QEGION II
    FY-93 STRATEGIC PLAN

BRINGING RISK INTO FOCUS
        FEBRUARY 1991
          Printed i>n Hxycfod Pa^xr

-------
                                                                  &

                                                                lejion II  FY-9:
                       Table of Contents


Executive Summary  	   5

The Regional Comparative Risk Workgroup	   12

The Risk Ranking Process	   12

The Ecological, Human Health and Welfare Rankings	   13

Incorporating the Rankings into the Strategic Planning Process	   16

Senior Management Retreats	   16

Initial Development of Proposals	   17

Cross-Divisional Workgroups	   18

The Current Relationship Between Resources and the Rankings	   19

Current On-going Regional Initiatives	   26

Regional Strategic Investment Themes	   28

Regional Strategic Disinvestment Themes	   31

Environmental Indicators	   32

Future Directions for Strategic Planning	   33

APPENDIX A	,	   35
     . MULTI-MEDIA AQUIFER PROTECTION PROJECT	   37
     . MULTI-MEDIA RISK REDUCTION  IN THE GREAT LAKES  ....   45
     . THE CARIBBEAN WATER  INITIATIVE	   53
     . COASTAL WATERS INITIATIVE	   79
     . TRANSPORTATION AND  AIR EMISSIONS INITIATIVE	   85
     . SUBSURFACE HAZARDOUS WASTE TRANSPORT
           SYSTEMS RELEASES	   93
                         ' Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
?t»ion II - TT-93
 Stnitju Plan
           . ACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATORS AND
               TREATMENT, STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES  	  99
           • GROUNDWATER TASK FORCE	107
           • NON-NPL SITE MULTI-MEDIA ENFORCEMENT	113
           . REDUCING RISK OF TOXIC RELEASES AND IDENTIFYING
               HAZARDOUS FACILITIES ON A GEOGRAPHIC BASIS  ...  119

      Appendix B - Summary of Investments and  Disinvestments	125

      Appendix C - Current Regional Initiatives 	141

      Appendix D  	  153
           FEDERAL FACILITIES PROGRAM  	155
           INDIAN PROGRAM  	161
                             ' Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
                                                                      Etjion II - "
                        Executive Summary
 For over a year, Region II has  been engaged, in an innovative, region-wide
 planning enterprise.  This process began with a comparative risk assessment
 of Jw^nJyJ!s^vejri_ejQYJro^                                      of
 ecological, Jiumanjiealth and welfare/economic risk. The information
"generated in this analysis was the primary basis for developing ten strategic
 planning initiatives which propose to shift regional resources in ways that
 will improve the Region's ability to reduce risk. The goal, in cooperation
 with  Headquarters, is to seek to incorporate these proposals into the
 Agency's FY-93 budget.

 The following report  describes the process used to evaluate risk (which  is
                                              Region " report), the
 process used to develop strategic initiatives, and the future steps that will
 be taken  in the strategic planning process.  Also included in this report are
 four appendices:

      Appendix A contains detailed explanation?  Df each proposal, including
      the problems being addressed, the goals,  strategies and activities to
      be undertaken to solve them and  the resource implications for FY-
      93.

      Appendix B presents in matrix form the investments and
      disinvestments for each regional initiative.

      Appendix C lists a number of  Regional Initiatives which represent
      current shifts in  regional resources to address regional priorities.

      Appendix D comprises background papers on the Region's Federal
      Facilities and Indian Coordination programs which map out the
      Region's strategies in these two important areas.

-------
t '- •
\
T


;
i
f


s
\
\


*-" 1

ffl

Region II r»-93
 Strztejxc Plan
       Listed below are summaries of the Region's strategic initiatives for FY-93.

