  regulated within existing
     EPA NPDES  programs, including industrial,  municipal, and
     stormwater runoff  discharges, construction,  as well as
     sludge  and wastewater applications to  land.
                   EPA Region III

                   Environmental Indicators

                   Initiative
Saura: Vltterjud taimitrim from USGS i Digit QUbvutu Unit
           UK Attmment Dttt from Suits' SOSltl Dan HI
 Sutaitlad to ERA tlmigli Hit PC Watrtatj/ Sptm.
Protection: ftben Equal Am Projection
fraject: Dot, md Mappmg Prtjmt jar tin EPA Rtgiai 07 Emnmrnmtil ,
  bubtaton Project                                \  .
Prepond By U5 EfM R^TOT 07 Water Mtrugemott Divmm.          V
Dife  ylpril IS, !3»3                                 I
 0  10  20  30  40  SO
        MILES


    Scjlt  1 :  3500000

-------
                     NONATTAINMENT OF DESIGNATED USES FOR RIVERS AND STREAMS
                                       NONPOINT SOURCE IMPACTS

Where waterbodies do not meet designated uses, the states determine possible sources of nonattainment.  This map
shows the percentage of river miles associated with particular sources that fall under the general category of nonpoint
source, including agriculture, silviculture, resource extraction and on-site wastewater systems.

Findings:

*     Nonpoint sources account for over 80% of the identifiable sources of nonattainment in many watersheds. Over
      18,000 assessed stream miles were impacted by nonpoint sources.

*     Impacted watersheds are located in more rural areas of the Region.

*     The major sources of impact are agriculture, resource extraction, silviculture and on-site wastewater systems.
      The following maps identify areas impacted by resource extraction and agriculture.

*     Untreated domestic sewage continues to cause impacts in southern  West Virginia and portions of western
      Virginia.

Management Recommendations:

*     The areal nature of nonpoint source problems and the current voluntary approach to mitigating impact make
      these sources harder to control than point sources.  The watershed protection approach requires all  interests to
      participate in defining and addressing problems.  In the  absence of a regulatory approach, cooperation among
      all interests is our strongest tool.

*     For resource extraction and agriculture, see the following maps.

*     EPA should work closely with the US Forest Service to encourage Best Management Practices within forested
      areas.

*     EPA should explore avenues to solve remaining untreated domestic sewage problems in the Region.

-------
   Non-Point  Source  Impacts   on
               Non-Attainment   of
 Designated  Uses   for   Waterbodies
                 0
                 < 20%
                 20%  - 40%
                 40%  - 60%
                 60%  - 80%
                 > 80%

     Under Section 305(b) of the  Clean Water  Act,  States  must
     report to Congress,  through EPA, on  a biennial basis,  on
     the condition of their waters.  The report  is developed
     by performing assessments on a subset of a State's
     waterbodies;  for each waterbody  assessed, the  State
     determines whether  or not  the waterbody  meets its
     designated uses, as  defined in the State's Water Quality
     Standards.

     Where waterbodles do not  meet  designated uses, the  State
     determines possible  sources and  causes of non-attainment.
     This  map shows the percentage  of miles associated with
     particular sources that fall  under  the general category
     of Non-Point Sources,  including agriculture,  silviculture,
     resource extraction,  and on-site wastewater  systems.
                   EPA Region 111

                   Environmental Indicators
                   Initiative
Saaa. WOtnhid Baavltrm ftar USGS 8 Digit COdcrwiu Unit
          UK MtOKiamt Dttt from SUM' 305% Ofe
 .Subratled to ItA Ouvufk  Iht PC Vittntody Syrian
Pnfectian: f£*n Eqial fgm Pnftftim
Pwjxt: DtU aid Map/ing Prtjmt far the EPA fegun
  in&atan PrajtO.
Prtaml By US EPA ftgm 01 Wir Mmtgrmaa Daamm.
Ottr  Afril 15, 1333
 0  10  20  30  40  SO
        MILES


    Soil  1 ' 3500000

-------
                     NONATTAINMENT OF DESIGNATED USES FOR RIVERS AND STREAMS
                                          AGRICULTURAL IMPACTS

Available data indicate that agriculture impacts the greatest number of stream miles in the Region. Measured impacts
total over 8600 miles.  This map shows two measures of impact by a general source category of Agriculture, which
includes cropland, pastureland, feed lots, and animal holding/management areas.  The variable-sized dots represent the
actual miles attributed to this source category.  The color of the watershed reflects the miles, expressed as a
percentage of identified impacts within the watershed.

Findings:

*     Watersheds in the lower Susquehanna basin, the western half of  Virginia and the DelMarva Peninsula are
      impacted by agriculture.

*     The lower Susquehanna basin and the western half of Virginia are all underlain by fertile soils and are located in
      the Valley and Ridge and Piedmont physiographic provinces. The underlying carbonate bedrock formations,
      which form the rich soils, are also very vulnerable to contamination from land activities.

*     The unconsolidated sediments underlying the DelMarva Peninsula also form fertile soils which support extensive
      agricultural activity and are vulnerable to contamination from land activities.

Management Recommendations:

*     The most important aspects of a holistic watershed  protection approach in these areas should include full
      understanding of and cooperation with the agricultural community, as well as consideration of the
      interdependence of surface and ground water systems.

*     We should continue to encourage the application of Best Management Practices.

*     We need to improve our ability to quantify the pollutants from agriculture so  that we can make accurate
      predictions for the calculation of watershed wasteload allocations.

-------
         Agricultural   Impacts  on
               Non-Attainment   of
 Designated   Uses   for  Waterbodies
                 0
                 < 20%
                 20%  - 40%
                 40%  - 60%
                 60%  - 80%
                 > 80%
                                     Number of  Miles Impacted
20  100   500
                                                          1000
    Under Section 305(b) of the  Clean Water Act, States must report  to Congress,
    through  EPA,  on  a  biennial basis, on the condition of their waters.  The
    report is developed  by  performing assessments  on  a subset of  a  State's
    waterbodies; for each waterbody  assessed, the State determines  whether or
    not the  waterbody meets  its  designated uses, as defined in the State's  Water
    Quality Standards.
         Where waterbodies do not meet designated uses, the  State determines
    possible sources and causes  of non-attainment.   This map  shows  two
    measures of  impact by a  general category of Agriculture, including
    Crop Land,  Pasture  Land, Feedlots, and Animal  Holding/Management
    Areas.
         The variable-sized  dots represent the actual miles attributed
    to this source category, while the colored watersheds express
    that  quantity  as a percentage  of  all  miles attributed  to all
    sources  within the watershed.
                   EPA Region III


               u   Environmental Indicators


                   Initiative
Sauce:
           Bcimbria from USGS S Digit
           Ua Attaaantnt DtU from Sluts' 305ft)
 SiJmHsf to EPA Omugh Ike K Wdntoiy Syrtm
Pttyechan: flbm EjjUd? Am Prnftctim
Pnjart. Dftt ml Miffing Preptnt for ttu m Kegm m Eirannmnbl
  bvbatan Pro/at
Prratrtd By US EPA gtricn m Wobr Mamt-maa Dicmm.
DUr April IS, 1333
        MILES


    Scjlt  1 : 3500000

-------
                MEAN TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS CONCENTRATION IN RIVERS AND STREAMS


The state water pollution control agencies, EPA and the USGS enter water quality monitoring data into STORET, a water
quality database maintained by the EPA.  The map depicts average values of total phosphorous concentrations calculated
from samples collected by state water pollution control agencies from 1989 to 1992.

Phosphorous is an essential nutrient for aquatic plants which at elevated levels can contribute to eutrophication.
Phosphorous is often used as an indicator of agricultural and municipal impacts.   The threshold levels used in the map are
taken from the EPA Gold Book which serves as guidance for the development of state water quality standards. At
concentrations exceeding 0.1 mg/1, the potential for eutrophication problems is high.

Findings:

*     Mean phosphorous concentrations exceed the 0.1 mg/1 threshold level in areas with identified agricultural impact.
      These data help to support the state water quality assessments.

*     Mean phosphorous concentrations are also elevated in urbanized and more densely populated areas.


Management Recommendations:

*     See discussion under previous map,  entitled "Agriculture".

*     Phosphorous is an example of a pollutant with both point and nonpoint origins.  The control of phosphorous in some
      watersheds will require a comprehensive, cross-program  approach.

-------
      Mean Total  Phosphorous
 Concentration  in  mg/1,  1989-1992
           •  < 0.05 mg/1
              0.05 - 0.1 mg/
           •  > 0.1 mg/1
                Initiative
Scura: Ounly Bound*™! /ram 1:2000000 USGi DLGJ fij«
              stittww /nm USEB4 STQRTT
Pnjart. D«t« end Mapping PnpmA far the EPA Region IS £i
  Miaton Project.
Prepand Bu US EPA Rerun Ul Gwrnutik tnfarmetttn Cfntfr
Da,  M»d, 10. 1333
 D 10  20 30 40  SO
      MILES

   bcjlt 1 : 3500000
                EPA Region 111

                Environmental Indicators

-------
                                                                                                              p
                     NONATTAINMENT OF DESIGNATED USES FOR RIVERS AND STREAMS
                                     RESOURCE EXTRACTION IMPACTS

Resource extraction impacts the greatest number of stream miles in the western half of the Region.  Measured impacts
in the Ohio, Monongahela, Allegheny, Kanawha and Susquehanna basins total over 6200 miles.

This map shows two measures of impact by a general source category of Resource Extraction, which includes surface,
subsurface, placer, and dredge mining practices, petroleum activities and mill and mine tailings. The variable-sized dots
represent the actual miles attributed to this source category. The color of the watershed reflects the miles, expressed
as a percentage of identified impacts within the watershed.


Findings:

*     In both Pennsylvania and West Virginia,  a majority of the impacts are due to abandoned mine drainage and the
      associated acidification, elevated metals, sulfate and sedimentation. Resulting conditions can be extremely toxic
      to most stream biota and can destroy the stream habitat.

*     Active mining and petroleum activities have also been identified as sources of impact.

*     Both Pennsylvania and West Virginia have specifically requested assistance from  EPA in the form of improved
      coordination between EPA and the Office of Surface Mines (OSM).


Management Recommendations:

*     Resource extraction activities in Region III continue to impact a large number of rivers and streams.  Although
      much of the problem is caused by older abandoned mines, "new" abandoned mines appear and active mines
      also cause impact. Region III should work closely with OSM to explore a more active role for EPA in the
      reclamation of abandoned  mines and the prevention of "newly" abandoned  and active mining impacts.

*     On a parallel track, we should consider existing programs within EPA (NPS and NPDES stormwater) to address
      this widespread problem.

-------
 Resource  Extraction  Impacts  on
               Non-Attainment   of
 Designated   Uses   for  Waterbodies
                 0
                 < 2055
                 20%  - 40%
                 40%  - 60%
                 60%  - 80%
                                     Number of Miles Impacted
                                        20  100    500
                                                          1000
    belle  1 :  3500000
     Under Section 305(b) ot the  Clean Water Act,  States  must  report to Congress
     through  EPA,  on  a  biennial basis, on the condition ot their waters.  The
     report is developed  by  performing assessments  on  a  subset of a State's
     waterbodies; for each waterbody  assessed, the  State determines whether or
     not the  waterbody meets  its  designated uses, as defined in the  State's  Water
     Quality Standards.
         Where waterbodies do not meet designated uses, the State determines
     possible sources and causes  of non-attainment.   This map shows two
     measures of  impact by a general category of Resource  Extraction,
     including Surface, Subsurface, Placer,  and  Dredge Mining practices,
     Petroleum  activities,  and Mill  and Mine  Tailings.
         The variable-sized  dots represent the actual miles attributed
     to this source category, while the colored watersheds express
     that  quantity  as a percentage of  all  miles attributed to all
     sources  within the watershed.
                   EPA Region HI
               u   Environmental Indicators
               I
             ^    Initiative
Source: WOenhxl Bombrim jrm LEGS I Digit GKalojinnj Unit
           U* Mtmaienl Dtu from SKta1 30Slt> 8*1 ~
 SubniHaJ to [PA Omnjh Iht PC Wtfntody Syrian.
    vm: Atom bnui Am Pmxtan
    . D*tt tnd Mtppmg frtftiti far Oa EPA Rtfan
     rfOT Pmect
Prrpvul By: IU EPA ftpon ID Vttttr Mfrfffmatt Dicmm.
DSr April 15, 1333
    10  20 30  40  60

-------
                        MEAN SULFATE CONCENTRATION IN RIVERS AND STREAMS


The state water pollution control agencies, EPA and the USGS enter water quality monitoring data into STORET, a water
quality database maintained by the EPA. The map depicts average values of sulfate concentrations calculated from samples
collected by state water pollution control agencies from 1989 to 1992.

Sulfate is released during the combustion of sulfur-bearing fossil fuels and when sulfur bearing minerals are exposed to the
atmosphere during mining. Acid mine drainage waters are commonly characterized by high sulfate concentrations,
therefore ambient sulfate concentrations can be used as an indicator of impact from resource extraction.  This map
supports the previous map, entitled "Resource Extraction Impacts".

Findings:

*     Mean sulfate concentrations are elevated in coal bearing regions of western and eastern Pennsylvania and West
      Virginia.

*     The spatial patterns of sulfate in the western part of the Region correspond well to the impact associated with
      resource extraction in the state water quality assessments of attainment of designated uses.

*     In the higher elevation, western areas which receive large sulfate loadings from atmospheric deposition, some of the
      sulfate in the streams may be generated outside of the watershed.

*     Mean sulfate concentrations are also elevated in the Lower Potomac, Lower James and the Hampton watersheds of
      Virginia. Point source discharges are the suspected sources of the elevated sulfate levels in these areas.

Management Recommendations:

*     See discussion under previous map, entitled "Resource Extraction Impacts".

-------
           Watersheds  Region  III
                         Upper Chesapeake
                         Lower Chesapeake
                         Susquehaima
                         Potomac
                         Delaware
                         Chowan-Roanoke
                         Allegheny
                         Monongahela
                         Upper Ohio
                         Middle Ohio
                         Upper Tennessee
                         Kanawha
                         Big Sandy-Guyandotte
                         Atlantic  Ocean
                         Eastern Lake Erie
                         Southern  Lake  Erie
                         Pee Dee
                         Southwestern Lake Ontario
                     ER\ Region III

                     Environmental Indicators
Sam: Coaly la^Jtnm fmm 1:2000000 LEGS DIG3 fita
  Daragrapl,* DaU fran 1OO US Ctrma tiOMu Dan Bin
PnpOm: ^Bm £^ud Am Pwanwi
Pnf*t: EMM nn4 Mafjmg Ptrpani far It* F-JM JUgm 07 Lnooamuni*
  Infoeon PtafKt.
PnffnJ By: US EPA Regan IE Geography hijbnmtion Cenltr
Dot:  Mm* 23, 1SS3
     10  20  30  40  bO
         MILES

     Seals  1  3500000

-------
                                          ECOREGION FRAMEWORK


This map depicts the ecoregions of Region III as defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Terrestrial variables such as vegetation, soils, land forms, land use and other characteristics were used to delineate the
ecoregions. The ecoregions depict regions of similar aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.


Findings:

*     Surface waters generally reflect the land forms which they drain.

*     Ecological and water quality data should be summarized by ecoregions rather than watersheds because ecoregions
      better correspond to the natural spatial variations and patterns in water quality.

*     Many states are using the ecoregion framework to develop biological criteria for waters.