       •    The Multi-Media Aquifer Protection Project undertakes to reduce the
            human health threat posed by contaminated drinking water.  This will
            be accomplished by prioritizing and targeting sole source aquifers in
            geographic areas of greatest human health risk and resource
            vulnerability and then  remediating and/or protecting these aquifers.
            A multi-media approach will be taken involving groundwater, air,
            Super-fund, RCRA, UST and pesticides programs.  In FY-93, a
            redirection of 9.7 workyears and $15.4 million in contractor support
            (primarily for one Superfund remediation) will be needed.  The
            workyear disinvestment will be taken from the Wellhead Protection
            Program,  and  shifting UIC/PWS  program resources to implement the
            project.  The air, RCRA and UST disinvestment will be available  from
            lesser  priority  enforcement/corrective actions and reduction of state
            oversight.  Superfund and pesticides input will involve work already
            planned.

       •    The Multi-Media Project for Risk  Reduction in the Great Lakes seeks
            to reduce the bioac^umulation of persistent toxic substances in the
            food web. The strategy involves continued updating of the Niagara
            River and Lake Ontario Toxics Management Plans, the multi-media
            implementation  of those plans and the development of analogous
            Toxics  Management Plans for Lake Erie  and the St.  Lawrence River.
            A  redirection of 18.5  Region II workyears will be required to support
            this initiative.  The disinvestment will come from core program areas
            on a cross divisional basis.  Full implementation will also require  5.5
            additional workyears which, if not received as an increase  to the
            base, would mean a cutback in proposed activities.

       •    The Caribbean Water initiative will attempt to reduce habitat
            alteration  and  prevent pollution caused  by wastewater discharge and
            development practices, and to improve  drinking water quality in the
            Caribbean. There are four modules to  this initiative:

                 The distinctive habitats strategy seeks to reduce habitat
                 alteration and destruction,  particularly human impacts on coral
                 reefs, mangroves, seagrass  beds,  and phosphorescent bays.
                 The first phase of the strategy will be to  assess the condition of

-------
                                                         legion II - ri-9?
                                                          Stnttglc flan
these distinctive habitats, prioritize them and select some for a
Pollution Prevention and Control Pilot Project.  Concurrently,
Region II will identify local and federal organizations, roles,
resources and initiatives pertaining to the management and
protection of these ecosystems.  The information gathered will
be used to develop an integrated environmental management
plan to prevent pollution in pristine habitats. To implement
these strategies in FY-93,  2.5 workyears will be invested.   The
disinvestment will come from CWA 301 (h) post waiver
monitoring and 403(c)  reviews, monitoring activities in New
York/New Jersey and realized efficiencies in the review of
Environmental Assessments in New York and New Jersey.

The  PRASA (Puerto  Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority)
strategy is to maintain a strong enforcement program while
empowering  PRASA, the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality
Board (EQB), and the Department of Health (DOH) to address
compliance and infrastructure problems at wastewater treatment
plants and drinking v\ ater systems.  Four workyears would be
invested in this strategy.  Existing resources identified for grants
management, permits, enforcement and  drinking water will  be
focused on this geographic project.  There will also be a shift of
some construction grants resources to permits  and/or
enforcement  with a corresponding lowering of OWAS
commitments.

For the Virgin Islands, the Region will strengthen its
enforcement  against non-complying municipal wastewater
discharges, and will  seek additional funding from Congress to
construct or improve all wastewater facilities necessary to attain
Clean Water Act compliance. Two workyears will be invested
in this strategy and the disinvestment will come from the same
program areas as the PRASA strategy.

The fourth module of this initiative will focus on small public
water supply systems in both Puerto Rico (e.g., non-PRASA
systems) and the Virgin Islands.  In Puerto Rico a combination
of vigorous enforcement and assistance to systems  not requiring
major capital  investment will begin.  A longer term effort will

-------
Region II - fT-93
 Strategic Plan
                  be made to develop rural water authorities both legislatively
                  and in terms of capital investments.  In the Virgin Islands, the
                  Region will conduct research into the microbiological
                  contamination and treatment of rainwater roof-top catchments.
                  Based on the research, regulations will be developed governing
                  these catchments systems.  Investments include 3 Regional
                  workyears and an additional .25 workyears from Headquarters
                  for the development of the rainwater roof-top catchment
                  regulations.  The disinvestment will come from de-emphasis of
                  the areas of direct Federal enforcement against non-transient
                  public water systems in New jersey, data verification and
                  working  with local communities/NGOs to facilitate
                  implementation  of SDWA in New York (e.g.,  mobilization).