*     Region III is participating in a Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (REMAP) called the
      Mid-Atlantic Highlands Assessment (MAHA).  It is an ecological assessment project based on the ecoregion
      framework. The project will determine minimally impacted conditions, describe the current ecological condition of
      parts of 6 major ecoregions and investigate diverse impacts. This study will cover 65% of Region III.

Management Recommendations:

*     This project did not use the ecoregion framework primarily because watersheds provide a more familiar frame of
      reference.  However, the Region should begin to investigate the  use of the ecoregion framework for assessing and
      managing water resources and protecting aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.  It should be noted that at a recent all
      employees meeting at EPA Headquarters,  both Vice President Gore and Administrator Browner considered
      ecosystem protection as a top Agency priority.

*     The Region should coordinate with the MAHA project and use information  from the project as it becomes available.
      This project will provide real information on the utility of the ecoregion framework in water quality management.

-------
Sana: Enroll ly US DM L» - CaaO*. OR
Pttpction: Aen £qwat AM J*nj)*l*»i
  cr OfU mi Majms P*pmt fat 0* tPA
   l Sy U.S .rJM D^ni 0) G«jrjpk« himani Cnlir
   ^pni 12 1993
 0   10  20  30 40  SO
       MILES


    iatt I  3500000
         Ecoregions  Region  III
         60 - NORTHERN APPALACHIAN PLATEAU AND UPLANDS

         61 - ERE/ONTARIO LAKE PLAIN

         62 - NORTH CENTRAL APPALACHIANS

         63 - MIDDLE ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

         64 - NORTHERN PIEDMONT

         65 - SOUTHEASTERN PLAINS

         66 - BLUE RIDGE MOUNTAINS

         67 - CENTRAL APPALACHIANS RIDGES AND VALLEYS

         68 - SOUTHWESTERN APPALACHIANS

         69 - CENTRAL APPALACHIANS

         70 - WESTERN ALLEGHENY PLATEAU
                Em Region III

                Environmental Indicators

-------
                     BIOLOGICAL MONITORING OF BENTfflC MACROINVERTEBRATES

Benthic macroinvertebrates are an assemblage of animal groups that live in bottom habitats in the aquatic environment.
The major taxonomic groups of benthic macroinvertebrates include the insects, annelids, mollusks, flatworms and
crustaceans. Healthy macroinvertebrate communities indicate good water quality and physical habitat.  In-stream
communities are excellent indicators because they live in the stream and thus their condition reflects long-term water
quality, unlike ambient samples which are often taken monthly and offer only a snapshot of water quality.

Findings:

*     Data are collected using different methods and are not strictly comparable  between the states.

*     More data are readily available for the state of Maryland and the non-tidal streams of southern  Delaware.  Coverage
      is limited in Pennsylvania and Virginia and very sparse in West Virginia.

*     On the  Eastern Shore of Maryland, 34% of sampled sites indicate severe impact while 55% indicate moderate
      impact.

*     In the nontidal streams of southern Delaware 26% of sampled sites show severe impact and 40% are moderately
      impacted.  Delaware reports that 80% of sites with poor quality biology are limited by habitat.

*     Although the coverage is sparse, available data indicate impacted sites are also clustered in the middle and lower
      Allegheny, the Monongahela, the Ohio and the lower Kanawha watersheds. Areas that appear to be minimally
      impacted include the Upper Delaware River basin in the northeastern corner of Pennsylvania.

Management Recommendations:

*     The most impacted areas should be targeted for source identification, control measures should be implemented to
      reduce stressors in those areas (including enforcement for traditional sources and innovative approaches for other
      sources).  305(b) data can be used to identify sources.

*     The least impacted areas should be targeted  for pollution prevention activities and protection through awareness of
      these areas in permitting, standards review and enforcement.

-------
       Biological  Monitoring  of
     Benthic  Macroinvertebrates
                      Evaluation of Biological
                      Health

                      Good


                      Moderate


                      Poor
Pnftfrttvt:
Pafft: CWj unJ
      IK JIM
Olb. Ulrdi 10, I31JJ
 U   10  ?U  3D 40  SO
       MILEC

   Bull 1 : 3500000
                EPA Region JU

                Environmental Indicators

                Initiative
Sana: Ouily Souni-io ;«™ 1 iouuoun USCJi DU.l /ik>
                  SUf< VUdM PaOulai Omlml
                  the EPA J^pon 01 fi

               GoynpfcK MjimdicM Gntor.

-------
                                CANCER RISKS BASED ON FISH TISSUE DATA

Concentrations of chemical residues in fish fillets can be used to determine fish edibility.  The following map illustrates the
estimated total (based on 45 chemicals) cancer risk for human fish consumption at a low ingestion rate.

Findings:

*     All estimated cancer risks exceeded 1 case in 100,000, except for the background location.  Risks would be even
      higher for subsistence fishermen.

*     Most sampling locations were chosen primarily because of suspected contamination and this was confirmed through
      the study results.

*     Most high risk locations currently have some type of fish consumption advisory in place.

Recommendations:

*     See Occurrence of Toxics in Fish Tissue

-------
      Cancer  Risk  by  Location
  Fish  Tissue  Data  -  Fillet  Only
              6.5 Grams /Day
                    Ca Risk by Location - Fillet Only


                    < 1 in 1,000,000


                    1 in 1,000,000 - 1 in 100,000


                    1 in 100,000 - 1 in 10,000


                    > 1 in 10,000
           PnraoMrf far Ifw 0M R*«n
    Sy Ui OH K^IOII HI G^upht hjtontfn Onbr.
   Mm* 9. 1333
 0  10  20 30  40  SO
      MILES


   Suit 1 . 3500000
               F.noiramnrntal Indicators

               Initiative
Saaa: GxWy Sounlanm pa* J 2000000 LEGS DLGJ
        F«ii T«u Qua /ton IKDM 1991 Ntfmrf 5h% of
               n FJi.

-------
                                   OCCURRENCE OF TOXICS IN FISH TISSUE


Toxic chemical residues in fish tissue (both whole body and fillet) can indicate the presence of these chemicals in the
watercolumn and/or sediments and can be used to determine fish edibility. There is limited information on the effects of
chemicals on fish health. Some of the most significant toxics in fish for human consumption in this region are dioxins and
furans as TEC, PCBs, dieldrin, p,p'-DDE, and mercury.

Findings:

*      For organic chemicals, the highest concentrations were generally found in southeastern Pennsylvania and
       southeastern Virginia.  For mercury, the highest concentrations generally occurred in eastern Pennsylvania and
       southern Virginia.

*      Most Region III states use FDA Action Levels to set advisories.  Risk-based concentrations could be more
       protective.

Recommendations Based on all Fish Tissue Information:

*      Identify sources of contamination and evaluate remediation efforts.

*      Increased federal assistance to states for monitoring fish tissue and developing fish advisories.

*      Identify criteria used to select sampling locations and determine if these criteria apply elsewhere in the region (look
       for high  risk sites not yet identified).

*      Integrate this information with other identified stressors to human health, especially in populations consuming larger
       quantities of fish to locate communities for priority attention.

*      Provide technical assistance to the states through the National OST Fish Contamination Program
                      to develop water and sediment quality management and pollution prevention control strategies.

-------
             Mean  Sulfate  Ion
 Concentration  in  mg/1,   1989-1992
                < 100 rag/1
                100 - 200 mg/
                > 200 mg/1
            \
                           in
Environmental Indicators

Initiative
Saua:  Caatty Baundtria from 1:2000000 USGS DLGJ FB«
          Maalmms ttaiax fnm IKEPA S710RET
PrvjKtim Nbtn Eqial AM Pmtttxn
Pmj«t: Dtttt trtd Mapping Prrfrnmi jar the EPA Region ID
  bvbaton Pmect
Ptrptnd fly US EPA ffgum W Geognptuc btformgtm Cater
Dat:  Much 10, 1S33
 0  10  20 30  40  SO
       MILES

   Malt 1 : 3500000

-------
                   NONATTAINMENT OF DESIGNATED USES FOR RIVERS AND STREAMS
                                              TOXICS IMPACTS

Where waterbodies do not meet designated uses, the states determine possible sources and causes of nonattainment.  For
example, a stream may not meet its designated use as a cold water fishery because of high temperature discharges from a
power plant.  The source of the impact is the industrial power plant, the cause of the impact is increased temperature.
This map serves as an example of how the impacts from a particular cause can be mapped throughout the Region.

This map show two measures of impact by a general cause category of Toxics, which includes Metals, Pesticides, Priority
and Nonpriority Organics, Ammonia, Chlorine, and Unknown Toxicity.

Findings:

*     This map serves as one example of how problem pollutants can be mapped within the Region.  The greatest causes
      of impact to the Region's waters included nutrients, organic enrichment, and siltation; these causes are represented
      partially in the Agriculture and Resource Extraction source maps since these activities contribute these pollutants.
      This toxics map shows  additional problem areas, somewhat reflected  in the Resource Extraction and Point Source
      Impacts maps.

*     Out of the total 3910 miles impacted by any of the causes in the Toxics category, 2051 of these miles were due to
      metals problems. Many of these metals problems coincide with Resource Extraction activities in the western
      portions of the Region, though there are some additional industrial point source related problems, in the Lehigh
      valley in Pennsylvania,  the Greenbrier in West Virginia, and numerous watersheds  in southern Virginia.

Management Recommendations:

*     See the Resource Extraction and Point Source Impacts maps for recommendations.

*     In this project, we did not use ambient metals monitoring data because there were questions concerning the quality
      of the data.  The impacts reported by the states and shown in this map could not be verified analyzing the ambient
      data.  EPA should work with USGS and the states to improve all future ambient water column monitoring for
      metals.

-------
              Toxics  Impacts   on
               Non-Attainment  of
 Designated  Uses   for  Waterbodies
                  0
                  <  20%
                  20% - 40%
                  40% - 60%
                  60% - 80%
                  >  80%
                                      Number of Miles Impacted
                                          20  100    500
                                                            1000
     Linear  Section  305(b) of the Clean Water Act, States must report to Congress,
     through EPA, on a biennial basis, on the condition  of their waters.   The
     report  is developed by  performing assessments on a subset of a State's
     waterbodies; for each waterbody  assessed,  the State determines whether or
     not the waterbody meets its designated uses,  as  defined  in the  State's Water
     Quality Standards.
         Where  waterbodies do not meet designated uses, the State determines
     possible sources  and  causes of non-attainment.  This map shows two
     measures  of impact  by  a general category  of  Toxics, including Metals,
     Priority  and  Nonpnority  Orgamcs.  Pesticides, Ammonia, Chlorine,
     and  Unknown Toxicity.
         The variable-sized  dots represent the actual miles attributed
     to this source  category, while  the colored watersheds express
     that  quantity as a percentage of  all  miles attributed to all
     sources within  the watershed.
                   EPA Region 111


              \
               *
              &   Initiative
Environmental Indicators
Sonra. Wottrahd a&mttna Iran USGS 8 Digil dulosuinj U
           UK Attonmmt D*U from SMJo' iOS&) Data
 SutonlttaJ to If A through Ike PC VWffMy Syria*
Projection: jtm Eqiat Arm fxjjxtion
Prtjtct: Dftt tnd Miffing Prcfmt jar At ff A Rajioti ID ErmronmaOA
  bvbfj&on Project.
Prtpand By IIS EPA Xtgiim W Wafar Mmycmart Divmai.
Die Afril IS. 1333
 0  to  20  30  40  50
        MILES


    Scald 1 : 3500000

-------
                                   POINT SOURCES OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS


Section 304(1) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) required the states to list those waterbodies which the state did not expect will
achieve applicable water quality standards, both numeric and narrative, due entirely or substantially to point source discharge
of toxic pollutants.  For those point sources  causing a violation of water quality standards a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit with water quality-based limits and a compliance schedule was required. This map consists
of the location of the Region III 304(1) facilities classified as major and minor facilities. A major facility is a municipal facility
with a design flow of greater or equal than one million gallon per day or an industrial facility with a rating greater or equal than
80 points. A minor facility is a municipal facility with a design flow less than one million gallon per day or and industrial facility
with a rating less than 80 points. The point system is based on facility characteristics such as flow and industrial category.

Findings:

*     The Region III 304(1) list consists of 138 facilities. The 138 facilities are composed of 100 major facilities and 38 minor
      facilities.  Because there is no latitude and longitude information for 32 of the minor facilities and these facilities, as well
      as several of the major facilities, they are not shown on the map.

*     The basins where the majority of 304(1) facilities are located are: Lower Susquehanna, Upper Susquehanna-Lackawanna,
      Schuylkill, Lehigh, Youghiogheny, Upper Roanoke,  Lower James and Gunpowder-Patapsco.

*     There is no discharge monitoring information for the minor facilities in the Permit Compliance  System (PCS). PCS is
      a system that  contains information on NPDES permits.

Management Recommendations:

*     If management of 304(1) sites is a priority within the NPDES program, EPA should coordinate with the states to try to
      get discharge  monitoring information for  the 304(1)  minor facilities into the PCS. Since we  have only 38 304(1) minor
      facilities, we could commit our own staff to enter information into the PCS.

*     The recently issued EPA Locational Data Policy mandates collection of accurate locational descriptors for all regulated
      facilities.  Accurate locational data are necessary to integrate with existing data and to assess potential impacts  to
      receiving waters.

-------
           304(1)  Site  Locations
                For   Region  III

                    •   304(1)  - Major  Discharger

                    •   304(1)  - Minor  Discharger
Sun: Caaay &»im tan ] 2000000 LEGS DLG1 Ht>
  lOtm 4ai tan DM Ptrml Canfiam %*«. (PCS).
   Kw .1fcrs r^fuut Am Piejftien
   : D*u ml Mafjmf Prepmt jb tit* EPA Stgien IB
       Pupa.
      : UJ EP-I Dfin HI £«»«(*«: M,to™««»i
Qa«. /Vnl 4 1993
 0  10  20  3D  40  SO
       MLEI

        i : 35oaooa
                  EM Region 111

                  Environmental Indicators

                  Initiative

-------
                               COMPLIANCE WITH TOXICS DISCHARGE LIMITS
                                     COPPER LOADINGS AS AN EXAMPLE


The 304(1) program consists of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits with water quality-based
limits and compliance schedule for toxics pollutants.  This map depicts the ratio of actual copper loadings to allowed copper
loadings for the 304(1) facilities discharging copper in Regions III.   For example,  119% of the permissable limit means the
discharger is exceeding their permissable limit by 19%. Copper was chosen because more data were available for this parameter
than for other toxic parameters at 304(1) sites.

Findings:

*     The basins where there are 304(1) facilities discharging copper at levels that exceed the permissible loading are: Clarion,
      Lehigh, Schuykill, Brandywine and Gunpowder-Patapsco. The facilities discharging in these basins exceed the permissible
      loading for copper by more than 19 percent.

*     The facilities discharging to the following basins are meeting the permissible loading for copper: Chinooteague, Hampton,
      Upper New, Upper Roanoke, Greenbrier, South Fork Shenandoah, Conococheague, Bald Eagle and Youghiogheny.

*     There are 39 outstanding 304(1) facilities in the states of Maryland and Virginia operating without approved NPDES
      permits that meet 304(1) requirements. Therefore, we do not have loading information for those facilities.

Management Recommendations:

*     For those facilities that exceed the permissible loading, we  need to set a compliance date for the 304(1) parameters.
      Based on this information, we should develop  enforcement actions as needed.

*     For those basins where there are 304(1) facilities in compliance with the permissible loading, we should coordinate with
      the states to develop instream monitoring programs to determine what environmental benefit we achieved through the
      implementation of the section 304(1).

*     We should coordinate with the states of Maryland and Virginia to issue the remaining 304(1) NPDES permits.

-------
Percent  of  Total  County  Acreage
                       in  Forest
                         less  than 20%

                         20% - 39%

                         40% - 59%

                         60% - 79%

                         greater than 79%

                   EPA Region  III

                   Environmental Indicators

                   Initiative
Source  County Boundaries from 1:2000000 U5GS DLG3 Ffa
           rarest statistics from USTS 51afJ forest Statistics
           feports.
Projection: Aben Ejuat Area Prtr/xttan
Prefect: Data and Mapping Prepared for the EPA KfgKm W Environmental
  buhcaton Project.
Prepared 8y U5 EPA Rtfim IE Geographic Information Center
Dale       March 10, I9S3
    10  20  3D  40  SO
        MILES

    Scall 1   3500000

-------
                                        REGION 3'S FOREST RESOURCES


The Forest Indicators team gathered baseline data on the Region's forest resources to use as starting point for analyses of
stressor data.  The following 4 maps present baseline data on percent forest by county, forest cover type, public ownership,
and elevation.


Findings:

*     The majority of Region 3 is forested. The most heavily forested counties are located in the western portions of
      Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia.

*     Forests are spai^ on the coastal plain.

*     Oak/hickory is the dominant forest type in the Region.  There are also large components of beech/maple and loblolly
      pine forest.

*     The vast majority of the Region's forests are in private ownership.

*     High elevation forests occur along the Appalachian Mountain range as it passes through Pennsylvania, Virginia, and
      West Virginia.

Management Recommendations:

*     Work with the Forest Service to establish watershed approaches to engage local/private protection.

*     Work with the Forest Service to establish protection programs (P2) in existing forested areas.

*     Work with the Forest Service to establish forest restoration efforts to encourage large forest patch size protection in
      coastal plain areas.

*     Work with the Forest Service at the  county level in outreach  and education for local communities.

-------
                                             FOREST INDICATORS                           T/P°

                                 MAJOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Findings:

*     Region III is heavily forested; oak-hickory forests represent the dominate forest type.                             ~~

*     There is currently no comprehensive dataset which describes the biological diversity of the Region's forests.
      Information is limited to rare, threatened and endangered species and plant communities of which Region III is
      home to a wide variety of special species and communities of concern.

*     Elements of forest biodiversity are doing well: deer, resident  songbirds, small mammals;  Other forest species have
      been extirpated or are declining in numbers: neotropical migratory songbirds, large predators (timber wolf, mountain
      lion, bobcat, wolverine), amphibians.

*     Most rare forest communities are associated with extreme environmental conditions such as high elevations or
      saturated conditions

*     Major stressors to forested ecosystems include air pollution in the form of ozone, air toxics, and acid deposition.

*     Species sensitive to ozone include some  of the Region's dominate tree species: white pine, black cherry, tulip poplar,
      red spruce and red  maple.

*     Research results support an  indirect link between high elevation forest decline, acid deposition and poorly buffered
      soils [note: the pH of Region Ill's rainfall averages between 4.0 and 4.5].

*     Forest fragmentation by roads, pipelines, subdivisions, clearcutting, etc. represent one of the greatest threats  to the
      overall ecosystem functions of our forests.

*     EMAP's Forest Health Monitoring is being implemented in our Region.  However, PA and WV do not participate in
      the program, to date.

-------
                                            FOREST INDICATORS

                               MAJOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Management Recommendations:

*     The Forest Team recommends working closely with the USDA Forest Service to better address the assessment and
      monitoring of air pollution impacts to forests.

*     The Forest Team recommends leveraging our existing regulations to better address forest fragmentation and means
      to reduce or mitigate its consequences.

*     The Forest Team recommends establishing closer links to EMAP's Forest Health Monitoring to achieve better
      Regional coverage.

*     The Forest Team recommends the use of innovative techniques and tools to identify areas of high biodiversity and
      develop management plans to offset risks to biodiversity.  Such tools/techniques include US Fish and Wildlife
      Service's Gap Analysis Program, EPA's Habitat/Biodiversity Research Plan and the Watershed Approach.

-------
Forest Team

-------
FOREST TEAM: (left to right):  Karen Angulo, Thomas Stolle, Pat Flores, Art Spingarn (co-leader), Susan McDowell
(co-leader), Dave Cutter, Catherine Brown, Randy Piersol, (missing: Fred Suffian).

-------
                                                     SENSITIVE TOXICITY MODEL -rtOASTA
SENSITIVE WXICITY
                                                                                           80  TO 100
                   V  10 TO  30

                   A  JO TO  80
    Acidic stress index (ASI)  for acid-sensitive fish species  in  the Mid Appalachian and the
         Mid Atlantic Coastal Plain regions.   (ASI > 10 unsuitable for sensitive  fish)

-------
    NATIONAL ACID PRECIPITATION ASSESSMENT PROGRAM - NATIONAL SURFACE WATER SURVEY
                                             BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS

A toxicity model, called an acid stress index, was used to estimate the acidity-related stress on fish associated with measured
levels of pH, aluminum and calcium.  The  fish response measured most frequently in the laboratory bioassays is mortality.
Thus, only experiments evaluating the effects of acidification on fish mortality were used for the toxicity model calibration.

Findings:

*     Approximately 24% (9,317 miles) of the targeted population streams in the Mid Appalachia region exhibit ASI
      values which indicate chemical conditions unsuitable for the survival of acid-sensitive fish populations.

*     Streams with the highest ASI values occur in the western part of the Mid Appalachian region in the higher-elevated
      upstream reaches.

*     Acid stresses in the Mid Atlantic Coastal Plain region indicate that  45% (11,801 miles) of the targeted population
      stream reaches exhibit ASI values which indicate chemical conditions unsuitable for survival of acid sensitive fish
      populations.

*     High ASI values are found in all areas of the Coastal Plain, but they are concentrated in the New Jersey Pine
      Barrens where the waters are naturally acidic.

*     Acidification is most likely one of the contributing causes of declines in fish stock in the Mid Atlantic Coastal Plain.
      Other  confounding factors contributing to the decline in the Coastal Plain are overfishing, eutrophication and habitat
      modification in estuaries, land use changes, and toxic discharges.

Recommendations:

*     In evaluating the priority of controlling acid deposition, impacts on important fisheries should be considered.

*     Support the Regional Environmental Assessment and Monitoring Program (REMAP) project, the Mid Atlantic
      Highlands Assessment (MAHA), which will provide more  information on biological effects due to acidification.

-------
       Estimated Stream Miles Impacted By Acid Mine
           Drainage Compared to Acid Deposition
Stream Miles
7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

   0
             Acid Mine Drainage
Acid Deposition
                                Source
Source: National Acid Precipitation Assessment
Program National Stream Survey

-------
        Streams Acidified  in Region
         (excludes acid mine drainage acidification)
Percent Acidified
70


60


50


40


30


20


10


 0
                          Source: National Acid Precipitation Assessment
                          Program National Stream Survey
                            56
12
                                           10
     Forested Streams   Other Streams
       Mid Atlantic Highlands
                        Pine Barrens     Other Streams
                          Atlantic Coastal Plain

-------
    NATIONAL ACID PRECIPITATION ASSESSMENT PROGRAM - NATIONAL SURFACE WATER SURVEY
                                      ACID MINE DRAINAGE IMPACTS


Design of the National Surface Water Survey allowed quantitative estimates of acid mine drainage effects within the
targeted stream population.  The bar graph shows an estimate of the impact of acid mine drainage compared to an
estimate of the impact of acid deposition.

Findings:

*     Within the entire National Stream Survey area, an estimated 3441 miles of acidic streams not impacted by acid mine
      drainage were found.  Most of this acidic stream length was located in the Mid Appalachian and Mid(ajlantic
      Coastal Plain.

*     Within the entire National Stream Survey area, an estimated 2851 miles of streams were acidic because of acid mine
      drainage. Another 3590 miles of streams were estimated to be impacted by acid mine drainage but were not
      acidified. Therefore, a total of 6441 miles of streams were impacted by acid mine drainage.

*     A large majority of the stream sites acidified because of acid mine drainage were located in western Pennsylvania
      and northern West Virginia.

*     Stream sites impacted by acid mine drainage but capable of neutralizing the acidity were more numerous in southern
      West Virginia and Tennessee.

Management Recommendations:

*     Control measures for both acid mine drainage and atmospheric deposition need to be implemented to address major
      threats to streams in the Mid Atlantic Highlands.

-------
      Percentage  of  Permissible
            Copper  Loadings
                    % of Permissible

                    > 119%


                    76 - 119


                    0-75
           \
           $
               Initiative
Saaa: Quay kmjfm fun 1:2000000 LEGS DIG1 film
 3OK» iai ,'iam £PA Pmral
 0  10  20  3D 40  50
      MILES
   Sato 1  3500010
EJM Region III

Environmental Indicators
    By; UJ B>A S^fon E G^^nfAr fc^rnam CmKr

-------
    NATIONAL ACED PRECIPITATION ASSESSMENT PROGRAM - NATIONAL SURFACE WATER SURVEY
                                           STREAM ACIDIFICATION

This study targeted small to midsized streams and investigated the effect of atmospheric deposition on the acidification of
streams.  Areas in Region III included the Mid Atlantic Highlands (Allegheny Plateau and the northern Ridge and Valley
Province) and the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain (including the New Jersey Pine Barrens). The NAPAP NSS provides more
data for smaller streams in smaller, headwater watersheds which are often not priorities for the state monitoring networks.

Findings:

*     Streams acidified by acid mine drainage were not included in the study.  (The study considered acidification from
      natural causes and other sources.)

*     In the Mid Atlantic Highlands, 12% of the target streams were acidified.

*     Acidified streams in the Mid Atlantic Highlands are nearly always found in forested watersheds because thin soils
      and steep slopes make the watersheds unsuitable for agriculture or other uses and also make the streams more
      susceptible to acidification.

*     Toxic effects  of acidity on biota in streams are expected to be most prevalent in the Mid Atlantic Highlands.

*     In the Mid Atlantic Coastal Plain 10% of the target streams were acidified (excluding the New Jersey Pine Barrens
      where acidification is organic and natural).

*     The most likely source of acidity in both of these areas is atmospheric deposition.

Management Recommendations:

*     Vigorous promotion of alternative transportation and energy conservation programs to  limit emissions that contribute
      to acid deposition.

*     Emission reductions in adjoining regions should be a matter of concern to Region III.

-------
         Typical  Soil  pH  Values
                           Soil pH Ranges:



                           < 5.0



                           5.0 -5.19



                           5.2 - 5.50



                           > 5.50
         Soil mapping units must contain at least 50%
         of the  pH ranking values  to  be  classified into
         these  low soils  pH categories.
              I
   :  County SaaiArm fan 12000000 USGS DLG3 Kim.
   ~~ ~   '  llu in! Can
   fob Qua fmm


Pn^rt: D«di anA Mafjmg Prtfami far Ike HM S^fion DJ £i
  Iufcason P*pct.
Pnpnd By.US  OM A(n HI (.«jr«Ar Jn^rntfn CMe.
Qn»  Mm* M, !«13
 G  ID  20  30  40  50
        MILES


    Solo 1 : 3500000
EB< «eyo« III

Environmental Indicators

Initiative

-------
                                                  SOILS: SLOPE

Steep slopes are subject to erosion, excessive runoff, and topsoil loss. This creates a stress for tree growth, and also
contributes to non-point source pollution.

Findings:

*     Steep slopes are concentrated in the western part of the Region, especially in West Virginia.

*     The majority of the Region's forests occur in areas with steep slopes.  (Level areas, in general, have been converted
      to agriculture and urban/suburban development.)

*     Forest cover can help reduce erosion, runoff, and non-point source pollution.

*     Once forests are logged, reforestation efforts are often difficult on steep slopes.

Management Recommendations:

*     Require information on slopes, sensitive soils and best management practices during the environmental review
      process.

*     Work with the U.S.D.A. Forest Service and Soil Conservation Service to promote stewardship and best management
      practices in areas with steep slopes.

-------
                  Slope   Steepness
                           Soil  Slope Ratings:


                           Severe


                           Moderate


                           Slight
         Soils  in the severe category contain  a minimum ot 40%
         soil components with slopes exceeding 15%.  Soils in the
         moderate  class contain 20  - 39.9  percent of the soil
         components with  slopes  exceeding 15%.   The slight category
         contains less than 20%  soil components  with slopes  in
         excess of  15%.
SBUIU.  Gunly bmtro tan 1 200OOX USGS DLG1 F
  Sak D*M (ton ttu 5nl Cm*nalm Strvtr (SCS)
  StXTSCO Da^a* Da* itmputooi ty l)» US B>A
Pn»r!  D
-------
                       1990 POPULATION/SPECIES AND COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN


Expanding human populations have been responsible for the disappearance of many natural animal and plant occurrences
and communities.  This composite map was assembled to explore patterns between human population centers and
biodiversity elements identified by State Heritage Programs.

Findings:

*     There is a high concentration of mapped rare species and natural communities along the forested Appalachian
      Mountain Range that extends from PA south into VA and WVA.  These are rural areas with low human population
      densities.

*     High concentrations of rare species and natural communities are also mapped in DE and western PA.  This may be
      an artifact of more intensive inventories in these areas.

Management Recommendations:

*     Use EPA grants programs and NEPA reviews to support innovative approaches to land use planning to ensure
      protection of areas with high biodiversity.

*     Support/promote EMAP monitoring in forested areas with known high biodiversity.

*     Target watersheds with high biodiversity for special educational, enforcement and pollution prevention initiatives.

-------
    1990  Population by  County
           With  Species  and
Forest  Communities  of Concern
         > 1,000,000


         750,000 - 1,000,000


         500,000 - 749,999


         250,000 - 499,999


         100,000 - 249,999


         50,000 -99,999


         10,000 - 49,999


         < 10,000
                  Species Locations


                  Forest Community Locations
          I
   County bunfcn* /*BI 1:1000000 USGS Did! FV»
          IMO US Om» lumt OaU fd.
intvatan   .
   9y.  (iS DM Hfon 3! Cqn^hr h)bnw>nn Cmur.
       : 1993
a  10  ?o 3D  40 so
     MILES


   Sttto t  3500000
EPA Region 111

Environmental Indicators

Initiative

-------
                                               DEER HERBIVORY


Deer herbivory (or deer browsing) represents one of the greatest potential threats to forest regeneration and subsequently
places a variety of wildlife at risk due to the "opening up" of forests.

To date, several areas of our Region (most notably, PA) are subject to high deer densities which have an adverse impact on
understory vegetation.  Adverse impacts may affect other wildlife populations which depend on understory vegetation
destroyed by deer.

Findings:

*     High deer densities result in the overbrowse of young trees and plants up to six feet from the forest floor.

*     Loss of forest regrowth potential, which is represented in the understory vegetation, bodes ill for the future health of
      our forests.

*     The continued fragmentation of the forest landscape only presents more opportunities for deer to encroach further
      into forest interiors.  The resulting overbrowse diminishes the availability of cover and nesting habitat for birds and
      mammals, opens the forest to intrusion of non-native (exotic) plants and animals which supplant native biodiversity
      and increases  the risk to rare and threatened plants.

Management Recommendations:

*     Work with the USDA Forest Service, local, state and federal land managers to increase public awareness of the deer
      overpopulation problem.  Encourage management techniques that include:

      Shooting the deer.

      Reintroducing native predators such as wolves and mountain lions.

      Setting up family planning clinics in high deer density counties.