            The Coastal Waters Initiative addresses point and non-point source
            pollution, land-use changes, and combined sewer overflows in four
            Regional water bodies, each of which has a different area of highest
            risk that will be focused on.  Comprehensive Conservation and
            Management Plans (CCMP) to  clean up ti;ese systems are current!/
            being developed. The successful implementation of these plans
            requires focused, multi-program  efforts in our coastal waters.  A total
            of 16 workyears will be invested to support the initiative.  Six
            workyears will come from core activities: (i.e.,  workyears already
            targeted to the initiative)  - 2.5  from the  New York Bight Restoration
            Plan, 1.5 from the Long Island Sound Study, 1  from the Delaware
            Estuary  Program and 1 from the Near Coastal Water program; 7.5
            workyears will come from a shift in construction grants resources and
            geographic targeting of permitting/enforcement resources; 1.5
            workyears will come from Ocean Dumping Ban Act and non-point
            source inter-agency activities, and 1.0 workyear of ocean resources
            will be targeted for community outreach.

            The Transportation and Air Emissions Initiative seeks a reduction of
            high risk mobile source emissions through three pollution prevention
            strategies:   the enhancement of state motor vehicle inspection and
            maintenance (I/M) programs, the implementation of transportation
            control measures and the substitution of cleaner fuels for gasoline
            and diesel fuel. A total of 5 workyears are necessary to implement
            these strategies in FY-93. Disinvestment of 3.0 workyears will occur

-------
                                                                Eejion II - FY-93
                                                                 5ir*ltglc Plan
in the following areas: federal and state regulation development,
NSR/PSD program, state toxics program development, and support
and development of computer systems.  The Region expects to
receive  the additional 2.0 workyears in. FY-93 for implementation of
the new Clean Air Act requirements.

The Subsurface  Hazardous Waste Transport Systems Releases
Initiative seeks to i educe or eliminate risk from industrial subsurface
toxic releases  and to remediate the contamination of soil and
groundwater occurring from such subsurface conveyance systems.
The strategy involves the  identification and prioritization of facilities
whose subsurface conveyance systems are releasing hazardous waste.
The stabilization and remediation of high priority sites will be pursued
through corrective action  and, where appropriate, will include
pollution prevention requirements.  To implement this strategy in FY-
93, Region II will shift 3.2 workyears  from areas such as Land Ban
Warning Letter issuance, Non-TCLP Generators,  state oversight
inspections,  and lower priority corrective actions.

The Active Hazardous Waste Generators and Treatment. Storage, and
Disposal (TSDs) Facilities Initiative endeavors to reduce the risk posed
by RCRA facilities to human health and the environment from
exposure to contaminated groundwater and subsurface water, soil,
and air  releases.  A two-pronged strategy has been  established.  For
TSDs, the un-permitted universe will  be prioritized based on each
facility's risk to the  environment, and permitting will proceed based
on the ranking.  For hazardous waste generators, the strategy is to
promote/require waste  minimization procedures at targeted facilities.
To implement this strategy in FY-93, 1 workyear currently used  for
RFAs will be shifted to prioritizing TSDs.  For generators, 2 workyears
will be invested.  The disinvestment will come from decreased
oversight of certain state activities (e.g., storage permits).

The Ground Water Task Force Initiative seeks to reduce  the  risk
posed by the  migration  of groundwater contaminant plumes  at
Superfund sites from the time a site is listed on  the NPL until
remediation  begins.  A task force will be formed  which will identify
and prioritize  NPL sites for early groundwater action,  develop
feasibility studies for those sites and insure that plume clean-up

-------
                                        10
egion II  FT-93
Slratejic flan
            becomes part of the ROD for the sites. An investment of 4 to 5
            workyears  will be  required for the task force; each clean-up action
            will require $50,000-$100,000 for feasibility studies and  $1 to $2
            million for  remediation. The disinvestment will involve some delay of
            a small number of RI/FS or  ROD reviews and  redirecting technical
            support workyears.