-------
                Average Deer
            Population Density
                   1985-1989
                      < 20 deer per square
                      mile of forest

                      20 to 35 deer per
                      square mile of forest

                      > 35 deer per square
                      mile of forest
Sam: Caatty
Pn*rl QU anl Mafffy P*pa~l Jbr IV n>A TlffOt DJ Ii
  Moon Piqct.
Pnpnri 8y: LU E
Our:  ffri I, 1993
 0  10  20  30 40  60
       MILES

    Suit I : 3500000
                Em Region III

                Environmental Indicators

                Initiative
            fun 1 iOOOOOO USGS DIG! HI.
                     hjbrndni

-------
                                       GYPSY MOTH AND OTHER PESTS

Gypsy moth and other insect pests are potentially serious stressors on the Region's forests.  Widespread and recurring pest
outbreaks can affect the forest's susceptibility to other stressors and, ultimately, change the nature of the forest itself (i.e.
oaks are the preferred host for gypsy moth; widespread oak mortality could lead to the regeneration of another forest type
(i.e. maple).

Findings:

*     Region III has  witnessed the onslaught of the gypsy moth as this pest's range continues to move south and west.

*     Gypsy moth infestation, in combination with other stressors such as drought, acid deposition, and ozone can lead to
      increased oak decline and mortality.

*     Gyspy moth infestations (and other pests) can lead to the conversion of one forest type to another.  One can argue
      on both sides of this issue.  Ramifications of an accelerated rate of conversion due to gypsy moth should be given
      careful consideration.

*     On private land, the first line of attack appears to  be pesticide use; continued gypsy moth infestation could lead to
      increased pesticide use and thus contribute to nonpoint source pollution and the loss of nontarget species such as
      Lepidoptera  (butterflies and moths).

Management Recommendations:

*     Work with the  Forest Service to encourage integrated pest management on private lands.

*     Support research on the  effects of pesticide use on nontarget species.

*     Look to gypsy moth infested areas as potential areas for nonpoint source control management and education as it
      regards pesticide use.

-------
   Counties  with  Gypsy   Moth/Gypsy  Moth  Forest  Susceptible
Produced by:  USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area
Forest Health Monitoring CIS Group
                                                            ED COUNTIES WITH GYPSY MOTH DETECTED

                                                            • SUSCEPTIBLE GYPSY MOTH FOREST

-------
                              EMAP'S FOREST HEALTH MONITORING PROGRAM

To date, EMAP's Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) represents the only longterm, systematic monitoring program
specifically designed to evaluate status and trends in forest health. The goal of the program is to measure and assess the
effects of natural and anthropogenic stresses on our forests.

Several environmental indicators are currently used and many others are being tested and refined for incorporation into the
program.

Findings:

*      Three of the five states in our Region participate in Forest Health Monitoring (MD, DE, VA).  These states
       commenced the detection monitoring in 1991; therefore, limited data are available at this time. Detection
       monitoring, the first level of the FHM, refers to the system of permanent plots (based, in part on EMAP's grid
       system); these plots are assessed annually. In addition, irregular aerial surveys to assess forest pest and other
       stressor effects are included in Detection Monitoring (see technical report for more details).  In VA, several
       demonstration pilot plots are underway in an effort to evaluate environmental indicators and address specific
       concerns.

*      Baseline data collected for the first year of monitoring indicate no regional trends in the decline of forest health.
       Some states are experiencing widespread pest problems, although, at present,  these do not represent cause for
       alarm.

Management Recommendations:

*      Encourage West Virginia and Pennsylvania to participate in FHM; this will provide Region III with a comprehensive
       assessment of our Forest and provide early warning signs of stressors that EPA should address more rigorously.

*      Establish better communication links between the Forest Service FHM team and Region III scientists via regular
       roundtable discussions, exchange of staff and joint REMAP projects.

*      Evaluate Regional needs  for inclusion into EPA's REMAP projects.

-------
 NORTHEASTERN UNITED  STATES
 MAJOR FOREST  TYPES  (EYRE,  1980)

 and the  EMAP  TIER  1  SAMPLING FRAME
       MAJOR FOREST TYPES

      I	1  Milt - M - Jirt MM
      rr-i  VHI - Hi
      I	1  LriMI? - IktrtlMf hi.
      ••  Oik - MM
      ^m  Ol* - lUhr;
      ••  Oik - In - C)prtti
      a^n  Bm - til - C«ttH»*4
      I	1  MM* - «•««» - llt«k
      r—I  «IH> - Mril
         o
         o
         o
Digitlzid vtnion producid in 1981,
by S.N. Az«*«do, Ftrnt Oltni Iiom,
USEPA Environmental Renorch Lob, Corvolli»,
                                                                                     Orejon
 o
o
o
                                                                           AREAL

-------
 Percent  of  Total  County  Acreage
                  in Forest
with Ozone Non-Attainment  Areas
                   less than 20%

                   20% -39%

               |   | 40% -59%

               [Fl 60% - 79%

               HJ greater than 79%


               '//), Ozone Non-Attainment

                •  Air Monitor Locations
           \
 iaaa: Camly SarnArm . 2000000 USCS DIC3 fib
         Fant lUIotn J4m LETS Star ta
             jrW Moralor kxxtm* flan
     By IJ.S OH D^m m G^nplir
       Mi«fc 10 19913
    10  ?D  30 40 bO
       MILES


    SCJ/B t  3500000
ERA Region 111

Environmental Indicators

Initiative

-------
                           POPULATION DENSITY WITH OZONE NONATTAINMENT

High ozone levels are strongly correlated with high population density. In densely populated areas, mobile and area sources
contribute significant amounts of ozone precursors. As forested areas of Region III become more heavily populated, ozone
levels increase and reach concentrations which may stress forest health.

Findings:

*     Ozone levels have exceeded both EPA's National Ambient Air Quality Standard (120 ppb) and the Forest Service
      Redline Value (120 ppb) in forested areas of Region III.

*     The impact of increasing population density on forest communities can be profound and includes the impact of
      increased concentrations  of air pollutants such as ozone which are known to present a threat to forest health.

*     The US Forest Service, the National Park Service and TVA operate air pollution monitoring stations in selected
      forests of the Region.

*     Sensitive species include some of Region Ill's dominant forest trees: white pine, black cherry, tulip poplar, red
      spruce, red maple.

*     There has been limited ozone monitoring in the higher-elevation, forested portions of Region III.

Management Recommendations:

*     Increase ozone monitoring of rural, forested, high-elevation sites.

*     Encourage the participation of the states of PA and WV in the Forest Health Monitoring Program for Region III.

*     Identify sources or causes of ozone non-attainment in heavily forested counties.

*     Work cooperatively with other EPA Regions to reduce source emissions of ozone precursors in other states which
      are impacting Region III  through long-range transport.

*     Coordinate data collection of Forest Service, National Park Service and TVA with the existing EPA AIRS database.

-------
       1990  Population Density
            By  Census  Tract
   With Ozone  Non-Attainment
                    Persons Per Square Mile:

                  I > 7,500

                    5,000 - 7,499

                  1 2,500 -4,999

                    1,000 -2,500

                      500 -1,000

                      100 -  499

                    < 100

                    Ozone Non-Attainment
\
 u
 *
£
Saaa; Count,, SaaUmm fan 1:2000000 USGS DIGj fita
 Dmtyraphx Dot* ftan 1990 US frmu SufMy Dau
          ( /torn  '
          ,
Pnpct: D*u jnrf Mapffy PtfpaMt Jfar the f-P.-l
 Mutton Popcf.
Pw^*nd 8y IAS EJH R*f»i
       1, ;MJ
 0  10  2D 30  40 50
      MILES


   Sei« 1  3500000
               QM Region 111

               Environmental Indicators

               Initiative

-------
                                               ACID DEPOSITION

Forests in Region III are exposed to the most acidic deposition in the U.S. Acid deposition may pose a long-term threat to
forest health in sensitive areas. Sulfate (SO4) and nitrate (NO3) deposition and pH of precipitation were selected for
review.

Findings:

*      The pH of rainfall throughout the Region averages between 4.0 and 4.5.

*      Sulfate  loadings range from 10-40 kg/ha/yr; Nitrate loadings range from 10-30 kg/hayyr.

*      Emissions from other EPA Regions is widely acknowledged as a significant contributor to Region III acid deposition
       loadings.

*      In 1990, the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) found that, "There is no evidence of
       widespread forest damage from current ambient levels of acidic deposition in the United States".

       However, symptoms of forest decline at high elevations have been linked to acid deposition. Region Ill's
       Appalachian forests fall into this category of high elevation.

*      Possible long-term effects may occur, particularly on susceptible soils, due to nitrogen saturation, leaching of
       nutrients, aluminum mobilization or a combination of all these effects.

Management Recommendations:

*      Monitoring of acid deposition in our Region under the National Atmospheric  Deposition Program (NADP) is
       limited. Increased cooperation with the States, the Forest Service and the National Park Service may make
       monitoring data more readily available to the  EPA.

*      Vigorous promotion of alternative transportation to reduce the Regional emissions of NOx.

*      Vigorous promotion of energy conservation programs to limit emissions of NOx, and SO2.

-------
                                  Acid   Deposition
Areas Where Precipitation in the East is below pH  5
                                                                                      "Shaded aicas indicate individual states
                                                                                      having emissions of 1,000 kilutunnes oi SOj
                                                                                      and gicatcf.

                                                                                      Cuntuuis connect points of equal
                                                                                      precipitation pH.
                                                                       *\J
                                                                  Souicc: National Actd Precipitation Assessment PIO&IUIII Imeiim Report, IVB7 USLI'A
                         How "Acid" is Acid Rain?
                                      Vinegar         Distilled Water
                             Lemon juice
"Pure" Rain |5.6|     Baking Soda
1
Neutral



Basic



67 8 9 10 11 12 13 1,
                         The pH scale ranges from 0 to 14. A value ol 7.0 is neutral. Readings below 7.0 are acidic,
                         leadings above 7.0 are alkaline. The more pH decreases below 7.0, the more acidity increases.
                         Because the pH scale is logarithmic, there is a tenlold difference between one number and
                         the one next to it. Therefore, a drop in pi I from 60 to SO represents a tenlold increase in
                         acidity, while a drop from 6.0 to 4.0 represents a hunderedfold increase.

                         All ram is slightly acidic. Only ram with a pH below S.6 is considered "acid rain."

-------
Work cooperatively with other EPA regions to reduce emissions of NOx, and SO2 which are impacting Region III.

Given the level of controversy over the effects of acid deposition on forest health, Region III should continue to
support research efforts aimed at solving the issue.

-------
ANNUAL  AVERAGE pH OF
    RAINFALL FOR 1990
        IN REGION in
             0  10 !0 30 40 SO
                MILES

               Sofa 1 : 3500000

E?M Region in
Environmental Indicators
Initiative
                                                 Cmjr Bomdnta ttam 1JOOODOO ISGS DI.C3 TOM.
                                               pH dMi trm OH NMknl
                                                 Albm EqtMl /tra ProJicUoii
                                                      Pt«i«p«l te tin EPA
    UJ. IPA B^^o m G««nct>k InltenKldl Coxa.
               1990  Annual Average  (pH)
•  < 4.20
•  4.20 •  4.29
   4.30 -  4.39
•  4.40 -  4.49
•  > 4.49

• NADP Monitoring Site

-------
NITRATE  DEPOSITION

       FOR  1990

     REGION  HI
                            1990  Annual  Totals  kg/ha
        Em Region III
        Environmental Indicators
        Initiative
                           0  10 20 30 40 SO
                               rn.it
                            Sots 1 : 3500000
ii
                                                    Court} BouMkrlai ftm lilOOOOGfl l.'SGS DLG3 FU«.
                                                     rWportJon Ada Ttan the N«kuaJ AUnMpbcrk
    o
   10
   20
   30
                                   9.99
                                  19.99
                                  29.99
                                  39.99
   Albon EqiMl Ar« Ptajjelion
   B «od M^ptaf Prepared for th* EPA Rc«l«o Hi
Envbtmex**! Indkaton Prq|Mi.
  Byt Ujft. EPA R^oa m C««np«ik Inforn^lai Ceur.
 FcbciMry I, 1991
•  40 and above

• NADP Monitoring Site

-------
SULFATE DEPOSITION

       FOR  1990

     REGION  HI
        EB* Region III
        Environmental Indicators
        Initiative
                          a 10 !0 30  40 SO
                             ULEE
                           Safe 1 : 3600000
ii
        flm lilOOOOOO ISC8 DI.G3 nm.
Mtnu Dqmuon feu tram O> NKloiaJ JUauMfbak
DqnriUoa Pn|m
JecHon: .\lbrn Eqiml Aro Pr^Mlon
  DH> Bid Mq>pk« Ptcpnnd for ti. EPA Kjflo, HI
Envtrannacal iBdacan ProJ«cl
  »}• f J. EPA
                          1990  Annual Totals kg/ha
•   o  •  9.99
m  10  -  19.99
   20  •  29.99
   30  -  39.99
•  40  and  above

• NADP  Monitoring  Site
        •

-------
                             GLOBAL WARMING - "THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT'

Forests could be adversely impacted by the effects of global warming.  Certain species of trees may not be able to adapt to
climatic changes, thereby potentially placing entire forests at risk.

Findings:

*      Scientific consensus exists that global warming is likely to occur.

*      Global Warming is caused by "greenhouse gases" in the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide (49%), methane
       (18%), chlorofluorocarbons (14%), and nitrous oxide (6%).

*      It is likely to upset ecosystem balances and cause shifts in species ranges as the climate changes.

*      Climatic change could also increase fire frequency and pest infestations.

Management Recommendations:

*      Support reforestation efforts to counteract increasing carbon dioxide emission levels in the atmosphere.

*      Educational programs (Center for Environmental Learning) directed toward causes and effects of global warming
       and the role of forests.

*     Actions in Region III should be part of a coordinated national/international strategy.

*     Air programs should use forest data/concerns to assist in gaining public support for control measures that would
       decrease emission of greenhouse gases.

-------
                                                FRAGMENTATION


Fragmentation represents one the greatest threats to the functioning of forest ecosystems as habitat for our diverse wildlife
populations.  Fragmentation can lead to increased exposure of the forest fragments to wind, solar radiation, increased rates
of evaporation. Forest fragmentation contributes to the loss of biological diversity by reducing the numbers of species
which can be supported in the remnant forests, increases forest species' exposure to higher rates of predation and
parasitism, and creates barriers for migration thus contributing to genetic isolation.

Findings:

*     There has been no systematic attempt to evaluate the degree and extent of fragmentation  in the Region's forests.

*     The above finding notwithstanding, Region Ill's landscape is highly fragmented by roads, pipeline corridors,
      powerline right-of-ways, impoundments, subdivisions, etc.

*     The scientific literature is replete with studies that demonstrate the effects of forest fragmentation as it relates to the
      forest condition and the maintenance of biological diversity including loss of genetic diversity, increased exposure to
      predators or nest parasites, increased opportunities for deer encroachment and subsequent browsing damage,
      invasion of non-native species, increased exposure to climatic variables such as wind and solar radiation.

Management Recommendations:

*     Use EPA's grants programs to leverage innovative approaches to local land use planning that reduce fragmentation
      and promote biodiversity.

*     Work closely with the USDA Forest  Service's Forest Stewardship program to improve best management practices
      and encourage good stewardship on private lands.

*     Leverage NEPA to its fullest extent to better address habitat (forest) fragmentation.

*     Work w/EMAP landscape and forest health to obtain digitized land use/land cover data.

-------
Use GIS to identify forest restoration opportunities that would decrease fragmentation effects and create
wildlife/habitat corridors between currently disjunct forest patches. Use enforcement and mitigation agreements to
achieve restoration goals.

-------
     Total  Road Mileage for Region
                        (By State)
           PA 116,508
Total Mileage = 254,098
Source: Office of Highway Infer. Mgt.
  Federal Highway Administration
                    VA 67,700
                                          MD 28,752
                                            DE  5,444
                                            DC  1,102
                                          WV 34,592

-------
Percent  of Total County  Acreage
             in  Forest  With
   Population Change  1980-1990
             Forest (%):
          H less than 20%
          [""I 20% - 39%
          |  | 40% -59%
          iH 60% -79%
            | greater than 79%
   Population Change
• > 40%
• 20 - 39.9%
• 10 - 19.9%
Saaa: Coaly AwiAni /m 1,2000000 USGi DIO1 film
      tar* tf£Mtn /niti USB SOU Fa
    liD*! DAI from US CmMi
       "
fn^ct: 04* aiA Mapping Putpant Jbr titf &A Jtggm ID El
  Mum Piqft.
Fi^nl Sy: LU CR1
OH,
 0 10  20 3D 40
      MILES
   Soli 1 : 3800000
               EPA Region 111
               Environmental Indicators
               Initiative

-------
                             FRAGMENTATION: ROAD DENSITY/ROAD MILEAGE

In order to provide a coarse evaluation of the extent of fragmentation (by roads only), road density/acre of land was
calculated on a county basis. Increased potential for fragmentation could also be  related to population change.

Findings:

*     Several areas of the Region represent  potential for increased forest fragmentation by roads. Most notably is
      northeast PA (Monroe, Pike and Carbon Counties) which are highly forested and undergoing rapid development.
      Other "hot spots" include southcentral  West Virginia and southern Virginia.

*     As various areas within our Region undergo rapid development, primarily in rural areas, the Region's Forest will
      necessarily become more and more fragmented; thus subjecting the forests to the adverse impacts associated with
      fragmentation (see previous description)

Management Recommendations:

*     Work with state, county and local planning and transportation agencies especially in NE PA, S. Central WV, and S.
      VA to develop regional transportation plans in an effort to use existing roadways more  efficiently and to develop
      alternative modes of transportation.

-------
 Percentage  of  County  in  Forest
            With  Road   Density
                   % of County in Forest
            100%     15%    50%      25%      0%
   6 .019
   1  -007
  H
  1

  I  .004
  V
*
                  EPA Region III

                  Environmental Indicators
^   Initiative
SOUK:  Goaty Samttna from 1:2000000 USCS DLG3 Ffla
          Rai D™ty DOJ CJaiUtl Frum Cam T/GER
          fond Pnonti^n ,*» IfiFS Suit foal Aoasmaits.
PnfKtim: ftoen Equal Am Pmtrtart
PjtJKt: DttU old Mappmg PreptrrJ for tht EPA Kfgian
  bvttcMon Project
Protend fly 1LS EPA Jteffwn QT Gtograptuc Information Cmttr
Dtli  Mtrdi 13, 1333
 0  10  20  30  40  50
       MILES

   Scale 1 : 3500000

-------
                                                      SOIL pH

Soil reaction or pH is a measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a soil. Acid soils are poorly buffered, and forests growing on
them are therefore more susceptible to nutrient deficiencies and aluminum toxicity.

Findings:

*      Many of the soils in Region 3 are naturally acid, with soil pH values below 5.5.

*      The most acidic soils (below pH 5.0) occur in the coastal plain areas of Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, and in
       western Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

*      Research results support an indirect link between high elevation forest decline, acid deposition, and poorly buffered
       soils.


Management Recommendations:

*      Support long-term monitoring and research on long-term acid deposition effects on forest soils.

*      Promote energy conservation programs, alternative transportation, and other strategies to reduce acid precipitation
       emissions.

-------
     TRI  Source  Locations  For
      Selected  Chemicals With
     Percent  Forest  by  County
           % County in Forest

           less than 20%

           20% - 39%

           40% - 59%

           60% -79%

           greater than 79%
    TRI Air Emission:

g)  Ammonia

(5  Hydrogen Fluoride

0  Ethylene

(J  Hydrocloric Acid
Sunn: QaMy SamUnm tan J MOOOOO USGS DLG1
  Tun JU»r imrtnry iTKI) DOa from US DM HUS
Prafian Ahera Z^urf y^w Piqicfiji
Pn*»; Qua «M( M«7po^ Pitpmd ^r ih/ O1,*. R^pm 0;
  >uhca(dn Pn^n
    By. Ul DH R^vn 3.' G«fi^hr k/tnutm Cms.
    .Vi -5. ;«3
 Q  10  20 3D  40 bO
      MILES


   5ei« 1  . 3500000
               EM Region III

               Environmental Indicators

               Initiative

-------
                                                     OZONE


Ozone is widely considered to cause more damage to vegetation than any other air pollutant. Most forests in eastern North
America are exposed to ozone and there are indications that ozone is a Region-wide, background stress on forest health.

Findings:

*      Ozone levels exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) throughout much of Region III.

*      The US Forest Service red line threshold values are exceeded in most major metropolitan areas, as well as in some
       rural, forested areas where monitors exist.

*      Species sensitive to ozone include some of Region Ill's dominant forest trees: white pine, black cherry, tulip poplar,
       red spruce, red maple.

*      There has been limited ozone monitoring in the higher-elevation, forested portions of Region III.

*      Region III is impacted by the transport of ozone and its precursors from adjoining EPA Regions.

Management Recommendations:

*      Increase ozone monitoring of rural, forested, high-elevation sites.

*      Encourage the participation of the states of PA and WV in the Forest Health Monitoring Program for Region III.

*      Identify sources or causes of ozone non-attainment in heavily forested counties and take specific action to reduce
       emissions.

*      Work cooperatively with other EPA Regions to reduce source emissions of ozone precursors in other states which
       are impacting Region  III through long-range transport.

-------
         Ozone  Non-Attainment
                      For  1991
                         Marginal    (0.121 -0.138)

                         Moderate    (0.138 - 0.160)

                         Serious      (0.160 -0.180)

                         Severe - 15  (0.180 - 0.190)

                         Severe -17  (0.190 -0.280)

                         Extreme     (0.280 and above)

                         Additional Areas
                         Designated Non-Attainment

                         Areas Designated
                         As Attainment
Join. Gutty buntm f™ 110OOOOO USGS DLGJ Kim.
   Oa»w AHainn*aMa*Alam*ti 4ate fnm
  US OM/URS lnjux

Pri*ci DgU ail Mufjmg PwjMiW la tht [PA Rtgm IB
  TnznMrtnunLt .Wiulort Ptejtct.
    Sy :;.'. OM
   Mm* !0 199
 0  10  20  30  40  SO
       MILES

    *Jc  1  3500000
                  Em Region III

                  Environmental Indicators

                  Initiative

-------
                      PERCENT FOREST BY COUNTY WITH OZONE NONATTAINMENT

A number of the heavily forested counties in Region III are designated in nonattainment for Ozone.

Findings:

*     Ozone levels have exceeded both EPA's National Ambient Air Quality Standard (120 ppb) and the Forest Service
      Redline Value (120 ppb) in the following forested counties: WV: Greenbrier, Kanawha, Putnam, Cabell, Wayne and
      Wood; Stafford, VA:  Chesterfield, Hanover, Charles City and James City; MD: Charles; PA: Fayette, Somerset,
      Cambria, Blair, Warren, Susquehanna, Wayne, Pike, Wyoming, Monroe, Carbon, Schuylkill, Juniata and Perry.

*     The US Forest Service, the National Park Service and TVA operate air pollution monitoring stations in selected
      forests of the Region. Still, there has been limited ozone monitoring in the higher-elevation, forested portions of
      Region III.

*     Sensitive species include some of Region Ill's dominant forest trees: white pine, black cherry, tulip poplar, red
      spruce, red maple.

*     Region III is impacted by the transport of ozone and its precursors from adjoining EPA Regions.

Management Recommendations:

*     Increase ozone monitoring of rural, forested, high-elevation sites.

*     Encourage the participation of the states of PA and WV in the Forest Health Monitoring Program for Region III.

*     Identify sources or causes of ozone non-attainment in heavily forested  counties.

*     Work cooperatively with other EPA Regions to reduce source emissions of ozone precursors in other states which
      are impacting Region III through long-range transport.

*     Coordinate data collection of Forest Service, National Park Service and TVA with the existing EPA AIRS database.

-------
          Forests   -   Public   Lands
                         National Parks and
                         Wildlife Areas

                         National Forest

                         State Parks

                         State Forests

                         State Game  Lands

                         Other Public Lands
                    Em Region III

                    Environmental Indicators

                    Initiative
Sam:  G»»>ty IwOra fun 1:1000000 LEGS DIGJ fib
          Pi* touaunt <»iH»< fon tUU luflaaty m^>
Pn^rtKW ^fem tqud tim Piv*ta*
Prof I  CU< oil MiOTf P»»iiW *r tte DM D^in
  Mum ftaMct.
P«9n< 8y UJ IPX J^fBr, HI Ofr^Ac Mjbnwtm Cnur
DA  ,M«ri, M 1543
    10  20  3D  40  50
        MILES

    Sate t : 3SOOOOO

-------
                                                  SAWTIMBER
                                                (Forest Maturity)

Sawtimber stands are forested areas with a significant proportion of hardwood trees greater than 11 inches in diameter, or
softwoods greater than 9 inches in diameter. As such, sawtimber stands represent the Region's more mature forests. These
stands are more economically valuable than younger forests.  They also tend to be more ecologically valuable, because they
are more structurally diverse and can support a wider range of biodiversity, than younger forest stands.

Findings:

*     Sawtimber stands are mapped for PA, DE, MD, and WVA

*     The Region's highest concentration of mature stands is in WVA.

*     The metropolitan areas around Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, and Pittsburgh generally have the Region's
      lowest concentrations of mature forests.

Management Recommendations:

*     Use EPA grants and the NEPA review process  to encourage innovative land use planning which promotes
      stewardship of large tracts of mature forests.

*     Work closely with the  U.S. Forest Service to improve best management practices and encourage stewardship on
      privately owned forests.

-------
 Region  III  Forest  Cover  Types
                        LEGEND:

                        Oak -Hickory

                        Loblolly  - Shortleaf Pine

                        Maple - Beech - Birch

                        Oak -Gum - Cypress

                        Oak -Pine

                        White - Red - Jack Pine

                        Aspen - Birch

                        Spruce -Fir

                        Elm - Ash- Cottonwood

                        Non-Forest
                   Em Region III

                   Environmental Indicators

                   Initiative
Sam*:  COMy
  fort Cm DaU DtfituW h/
  XatarA Lt - FoM Cham Tim*, CaraOa, Oifgan
  13W.
riqMctijH: Am Taud /rm Pv*'"1
Praprt:  D*t* a*A Mapping Pajnutd fa* :hr £PA Jttgioi HI E
  Miuoen Piofxl
Pirpni By. LU  TPA tofion !U
DO: Fdnioty 10, I1S3
        MILES


    Seals 1  3500000

-------
                                                 BIODIVERSITY

Genetic and species diversity, as elements of biological diversity, contribute to the overall functioning and health of forests.
In order to better understand the status of our forests and the potential for adverse effects, exploring aspects of biological
diversity is essential.

Findings:

*      There currently is no comprehensive dataset which describes our Region's biodiversity

*      The best information available is limited to rare, threatened and endangered species or plant communities;  This
       provides an incomplete picture of the Region's biodiversity.

*      Some forest dependent species are doing well, including deer, resident songbirds, small mammals.

*      Some forest dependent species are in trouble including Neotropical migratory songbirds, large predators, and
       amphibians; forest fragmentation, air pollution, pesticide use are implicated in these declines.

Management Recommendations:

*      Enhance existing information (threatened and endangered species) through the following means:

       Support EPA's National Biodiversity Assessment Program with Regional input

       Support US Fish and Wildlife Service's Gap Analysis Program

*      Implement EPA's Habitat Strategy (see technical support documents)

*      Leverage existing programs to reduce  potential risks (air pollution, habitat fragmentation) to forest biodiversity.

-------
         Elevation   Greater  Than
                      2,500  Feet
                          Elevation Greater Than
                          2,500  Feet
         EPA Region 111

                   Environmental Indicators

                   Initiative
Source  County Samdtna from 1:2000000 USGS DLG3 Film
 ElmmoB Dm From USGS 30 moid DEM Dan
Projection: jVben EJWJ! Aw Ptw(rti«i
PTDTori: D*rta tnd Mapping Prtjxnt fur At EPA fagian ID Enmjrjnmmtil
  bvbaton Project
Prepared By US EPA Region QJ Geographic Information Center
Dd>   .Vtotrfi 21, 1993
 0  ID   20  30  40  50
        MILES

    Seal! 1 : 3500000

-------
                          BREEDING BIRDS (Breeding Bird Survey and other related data)

Birds and bird communities represent elements of our Region's biodiversity, of which many species are forest dependent.
Often a sign of a healthy ecosystem lies in its ability to provide the necessary habitat and life history requirements (territory
size, foraging  areas, etc.) to support wildlife populations.  To date, the Breeding Bird Survey represents the only longterm
monitoring program of nongame avian population trends.  Other avian datasets, including state Breeding Bird Atlases and
Christmas Bird Counts, can supplement our knowledge of avian population status,  trends and distribution.

The use of birds as indicators of environmental change can provide additional insight to the  effects of change (or stress)
when complemented with other similar kinds of information.

Findings:

*     Declining populations of several migratory bird species have captured the attention of both scientists and land
      managers at all levels of government. The analysis of the Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) trend data provided the first
      warning signs that certain Neotropical Migratory songbirds were in decline.  Many of  these species are area-
      dependent forest interior species (i.e. these birds require large tracts of unfragmented forest to successfully breed).

*     Although deforestation of the tropical rainforest (wintering grounds) was initially perceived as  the major causal
      factor of songbird population declines, there is sufficient evidence  pointing to habitat  alteration (fragmentation) and
      degradation (pesticide use, etc.) on the temperate North American breeding grounds  as contributing to the decline
      of our songbird populations.

Management Recommendations:

*     Support US FWS Gap Analsysis and other techniques to define areas of high  biodiversity and associated stressors;
      Develop a means to offset the effect of stressors.

*     Develop and use an avian indicator to monitor changes in forest habitat quantity and  quality.

*     Support more fully EPA's participation in Partners in Flight, an international,  interagency conservation program for
      neotropical migratory birds.

-------
Percent  of  Total  County  Acreage
               in  Saw  Timber
                         Under 25
                         25-50

                         Over 50
            \
Projection: /torn Lptal Am Fraction
Prefect: Dttf tnd Mapping Prrfmnd for ttit EPA Regan
  hAaton Project
Prepared By US EPA Rfgtcn W Geography Infannehan Center
D3T     Mtrch 13, m3
 0  10 20 30  40  SO
       MILES

   Suit 1 : 3500000
                 EPA Region 111
             £   Environmental Indicators

                 Initiative
Sauce.  Onoity Bounlina /ran 1:2000000 USGS DLG3
          Fnmt mtutu /ran IZSFS SUl Foot

-------
  Watersheds  With  Species  and
 Forest  Communities  of Concern
        Upper Chesapeake
        Lower Chesapeake
        Susquehanna
        Potomac
        Delaware
        Chowan-Roanoke
        Allegheny
        Monongahela
        Upper Ohio
        Middle Ohio
        Upper Tennessee
        Kanawha
        Big Sandy-Guy andottr
        Atlantic Ocean
        Eastern Lake  Erie
        Southern Lake Erie
        Pee Dee
        Southwestern  Lake Ontario
•  Species Locations
   Forest Community Locations
•aaa. Coaly &*o*me flan 1:2000000 USGS DIG)
 SaHcm anl Canmaaty lacatvn flan TW Jjrtl
      Pratcl.
    By. US EPA Kipai m G*y,apkr
Dttr Mwrii 31. 1993
 0  10 20 30  40  bl)
       MILES


    Suit 1  3500000
                 ERA Region III
             3
             £   Environmental Indicators
             3
             r    Initiative

-------
                        SPECIES AND FOREST COMMUNITIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN

The protection of rare and endangered species and communities is the front line in the battle to preserve biodiversity.