            The Non-NPL Site  Multi-Media Enforcement Initiative endeavors to
            reduce the risk posed by non-NPL sites at which the Region was able
            to make an imminent and substantial endangerment determination
            (along with a strong liability  case against the PRP).  This  proposal
            would include an investment of approximately  3 workyears and
            $450,000 in extramural funds for contractor oversight of PRPs.  The
            disinvestment  would come from  the Region's NPL activities.  The
            extramural  dollars would be disinvested from NPL enforcement.

            Reducing Risks of Toxic Releases and Identifying Hazardous Facilities
            on a Geographic Basis  seeks to intensify civil and criminal
            enforcement against companies that abandon hazardous  chemicals
            and to identify and take enforcement action against a geographically
            targeted  universe of potential candidates for future removal actions.
            Three workyears and $50,000 in contractor funds will be needed  for
            these activities in FY-93.  Disinvestment will come from a slight
            reduction in the overall number of removals and a refocusing of legal
            resources now devoted to other Superfund efforts.  The proposal  will
            be expanded in scope should Headquarters  promulgate the CERCLA
            §108 financial  responsibility regulations.

-------
"Bills Ik i i
^r1


A
11
1
i ,

i ^
                                                                   Eejion II - rY-5.
                        The  Region II
                              FY-93
                        Strategic  Plan
                Bringing  Risk Into Focus
"EPA should target its  environmental protection efforts on
the basis of opportunities for the greatest risk reduction.*

The Environmental Protection Agency has begun to  make risk the common
currency of the environmental trade.  With an ever-expanding
environmental agenda, risk assessments can provide the technical bases to
accomplish cross-media priority setting.  Building on the  1987 Unfinished
Business study and on the creation of the Science Advisory  Board's Relative
Risk Reduction Strategies  Committee, in January of 1990, EPA Region II
undertook an assessment of the comparative risk associated with the most
pressing regional environmental concerns.  The  results of this assessment
have formed the foundation of Region ll's strategic planning effort.

Described below is the process implemented  by the Region to identify high
risk concerns, and to translate that information into  an exceptions-based
strategic plan for FY-93.  At all steps along the path  from risk-ranking
through development of strategic approaches  to reducing risk, the  Region
has assured a multi-divisional, cross-program planning structure. Region M's
senior managers, line managers and technical, scientific and  program staff
have all contributed to this strategic planning  effort.
      TTiis and the following quotes are among the recommendations made by the Science Advisory
Board in their recent report entitled Reducing Risk:  Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental
Protection.

-------
                                        12
   II ri-93
Sliitejlc Man
      The Regional Comparative Risk Workgroup.

      The Comparative Risk Workgroup comprised approximately 20 regional
      employees. Members of the workgroup had diverse academic and
      occupational backgrounds  and possessed a wide range of scientific,
      engineering, managerial and administrative experience.  The workgroup was
      composed of branch chiefs, section chiefs and senior staff from each
      division in the Region.

      The workgroup convened  on a weekly or bi-weekly basis over a period of
      approximately eight months.  When necessary, sub-committees were
      formed to address specific  issues,  and regional employees of appropriate
      backgrounds, including some not on the workgroup, were tapped for
      further input.  During this eight-month period the workgroup utilized over
      four workyears and $70,000 of contractor support.  The final Region  II Risk
      Ranking report was issued  in February 1991, and its results are being
      widely communicated both within and outside the Region.

      The Risk  Ranking Process.