Findings:

*     The inventory of rare and endangered species and communities is an ongoing process conducted by several different
      agencies and organizations, thus any data set must be considered incomplete.

*     Rare and  endangered species and communities occur throughout Region III, with concentrations along the
      Appalachian Mountain range and in a number of sub-watersheds.

*     Region III has lost many species since human  settlement such as  the wood bison, elk, timber wolf, mountain lion: all
      large predators which require large areas of undisturbed habitat.

*     Most rare forest communities are associated with extreme environmental conditions such as high elevations or
      saturated conditions.

*     Bioreserves represent a new  approach by The Nature Conservancy to identify and protect  areas that harbor
      concentrations of rare species and communities and/or exhibit a high level of species biodiversity, and that require a
      landscape or ecosystem level of protection.

Management Recommendations:

*     Enhance existing data and state of knowledge  through the following means:

      Support/promote EMAP monitoring in high elevation forests and/or areas of high biodiversity.

      Negotiate  data sharing agreements w/State Heritage Programs &  U.S. Fish and Wildlife  Service on Region-wide
      basis.  Include "candidate" species listed under the Endangered Species Act, during regulatory reviews.

      Consider candidate as well as listed species under the Endangered Species Act when implementing EPA Programs
      (i.e. CWA reviews, Superfund R.A., NEPA, etc.).

-------
*     Target bioreserves and other watersheds w/high biodiversity for special educational, enforcement & pollution
      prevention initiatives.

*     Form partnerships with The Nature Conservancy and other NGO's to set goals and develop innovative conservation
      and restoration programs.

-------
     Forests  of  Special  Concern
               And  Bioreserves
                       Old Growth Forests > 100 ac.

                       Rare Forest Communities

                       The Nature Conservancy's Bioreserves
 *
£
                  BM Region III

                  Environmental Indicators

                  Initiative
Soon: Corny &»«4ro fwm 1.200X00 USGS DLG1
  Taml tfUftmTta Mau» Gncmxy, "

Pr^cttan: .Aftrrj faui /V« ?d^«t»i
Pnffl: DA 0d Mn^vif PwpwW Jbr Itit EPA Rtfion JH Ei
  bAonon Pipwt.
    I By. !li TfA X*fan HI Gtfafkr hf*»uM CmUr
    F*r»ir, • 1993
 0  10  20  30 40 SO
       MILES


    Scale 1 : 3SOOOOO

-------
                                                   AIR TOXICS

The selected toxic air pollutants (hydrogen fluoride, hydrogen chloride, ethylene and ammonia) are known to cause acute,
catastrophic injury to vegetation close to the emission sources. While the effects of these toxic compounds are typically
localized, there are many sources  of these compounds in Region III, including in rural, forested counties.

Findings:

*     Hydrogen fluoride interferes in the metabolic processes of leaf tissue resulting in loss of chlorophyll, tissue death or
      necrosis, leaf deformation and discoloration. HF-susceptible species occurring in Region III include members of the
      following groups: pine, fir,  ash, aspen, poplar, maple, spruce, birch, elm, willow. Facilities emitting HF occur in
      heavily forested counties of PA and WV.

*     Ethylene induces senescence, abscission, epinasty or leaf curling, inhibition of flowering, promotion of flowering,
      etc.The largest source of ambient ethylene is automobile emissions.

*     Hydrogen chloride causes marginal or interveinal chlorosis and necrosis of plant tissue.  HCl-susceptible species
      occurring in Region III include species of cherry and maple. There are numerous facilities emitting HC1 in Region
      III. Many are in heavily forested counties.

*     Ammonia causes foliar tissue collapse and eventual necrosis. There are numerous facilities emitting ammonia
      throughout Region III.


Management Recommendations:

*     Compare emissions w/sensitive forest areas; target sources for  enforcement,  P2, and public outreach.

*     There is currently no  monitoring for ambient concentrations of toxics. An  ambient air monitoring program should be
      considered if foliar injury is found consistently near  sources.

*     The location of new sources of these toxics should be carefully reviewed when in proximity to forested or other
      sensitive areas.

-------
HUMAN HEALTH TEAM:  (left to right):  Nancy Rios (co-leader), Lorna Rosenberg (co-leader), Alice Chow, Bruce
Smith, Carol Ann Gross, John Noble, Jeff Burke, Debra Forman, (missing:  Jack Kelly, Ghassan Khaled).

-------
Human Health Team

-------
                              HUMAN BEINGS OF REGION III - THE RECEPTORS

The receptors of the Human Health Group are the human inhabitants of Region III. Based on the 1990 US Census, the
approximate total population of our five states, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia and the District
of Columbia is 25.8 million, which is about 10% of the total national population. In describing human health, often the very
young and the elderly are considered to be sensitive population groups to exposure from environmental pollutants.  In
Region III there are approximately 2 million children under the age of 5 years and 4 million residents over 65 years of age,
a combined total of 23% of the entire population. The median age is 33.3 years.

*     Approximately 48% of our population is male and 51% female, with a racial configuration of 81% white,  15% black
      and 4% hispanic and other.

*     People live all across the region in cities, suburbs and rural areas.  Most of the population however is clustered
      around our metropolitan areas, consisting of a central city and surrounding suburbs. These urban areas are the
      residence of choice for 70% of Region Ill's population with the remaining 30% in rural areas.

*     Human health is impacted by many different factors. The systems that now exist for collecting health data on a
      regional/national basis are inconsistent and difficult to assess. Most significant is their lack of exposure information
      between  the pollutant and the human body; and about the dose of a pollutant or its metabolites that enter the body.

*     Cancer occurrence is one measure of the quality of public health. Research reports that diet, use of tobacco and
      lifestyle choices account  for over 70% of these cancer occurrences. Although linkages of cancer in the  United States
      from environmental sources have been postulated, exposure to these stressors has not been defined with an
      acceptable level of certainty. The Human Health Team reviewed data sets of cancer mortality from lung,  liver,
      kidney and leukemia as those cancers most closely linked with exposure from environmental pollutants. Incidence
      data for the occurrence of these cancers with environmental exposures was not feasible to collect within the time
      frame allotted to this project.

*     Environmental pollutants are known to have non-cancer effects on the human body as well.  Information  on non-
      cancer effects is not centralized, but may be available from individual hospital records. Gathering this data on a
      regional basis would be significant undertaking. Since the cause and effect relationships of environmental  pollutants
      and human health is uncertain, we have focused our investigation on the potential of stressors to influence health
      quality.

-------
Specifically, we selected the following stressors based on data availability and the fact that their influence is potentially far
reaching.  Also, they were chosen because we believe and that the Agency's involvement in regulation, abatement, outreach,
or education could possibly reduce their impact on human health in Region III.
      *      Toxic air emissions from point sources
      *      Ground - level Ozone
      *      Threats to Public Drinking Water
      *      Lead
      *      Radon
      *      Contaminants in indoor air
      *      Pesticides

-------
          1990   Population   Density
                 By  Census  Tract
                           Persons Per Square Mile:

                           >  7^00


                           5,000 - 7,499


                           2,500 - 4,999


                           1,000 - 2,500


                              500 -  1,000


                              100 -    499


                           <  100
                     EPA Region III

                     Environmental Indicators

                     Initiative
Source:  County Boundaries from 1:2000000 USGS DLG3 Files.
  Demogntpfaf Dai* from 3990 US Census Bureau Data
  Toxic Release Inventory (TK) Data from US. EPA TK1S   ..
  R*|OH Dote from Key Technology, TeWyrw, Arched Inc., AB.E ,
  US.T, and the Radon Project.
Projection: fiber* Et$id Area Projection
Preyed: Deta and Mapfmg Prepared jvr the EPA Region UJ Environmental
  bvtocaton Pmeet.
Prepared By- 115 EPA Hemm ffl Geographic Information Center
Dttf  February S, 1993
 0   10  20  30  40  50
        MILES


    Scale  1  3500000

-------
              Minority   Distribution
                          Region   III

                              Percent Minority  Population


                              95 -  100%  Minority


                              90 -  94.9% Minority


                              75 -  89.9% Minority


                              50 -  74.9% Minority


                              25 -  49.9% Minority


                              10 -  24.9% Minority


                               5 -   9.9% Minority
                               0 -  4.9% Minority

                       EPA Region  III

                       Environmental Indicators

                       Initiative
Source:  Census Trad Data from ILS. Census Bureau TIGER Fues
  Demographic Data from US Cerent Bureau Summary Tape
  F3e • 3A fSTT-M).
Nates:  Minority Population is calculated oe the total
  rjcmdotton nonus thr non-hspenic, white population
  Therefore, the term minority extends to indude
   the Hiepani.' population.
Projection: AJbers Lquai Area Projection
Project:  Deia tnd Maopmg PreptnA far the EPA Region ZD
      Environmental haacatars hutiaiivr
Prepared By  ILS EPA R«wn ffi Geography Information  Center
DBJe  Mardi W, 3993
     10   20  30  40  50
         MILES

     Scald  1 :  3600000

-------
              Poverty   Distribution
                        Region  III

                            Percent Under  the Poverty Level


                            75 -  100%     Under Poverty


                            50 -  74.9%    Under Poverty


                            40 -  49.9%    Under Poverty


                            30 -  39.9%    Under Poverty


                            20 -  29.9%    Under Poverty

                            13.1  - 19.9% Under Poverty
                               National Ave. =  13.1%


                             5 -   13.0%   Under Poverty
                             0 -  4.9%   Under  Poverty

                     EPA Region III
                w    Environmental Indicators
                u

                r     Initiative
Source:  Census Tract Data from LLS Coxae Bureau 77GER Ffl«
  Demographic Data 'mm IZS Onsiu Bureau Summary Tone
  Fie - il ISTF-3M'TiHe P217.
Projection: /ten E-ruai Area Pmjectiot
Project: Data and Manpmg Prepared far the EPA Region ffl
     Enmranmenm btmattoK Initiative
Prepared By LLS EPA Region HI Geographic hvformatton  Center.
Dtte  March 10, 2993
  0   10  20  30  40  50
         MILES

    Scale  i   3500000

-------
                                    OVERVIEW OF CANCER IN REGION ffl

Cancer mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics is collected by EPA's ORD and converted to rate by
county.  The data is categorized by white male, white female, nonwhite male and nonwhite female.  Data is currently
available for the decades of the  1950s, '60s, and '70s; '80s data will become available in the near future. For the
Environmental Indicators project, 1970s data for lung, liver, kidney and leukemia for white males and females were
evaluated, since these cancers are potentially associated with environmental exposures. The nonwhite rates have not been
corrected for statistically small populations in some counties. This could result in a false high or false low, (zero), value.
ORD has developed a methodology for correcting for this phenomena with the '80s data. A composite map, based on the
ordinal rankings for each of these four cancers, was also generated.

Findings:

*     Cancer mortality rates for white males are generally higher than for white females. This is especially evident in the
      lung cancer maps, where  the female rates are in the lowest range, while the male  rates are across the board.  This
      may be due to non-environmental factors, such as diet, stress, and smoking.

*     Counties with high composite cancer rates tend to be in the southern part of the Region.

*     The following counties  are have high rates (top three categories) for both white males and females:  Surry, VA;
      Queen Annes, MD; Calvert, MD; Rappahannock, VA; Craig, VA; Wise, VA; Lincoln, WV; and Logan, WV.

Management Recommendations:

*     Counties with high composite cancer mortality rates should be considered under stress and should be considered
      sensitive. EPA should make sure that activities regulated by EPA in these areas do not add to this stressed situation.

*     When available, the 1980s cancer mortality data should be evaluated to determine if there are any significant findings
      with respect to nonwhites or significant changes for whites.

*     For those counties with high rates for males and females, the programs should investigate the possibility of a link to
      environmental causes.

-------
    Cancer  Mortality  Composite
             For  White  Males
                       Cancer Index Number

                       19-20

                       17 -18

                       15 - 16

                       13 -14

                       11 -12

                       9-10

                       7 -8

                       4 -6
      .prttf^
Soon: CaurOy fewiAria flan 1 2000000 LEGS DIG] Fita
  Gmor .VfarlaWy CWa to 1 15 DM Ojlto of Dondi u *an of Mny. lioy, InAnu «nj
    Cku onJ Uj^nf Pirpafl fa llu E7X
      P(OMTT
      liS EP/t %»i UJ G
-------
     Lung   Cancer   Mortality  Rate
                     White  Males
 D  10  20  30  40  SO
        MILES

    Scik 1 : 3500000
                           >  1000


                           901 to 1000


                           801 to 900


                           701 to 800


                           601 to 700


                           501 to 600


                           401 to 500


                         I  < 400


                         1  Data Not Available




                    EPA Region III

                    Environmental Indicators

                    Initiative
.So.ro-  County Bamdinef from 1:2000000 USGS DLG3 fia.
 Caver Martmty Dot) far US DM Offta of Raeordi aul
 Daxlarmmt, Katardi Triangle PM
Projection: /Son Equal Arm Projtchon
Project: Data tnti Mapping Prrrxmt for the EPA Rfgvn SI Errsirororunl*!
  bvbceton Project
Praartd By US EPA Rerun m Gtorrqiiic hfomatan Cater
     Mirch 2S. 1S93

-------
    Lung   Cancer  Mortality  Rate
                  White  Females
                         > 1000


                         901  to 1000


                         801  to 900


                         701  to 800


                         601  to 700


                         501  to 600


                         401  to 500


                         < 400


                         Data Not Available
                   ERA. Region III

               u   Environmental Indicators

                   Initiative
Source: County BcmUna from 1:2000000 USGS DLG3 fita
 Coxa MartiLty Deta jar US £f.'A Office cj RaatrA anj
 Development, Keeevth Triangle Pntc
Projection: flben Equd Am PraKtwn
Pnjed: Daia tnd Mappmg Prrfmrtd for the EPA Region IS Emnmrmentgl
  bvbraton Project.
Prepared By: US EPA Rerun m Gtornarx bihrmOan Cater
Die: Mtrch 25, 1993
 0  10  20  30 40  50
        MILES

        1 : 3SOOOOO

-------
    Cancer Mortality  Composite
           For  White  Females
                LJ
Cancer Index Number

11


Id


9


8


7


6


5


4
                Initiative
Sana: CaaOy fcu»tn9 /m 1.2000000 LEGS DLG1 Fila
  Cant! Mrt*ly D"" to US DM Oflto of Xfrnadt mi
    pnM, ft*arA Truiyk Pjrt
         «• lk< un of Wiuy, lunj, Mom «J
Pnj«l- DU j»l Mippnf PitpuW to IV OM Dfn HI
  Atrficabn PnKl.
    Sy I" £P/1 SWOT 01 G«»rap)ir htoratm Gnttr
 0  10  ?0  30 40  50
       MILES

   Salt I : 3600000
                EM Region III

                Environmental Indicators

-------
                                  TRI AIR RELEASES - CANCER WEIGHTED

The Toxics Release Inventory contains a substantial amount of environmental release data for all media.  This data is
reported in pounds of chemical released per year, based on estimates. In order to relate these releases to one another,
chemical-specific toxicological information, cancer and non-cancer, is multiplied by the amount of the release. This results in
a risk-based (human health) value that can be compared across facilities and counties.

Findings:

*     The counties which are in the highest category of total release but at least two categories lower of cancer (C) or
      non-cancer (NC) weighted releases are:  York, PA(C); Frederick, VA(C)(NC); Henry, VA(C)(NC); Wood,
      WV(C)(NC); and Giles, VA(NC).  The counties which are in the  highest category of cancer (C) or non-cancer (NC)
      weighted releases but are at least two categories lower for total releases are: Crawford, PA(C)(NC); Lebanon,
      PA(C)(NC); Cabell, WV(C)(NC); Suffolk, VA(C); Carbon, PA(NC); Mercer, PA(NC); and Montour,PA(NC).

*     The highest cancer-weighted air releases are in the urban areas of Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Erie; Baltimore; and
      Charleston, WV.  In addition, high cancer-weighted releases are found in the counties of Allegany, MD; York, VA;
      Suffolk, VA; Marshall, WV; Cabell, WV; and Jefferson, WV.

*     The highest non-cancer-weighted air releases are in urban areas of Philadelphia; Pittsburgh;  Erie; and Baltimore.  In
      addition, high non-cancer-weighted releases are found in the counties of Allegany, MD; Carbon, PA; Lycoming, PA;
      Montour, PA; York, PA; and Cabell, WV.

*     The counties with high cancer-weighted air releases and high composite (liver, lung, kidney and leukemia) cancer
      (white males -  1970s) are Cabell, WV; Kanawha, WV; and Baltimore City.

Management Recommendations:

*     Counties with high releases should be evaluated for opportunities  to reduce the emissions, such as pollution
      prevention, enforcement, and outreach.  The "worst" facilities within each county should be targeted first.

*     Further investigation should be conducted to determine the strength of the association between TRI cancer-weighted
      releases and cancer mortality, using 1980s data.

-------
            TRI Air  Releases
          County  Summation
            Cancer  Weighted
                     4.5 +    (>90 %)

                     .5 -4.49 (70% -90%)

                     .05 - .5 (50% - 70%)

                     .01 - .05 (30% - 50%)

                     0      (0 -30%)

                    No Readings
           £
Saura: County
 Tone JUnK hmniary
  'on: Vbtn Ltf^t Aata Piajftm
    D*t* anA Moving Pfepanl far Out
    By. US TfA
Oft FArvary i3, 1113
 a  in  20 30  «o so
      MILES


   Suit 1  3500000
               EfM Region III

               Environmental Indicators

               Initiative
            flm 1 2000000 USCS DLG1 Om
           fna> Cut fjan US BM 70S

-------
            TRI  Air  Releases
           County  Summation
         Non-Cancer  Weighted
                      22,000 +     (90% - 100%)

                      900 - 21,999.9 (70% - 90%)

                      80 - 899.9    (50% - 70%)

                      6 - 79.9      (30% - 50%)

                      .01  - 5.9    (10% - 30%)

                      0           (0% -10%)

                      No  Reading?
Saaa: Qwily ftwiAna tail 12000000 USGS DLGJ fim.
 Toxic RrioM hroentory (TRIJ Data ftan US TPA TKS
    : /Atn Zquol ,-lmi Projflian
 et: CM* onA Mafjmtg Pwptmt tor Itu EPA Jtfpan W
    Sy: U£ [PA Jtffxn HI Gaympkic hijbnmthcvi Otter
   Ttntary li 1W
 0  10  10 30  40 50
      MILES

   Sola 1 , 3500000
               EB4 Region III
           "^i
            5  Environmental Indicators
            $
           &  Initiative

-------
                                         RISK FROM INDOOR RADON

The risk of lung cancer due to exposure to radon and its decay products is well documented. The Surgeon General has
identified radon as the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States. The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has classified radon as a Group A carcinogen.

Findings:

*     EPA Region III has developed a regional database of indoor radon concentrations. A graphical representation of
      this database identifies regional areas which have indoor radon concentrations in excess of 4 pCi/L.

*     The  regional map has identified residences in the Reading Prong area as having the greatest evaluated indoor radon
      concentrations.  The Reading Prong is a geologic formation containing granite enriched with uranium which emits
      radon. Elevated radon readings have been confirmed throughout the Reading Prong which extends under north
      central Maryland, eastern Pennsylvania, northern New Jersey, and southern New York.

*     The  map also shows indoor radon concentrations outside of the Reading Prong. High, moderate, or low indoor
      radon concentrations exist throughout Pennsylvania and Maryland. Delaware and the District of Columbia have are
      moderate to low.

*     The  map has identified some areas in Virginia and West Virginia as having high to moderate indoor radon
      concentrations.  The total extent of radon in these two states can not be determined because of insufficient  data.

Management Recommendations:

*     Region III should attempt to convince the municipalities and townships in high radon potential areas to adopt EPA's
      new  "Model Standards and Techniques for Control of Radon in New Homes and Buildings" in their building codes.

*     Region III should supplement the Agency's manuals on mitigation techniques for pre-existing family dwellings with
      quarterly classroom instructions and/or an instructional video to ensure that radon reduction systems are properly
      installed.

-------
*     Region III should investigate the possibility of a joint federal/utility incentive for the mitigation of radon in pre-
      existing homes.

*     Region III should encourage school superintendents and school building managers to test and mitigate their school
      buildings.

-------
   Percentage  of Radon  Readings
                  Above  4  pCi/1
                        70% to 80%


                        60% to 70%


                        50% to 60%


                        40% to 50%


                        30% to 40%


                      "I 20% to 30%


                      | 10% to 20%


                  •I  0% to 10%
0*
SOUKS  County Bouadinec from 1:2000000 USGS DLG3 FOa.
 Raton Dot {ran X
-------
                                         RISK FROM INDOOR AIR

Indoor air quality problems can present a significant health problem to the majority of our population because people
spend about 90% of their time indoors, and there are some very nasty pollutants, both carcinogens and non-carcinogens,
commonly associated with the indoor air environment.

Findings:

*     Although the health effects of various indoor air pollutants are known, there is insufficient data to determine the
      exposure levels at which these effects would occur, and/or exposure information is insufficient for quantitative risk
      determination.

*     There is no health related data that would enable us to quantify the extent or seriousness of IAQ problems in
      Region  III; however, there is no reason to believe that people living in Region III are less  immune to IAQ problems
      than in  other areas of the country. In fact, IAQ problems may be more significant in Region III because of the
      climate  and population density.

*     Many if not most indoor air problems are easily remedied; (e.g., increase ventilation, remove the source) once it is
      determined that IAQ problems exist.

*     Many if not most businesses have become knowledgeable about IAQ problems and solutions in the office. The
      reason:  IAQ problems have cost American business some 60 billion dollars a year in lost productivity due to
      absenteeism.

*     The uninformed public; i.e., the homeowner is probably at greatest risk from IAQ problems.

Recommendations:

*     Region  III already conducts some outreach related to indoor air problems; however,  resources for this are limited.
      Given the potential for significant risk due to the amount of time spent indoors and the toxicity of various pollutants
      in the indoor air environment, such outreach should be given a higher priority by Region III and its States, and
      receive  more resources.

-------
An IAQ outreach strategy should be developed that has the uninformed public; i.e., the homeowner as the principle
target (refer to the technical support document for specific outreach recommendations).

IAQ outreach should be incorporated into the urban risk program.

-------
                                            RISK FROM PESTICIDES

There are over 50,000 pesticides on the market today. Of those it has investigated, EPA has identified at least 60 pesticide
chemicals as possible carcinogens. Risk from pesticides is generally associated with pesticides in food, pesticides in drinking
water, indoor air problems and other instances of misapplication.

Findings:

*     Although a survey indicated that 82% of Americans viewed pesticide residues on food as a serious hazard, data
      collected by FDA on both domestically grown and imported food indicates that pesticide residues on food are at very
      low levels and do not pose a risk to human health.

*     A national survey of drinking water systems conducted by EPA in 1991 found very few instances where health based
      levels for pesticides were exceeded in drinking water wells.

*     Inspections conducted by Region III States over a five year period of both agricultural and non-agricultural uses of
      pesticides resulted in a fairly low percentage of actionable violations.

*     When misused, pesticides may pose a risk to public health; however, it would appear that pesticide handlers under
      the watchful eye of federal and State regulatory agencies are using pesticides responsibly.

*     The possible exception to responsible users of pesticides may be  the uninformed homeowner. Market studies indicate
      that greater quantities of pesticides are used in the home and yard than on our nation's farmlands.

Recommendations:

*     Region  III already conducts outreach related to pesticides; however, resources for this are limited. Given the
      potential for significant risk due to pesticide misuse, such outreach should be given a higher priority by Region III
      and its States, and receive more resources. The homeowner should be  the principle target of this outreach.

*     Pesticide outreach should be incorporated into the urban risk program.

-------
                                              LEAD IN REGION ffl

Lead is a ubiquitous pollutant found extensively throughout Region III.  It is a heavy metal that can cause serious health
consequences from even small exposure. Particularly at risk are fetuses and children under six years who come in contact
with lead. Approximately 70% of elevated blood lead levels in children are believed to come from dust and flakes of
degrading lead based paint, 23% from drinking water and 7% from lead in soil and other sources.  Lead based paint has
been used extensively in homes built prior to 1978 when it's sale to consumers was banned. Over half of the children in
Region III live in homes where lead paint is found, a population at risk of over 1.0 million.

Findings:

*      US Census data reports age of housing information in 10 year increments, so housing data prior to 1970 gives a most
       inclusive picture of homes with lead. In Region III greater than half the population live in housing which was built
       prior to 1970. This amounts to almost 17 million people, of which approximately 1.3 million are children under 6yrs.

*      Regional information on blood leads is sporadic.  Extensive data exists for children in Baltimore, Washington,DC
       and Philadelphia. This data confirms that children living in older homes in dilapidated conditions have blood lead
       levels over 10 ug/dL in excess of the national standard.

Management Recommendations:

*      The Region must reinforce  its relationships with all federal, local and private agencies working on reducing
       exposure to lead such as providing grant funding or research dollars. Investigate lead exposure in a rural area
       with a high percentage of older homes and provide appropriate outreach.

*      Increased staff education, referral and innovative outreach to the public to emphasize the hazards and
       prevention of lead contamination.

*      Promote testing of all children for blood lead.

*      Formulate a Regional multi-media task force to address lead issues, including those involved in Title X lead
       paint abatement effort, the  Lead  and Copper Rule of the Safe Drinking Water Act and clean-up of lead
       Superfund sites.

-------
          Percentage  of  Housing
            Built  Prior  to   1970
    %  Built Prior to '70


    95 -  100%


    90 -  95.9%


    75 -  89.9%


    50 -  74.9%


    25 -  49.9%


    10 -  24.9%


     5 -  9.9%


     0 -  4.9%
           Population by Category
  8000000
  6000000  '
I
   000000
  2000000
             \
EPA Region III

Environmental Indicators
                  Initiative
SatKt:  Ca*m Tnct Dot (ran US Cmm Bwmt TIGER Film
 Dfmogrnhjf Data from US Cmnu Bureau Stotamry Tax
 Til - 3A ISTF-3A) T41* HOI, HO, H03, HQM t> Hzl
   ian: Mxn Ejuil flm Prartan
    DttM mi Mxppne Pnjmtd far the EPA Region 07
    EmnnrmtniM Jntbaaon hutatrof
     By: US EPA Rerun m Gtogmtac hfomtm Ca&r
Qdr  Mndi 10, 2333
 0  10  20  30  40  SO
       MILES

   Suk 1 : 3500000
                                                                                                                                      HI

-------
            VOC EMISSIONS IN OZONE NON-ATTAINMENT AREAS

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are emitted from a myriad of sources, which include
stationary, or "point" sources (refineries, chemical plants, etc.), area sources (dry cleaners,
gas stations, etc.), and mobile sources (motorized vehicles, airplanes, etc.).  VOCs are
significant both as a precursor to ozone (which contribute to adverse respiratory impacts)
and as an indicator of toxic air pollutants (50% of toxic air pollutants are VOCs).

Findings:

*      In non-attainment areas, the 1987-88 VOC emissions data indicate that point
       sources are a relatively small contributor to total VOC emissions. The major
       contributors of VOC emissions are area and mobile sources.

*      The 14% VOC emissions from point sources are the remains of a massive effort
       of control over the last 20 years.  But, even if VOC emissions from point sources
       are reduced to zero, the collective impact of area and mobile sources may still
       result in ozone non-attainment and substantial loadings of toxic air pollutants.

*      While the percentages of total VOC emissions will vary for specific areas of
       concern, substantial reductions in VOCs cannot occur without addressing area and
       mobile sources.

*      Traditional regulatory efforts alone will not be enough to curb VOC emissions
       because much of the mobile and area source emissions are caused by individual
       actions.

Management Recommendations:

*      Extensive outreach should be conducted to educate the public on how their
       actions affect and how changes in their actions can reduce VOC emissions, and
       the effect of these emissions on human and ecological health.

*      Region III should continue to participate in or lead national initiatives to reduce
       VOC loadings.

*      Region HI should explore possible new regional initiatives to address area and
       mobile source contributions to VOC loading and should continue to participate in
       existing actions such as transportation initiatives--i.e., trip reduction program,
       transit subsidy, etc.  Active sponsorship or promotion of alternative fuels or cars is
       an important and visible role that the Region might undertake.

-------
 Indexing/Forecasting System
 —— Proposed Approach ——
Toxicrty   X   Concentration   X  Exposure
                             Drinking Water
+ Radon  = Rjs|<

-------
                   Prototype TRI Indexing System
                            Maryland State: 1990
                   	Proposed Approach	
         Toxicity
                                                     prepared by Dr. Debra L. Fonnan 3/1/93
                  Phase I
                           Phase II
X    Concentration     X    Exposure   =
Risk
      Tool
 Concept
Variables
Toxicity Index ^^

Contaminants +
of
Concern

| Toxicity X Mass |


t t
chronic acute °
0
o systemic 0 •
0 cancer 0 •
o r
cific GIS

Fate + Transport

Risk Assessment
Epidemiology m

4- Receptors

sasured
= Risk
1 ° monitors
W ° dispersion (media specific) X
>riority pollutants '
acid aerosols a aggravated health conditions
ine paniculate PM » " confounding variables
Cm «" population size
nutagens

-------
                                      INDEXING/FORECASTING SYSTEM

A Prototype Indexing System is under development which ranks TRI releases in terms of their relative toxicity. Phase I
includes development of the Index system, Phase II includes characterization and evaluation of potential receptors. The
Index System utilizes approved toxicity factors from the IRIS database and incorporates both noncarcinogenic and
carcinogenic toxicity and their weight of evidence classifications, thus retaining sensitivitity to the original toxicity values.
Because the IRIS database is endorsed by the EPA and is nationally recognized, this approach serves  to support actions
which might be based on the results of the Indexing procedure.

Findings:

*     The Prototype Index System is media-specific and multi-component, including a Chronic Index, an Acute Index and a
      Fate Index.

*     An Index value is reported for each releasing facility which allows the identification of major contributors of the
      most toxic compounds.

*     The results of the Chronic Index of the Prototype for RY1990 TRI releases to the air medium  for the State of
      Maryland are presented in the technical report document. This methodology may reveal primary contributors in
      areas other than urban, highly populated regions.

*     The Prototype TRI Index System is intended to be included as part of a forecasting effort to evaluate the impact of
      TRI releases on human health risk.

Recommendations:
*     Other sources identified by our group as key contributors to human health risk include Area/Mobile sources,
      Pesticides, Indoor Air, Lead, Radon and Groundwater as a source of drinking water. These sources may be
      mathematically evaluated in terms of their relative toxicity indices to determine the comparative risk index of each
      variable.

*     Appropriate resources should be dedicated to evaluating suitable chemical lists, toxicity values and exposure
      information for the key contributors: TRI, Area/Mobile Sources, Pesticides, Indoor Air, Lead, Radon and
      Groundwater as a source of drinking water.

-------
Hazardous  Waste  Sites  With Public
      Water  Supplies  With MCL
Violations Within A 3 Mile  Radius
             Volatile/Halogenated


             Metals


             Pesticides


             Radionucleii
                   > 8 Public Water Supplies


                   5-8 Public Water Supplies


                   3-4 Public Water Supplies


                   1 - 2 Public Water Supplies
            \
Environmental Indicators

Initiative
   aa: Ojunty fcmdm Mm 1:2000000 USCS DLG3 Fim.
    VUttn lau tan 1UIM r
        MILES


     ScH< 1  3500000

-------
         Hazardous Waste  Sites
Located  Near  Potentially  Vulnerable
         Ground  Water  Intakes
         «up«rfund (NPL) Mid RCRA TCD Sli. Location*
         With Ground Wltw Quality Violation - Color IndloK
         th« number of public water supply ground wotar
         loomad within 1 mils, of th. lit*.
              Superfund (NPL):
              # of Ground
              Water Intakes

              0

              1 to 25

              26 to 50

              > 50
    RCRA TSD:
    # of Ground
    Water Intakes

«•  0

•  1 to 25

    26 to 50

4>  > 50
  un»: Caum BounArK. twn 1:2000000 USGS DLGi
   NPL Si)« loam f* CPA'i CCKUS
         JnUH laatam /pan SUr
 Pltpml By, US tfA Xqm ID Gffrafkif Infmavn Court
 Oak.  ffrt 5.  1993
  o  IQ 20  ag  40 so
        MILES

     Suit 1 : 3500000
                 EM Region III

                 Environmental Indicators

                 Initiative

-------
                 Hazardous Waste Sites with Public Water Supplies with MCL Violations within a 3 Mile Radius

Hazardous waste sites represent a significant source of ground water pollution to both private and public sources of potable water. Public
water supplies (PWSs) in the vicinity of hazardous waste sites are at particular risk. The presence of maximum contaminant level (MCL)
violations at PWSs located near hazardous waste sites may be an indicator of ground water supplies that are already contaminated by
hazardous waste sites (as opposed to at risk of contamination). This map locates hazardous waste sites that are within a 3 mile radius of
one or more ground water intakes used by PWSs that have MCL violations of industrial type contaminants. Information regarding MCL
violations-for PWSs are contained in FRDS n (Federal Reporting Data System).

Findings:

*     Inorganic (e.g.,metals), organics (e.g.,halogenated organics; pesticides), radionuclides (e.g.,gross alpha and beta; combined radium
      226/228) represent a small percentage of MCL violations.  Pennsylvania was found to have the highest number of MCL violations due
      to these parameters, which present a potential for adverse health effects.

*     Based  on the data from FRDS between 1988-1992, ground water based PWSs in Bucks and Montgomery counties in southeastern
      Pennsylvania, which lie within a 3-mile radius of a hazardous waste site with known ground water contamination, had MCL
      violations of industrial-type contaminants.

*     This analysis includes only 54% of the PWSs with MCL violations due to data gaps in FRDS regarding latitudinal and longitudinal
      coordinates for the location of PWSs. This map is therefore expected to be under inclusive of the sites meeting the criteria.
      However, it is not likely to affect the data distribution throughout the Region and results significantly.

Management Recommendations:

*     Analyze contaminant trends over time using existing data in FRDS for PWSs; then target activities to achieve compliance through
      treatment, or through remediation of hazardous waste  sites or both.

*     Prioritize hazardous waste site clean-up based on vulnerability of potentially exposed  PWSs; consider a search for additional sites
      in most vulnerable areas with known ground water contamination problems.

*     Consider a search for additional, as yet undiscovered hazardous waste sites in the most vulnerable areas with known ground
      water contamination problems (as potentially demonstrated by consistent MCL violations).

-------
Percent  of  Public  Water  Supplies
       With  Coliform  Violations
                    I > 74.9%

                    1 50 - 74.9%
                      30 -49.9%

                    1 20 -29.9%
                      10 - 19.9%

                       5 - 9.9%

                       0 - 4.9%
                 EB* Region III
            \
             i
            ff   Initiative
Environmental Indicators
 iaaa: Caan Boudni tam 1 2000000 LEGS DIGJ Fil>
  VUotn iau (torn U.SOA FRD5 rM:tmi
 Pnj*tm: Mm Lff*4 -Vw Prajftitn
 Triffl: CU< ml Muffing fjefait fa On DM Ryan HI EitmnmolU
  MWiozltn Pn«l.
 Prrjmd 8y: UJ E7/1 K^oi HI (,«ijr«pli«: hfamam CmUr
 Dal,  fynl 7 liS3
  0  10  20  30 40  SO
       MILES

    Salt  1  3500000

-------
                       Hazardous Waste Sites Located Near Potentially Vulnerable Ground Water Intakes:

Hazardous waste sites represent a significant source of ground water pollution to both private and public sources of potable water. Hazardous
waste sites located near potentially vulnerable ground water intake wells may lead to significant contamination of public water supplies (PWSs)
and private  wells. Identification of ground  water  intakes in the vicinity  of existing hazardous waste sites  with known ground water
contamination may give  some insight to the location of potentially vulnerable ground water intakes in this Region.

Findings:

*      There are very little drinking water quality data for private wells. What is available is limited and/or not centralized in a database
       for use in this Study.

*      Pennsylvania and Delaware both have a significant number of vulnerable ground water intake wells, based on the total number of
       ground water  intake wells used for PWSs within a 3 mile radius of a hazardous waste site with known ground water contamination.

*      This analysis includes PWSs ground water intake wells for community and non-transient/non-community water supplies for the entire
       Region.

Management Recommendations:

*      Encourage states  to consider well-head protection programs for high risk public and private well clusters.  Use existing data,
     e.g., CERCLA/RCRA sites paper files, to assist in locating private wells in known stressed areas.

*      Encourage states  and loan agencies to require testing and follow-up of private wells when real estate is transferred.

*      Include in prioritization of hazardous waste site cleanups potential for impact on ground water supplies of drinking water.

-------
                                   Percent of Public Water Supplies with Colifonn Violations

Human health concerns related to public and private sources of drinking water supplies with contamination from waterborne diseases is a
concern to all residents of Region HI. Historically the quality of drinking water has been a factor in determining human welfare.  Waterborne
diseases have for the most part been well-controlled in this country compared to others but there still is continuous violations of the coliform
standard. The Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) is an indicator of drinking water quality. Contaminant levels in drinking water above the
MCL may represent a potential human health and environmental concern. Information regarding MCL violations for public water supplies
(PWSs) are contained in FRDS II (Federal Reporting Data System II).

Findings

*      MCL violations for coliform were wide-spread in the Region. Pennsylvania and Virginia were found to have the most violations of
       the coliform standard for fiscal years 1988-1992. Counties with the highest percent of PWSs with MCL violations of coliform were
       primarily in rural areas. There is a potential for adverse health effects for persons consuming water that exceeds MCLs for coliform.

*      This analysis includes only 54%  of the PWSs with MCL violations due to data gaps in FRDS regarding latitudinal and longitudinal
       coordinates for the location of PWSs.  However, it is not likely to affect the data distribution throughout the  Region and results
       significantly.

Management Recommendations

*      Target activities  to achieve compliance by  use of  appropriate treatment  technologies and/or innovative funding approaches for
       vulnerable PWSs that may have difficulties achieving compliance, e.g., small PWSs.

*      Control sources of coliform in drinking water by construction of sewage treatment plants in highly stressed areas and/or regulation
       of the construction of septic systems in these areas.

*      Have all affected programs work together (with other state and federal agencies) to control agricultural run-off in areas
       with the greatest frequency of coliform violations.

-------
Percent  of  Public  Water   Supplies
         With  Nitrate  Violations
                     I > 14.9%

                   M 10 - 14.9%
                       5 -9.9%

                       3 -4.9%

                       2 -2,9%

                       1 - 1.9%

                       0.1 -0.9%
 Saaa: Camty Soa^Mnm fan 1:2000000 IBCS DLG3 Cita
  VOtttai lai fan USOA TfDS nrlilmi'.
 Pnjtction: .*&eri Lquf Aim Piajftm
 Pnj.1 Da, anl Mtfjmi P*pvel to Ikf DM Ktgoi
  Tnfaaan PnJKt.
 Prffni By. US [PA Nfn HI Gfytafkt bt/amaan Onur.
 Off: J^jril 7,  ;Mj
  a  10  ?a  30  40 so
        MILES

    Sail 1 : 3500000
                 Em Region III

                 Environmental Indicators
            <£   Initiative

-------
PERCENT OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES WITH MCL VIOLATIONS
AND POPULATION AFFECTED
FISCAL YEAR 1992*

State
DE
MD
PA
VA
WV
Surface Water Source
Percent of
Supplies
0
6.8
4.2
6.0
9.4
Population
(%)
0
0.36
2.7
1.2
2.7
Ground Water Source
Percent of
Supplies
12.6
4.5
8.4
18.2
6.0
Population
(%)
9.6
3.4
8.5
1.4
3.5
Total
Percent of
Supplies
11.0
4.7
7.4
16.0
7.4
Population
(%)
2.3
0.8
3.9
3.6
2.9
'Percent of population affected are presented for each State based on the percent of
 the population served by PWSs with MCL violations for each State.

-------
                                   Percent of Public Water Supplies with Nitrate Violations

Nitrate contamination of public and private drinking water supplies is a concern to many residents of Region ffl, but presents a particular
significant risk to newborns. Newborns exposed to levels of nitrate above the MCL may be at potential risk of toxic effects. Nitrate in surface
water may pose an additional risk to the environment.  The Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) is an indicator of drinking water quality.
Contaminant levels in drinking water above the MCL may represent a potential human health and environmental concern through discharge
of contaminated ground water to surface water. Information regarding MCL violations for public water supplies (PWSs) are contained in FRDS
II (Federal Reporting Data System II).

Findings:

*     MCL violations for nitrate were detected primarily in Delaware and Pennsylvania in this Region for fiscal years 1988-1992.
      Lancaster county was found to have the highest percent (greater than 14.9%) of PWSs with MCL violations of nitrate  for
      ground water based PWSs. Other counties with a high percent of PWSs (ground water source) with MCL violations of nitrate   w
Lebanon, Sullivan and Union counties in PA and  Sussex county in DE.

*     The nitrate levels reported above the MCL may pose a significant risk to newborns.

*     This analysis includes only 54% of the PWSs due to data gaps in FRDS regarding the latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates for the
      location of PWSs.  However, it is not likely to affect the data distribution throughout the Region and results significantly.

Management Recommendations!

*     Target activities to achieve compliance by use of appropriate treatment technologies and/or innovative funding strategies for vulnerable
      PWSs that may have difficulties achieving compliance, e.g., small PWSs.

*     Identify and control sources of nitrate in drinking water by outreach to  fanners on the proper  disposal of agricultural waste, and
      outreach to both fanners and homeowners on the proper use of agricultural chemicals, including fertilizer.

*     Eliminate existing data gaps in FRDS with respect to the locational information of PWSs by providing resources to the States to
      determine the latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates for the location of PWSs so that we can have a complete geographic data
      base for targeting EPA and state activities in all program activities that affect drinking water supplies.

-------
Mobile  and  Area  VOC  Emissions
         by  County  (tons/year)
    with  Ozone Non-attainment
    (1987-88 Emission Inventory)
         > 30,000

         20,000 to 30,000

         15,000 to 20,000

         10,000 to 15,000

         7,500 to 10,000
AFS Facilities
(Major VOC Sources)

Ozone  Non-Attainment
       1 5,000 to 7,500

         2,500 to 5,000

         < 2,500
 Man Quay bmtana f F-tpu* 
-------
Percent of Ground Water and Surface Water Based Public Water Supplies with MCL Violations and Population Affected
in Fiscal Year 1992

Ground water and surface water are natural resources of potable water. Ground water is the water source for approximately
94% of PWSs, which serve approximately 25% of the population using PWSs.  Surface water is the water source for
approximately 6% of PWSs, which serve approximately 75% of the population using PWSs.  Privates wells are primarily served
by ground water sources and serves approximately 19% of the population.  Drinking water quality is regulated by the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) passed by Congress in 1974 and amended most recently in 1986. The goal of the SDWA is to
assure the provision of safe drinking water to Americans by setting drinking water quality standards, and requiring regular testing
for regulated and unregulated contaminants. The Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) are the enforceable standards that are
used to assess drinking water quality.

Findings;

*      In fiscal year 1992, there were up to 16.0 % of ground water and surface water based PWSs with MCL violations in each
      of the states which may have affected up to 3.9% of the population in each of the states. The percent of ground water
      and surface water based PWSs with MCL violations was greatest for the State of Virginia.  The total population affected
      by ground water and surface water based PWSs with MCL violations was similar for all of the states (2.3-3.9%) except
      Maryland (0.8%).

*     Ground Water contamination is likely to be more chronic than surface water contamination; the percent of PWSs with
       MCL violations is greater for ground water than for surface water in fiscal year 1992.

*     Overall, the population at risk in fiscal year 1992 was greatest for ground water based PWSs.  Although the population
       served by surface water based PWSs is greater than for ground water, the population at risk due to MCL violations is
      greater for ground water based PWSs.

Management Recommendation:

*     Prioritize compliance activities at the most chronic violators.

*     Consider innovative funding approaches for vulnerable PWSs that may have difficulties achieving compliance, e.g., small
      PWSs which typically use ground water sources.

-------
             Figure 1

    SOURCES OF VOC EMISSIONS
FROM OZONE NON-ATTAINMENT AREAS *
                    26%
                    AREA
         60%
       MOBILE
                      14%
                     POINT
    FROM 1987-1988 EMISSION INVENTORY

-------
     AREA AND MOBILE SOURCES; A SIGNEFICAN CONTRIBUTOR TO AIR POLLUTION IN REGION Btt

VOC loadings are a good indicator of potential environmental threat because they encompass approximately 50% of the
toxic air emissions and are also precursors to ozone, which has known human health and ecological impacts. This map
displays the VOC emissions of area and mobile sources (it does not include point sources) compared with areas of ozone
non-attainment in Region III.

Findings:

*     Even when the contribution from point sources is eliminated, substantial VOC emissions still exist throughout the
      region.

*     Preliminary results indicate that relatively high emissions of VOCs exist in areas not commonty considered a problem
      (i.e., that are not in areas of ozone non attainment).

*     The exposure of people and ecological systems to toxic air pollutants and to ozone is widespread in the region.


Management Recommendations:

*     Region III should complete the emission picture and evaluate VOC emission data using 1990 emission inventories.

*     Ambient air toxic information or development of models to estimate public exposure is needed.

-------