      The first task facing the newly-formed workgroup was the division of the
      full range  of environmental problems that the Region faces into discrete
      proWem- areas. The group decided on an  approach that resulted in
      discrete categories, rather  than double-counting some effects. Since
      problem areas were non-overlapping, Region II did not have distinct
      categories for drinking  water or groundwater.  Instead,  sources of drinking
      water  and groundwater contamination,  like non-point sources, RCRA and
      Superfund, were ranked.  Also the workgroup decided  to rank sources
      only, rather than mixing sources and  pollutants on the problem area list.
      Therefore, separate categories for carbon dioxide or air toxics were not
      ranked but point, mobile and area air pollution sources were.  Some
      sources unique to  Region II were  also included in  the assessment:
      wastewood burning, ocean disposal of sludge, and dredging and dredge
      spoils disposal.  The full list of ranked problem areas  is  presented on  page


     With problem  areas defined, two key assumptions were necessary prior to
      ranking.  First, the  workgroup focused as much  as possible on residual risk.

-------
                                  13
                                                                    Etuion II - FT-93
                                                                     Strat«ic Plan
In other words,  no attempt was made to evaluate the level of risk that
would exist without past and current environmental protection efforts and
no attempt was  made to evaluate the effects of past or present efforts on
the current level of risk. The workgroup ranked the levels of risk that exist
today.  Second,  when projections about future efforts were required, it was
assumed that the current levels of environmental protection would  continue
at the same levels in future years. No assumptions were made about
changes in environmental legislation or funding levels.

With  the problem  list and ranking assumptions defined, regional workgroup
members  prepared nearly all of the individual problem analyses which
formed the basis for judging relative risk levels.  A small number of
analyses for problems that differ very little from region to  region (e.g.,
chlorofluorocarbon  depletion  of the ozone layer or pesticides  in food)  were
prepared by Headquarters.  After cross-divisional review, comment and
revision of problem analyses, workgroup members met to  develop  a draft
ranking. Whenever possible  ranking was achieved through consensus,
falling back on a simple majority vote when necessary.

Senior managers (i.e., the^Regional Administrator,  Depuiy  Regional
Administrator and Division and  Deputy Division Directors)  met with the
comparative risk workgroup in full sessions on three occasions.  They  met
once  when the initial processes of the comparative risk project were being
developed; a second time, before the ranking meetings, to review problem
area analyses. The final  meeting  reviewed the rankings and resulted in
unanimous approval of the results.

The Ecological,  Human  Health and Welfare Rankings.

Region  II undertook the ranking of problem areas for three types of effects:
ecological,  human  health and welfare.  A few problem areas (e.g., radon
for ecological effects or  land use changes for human health effects) were
not ranked on one  of the three scales because they had no direct impacts
on that type of risk. Problem areas Were ranked on each  scale by placing
them  into low, medium, high and very high risk categories.

-------
                                         14
legion II - FT-93
 Suiiegic Plan
                                   Ecological

       The ecological ranking identifies the effects of pollution sources on the
       overall vitality of the many ecosystems in  Region  II.  Consideration was
       given to a source's intensity of impact, the scale of impact, the biological
       value of the ecosystem (as opposed to the value  to humans) and the
       uncertainty of the data available. A full ranking is provided on  pages 20
       and 21;  a partial listing of the highest ranking problems on the ecological
       scale is provided below.

                  Very High                       High

       • Land use changes affecting    • Pesticide contamination  during application
         aquatic habitats              • Point source discharges  to water
       • Land use changes affecting    • Chlorofluorocarbon depletion of the
         terrestrial habitats              the ozone layer.
       • Extra-regional  acid            • Combined  sewer overflow
         deposition
       • Non-point source water
         pollution

                                 Human Health

       The human health  ranking is actually  a combination of two rankings that
       were undertaken separately:  cancer and non-cancer human  health effects.
       The cancer effects  were analyzed using four  common steps of  risk
       assessment:  hazard identification, dose-response, exposure assessment
       and risk characterization.  The projected cancer incidence was compared
       across all problem  areas and the workgroup  used these figures to develop
       the cancer ranking. The non-cancer ranking employed a  scoring system
       concentrating on three variables: type of health impacts,  population
       affected and the severity of the impact on the population. Scores were
       used as  a guide to  ranking. The two rankings were combined  while
       disallowing downward shifts of more than one level (i.e.,  a problem ranking
       very high on one scale could  not shift two levels down to medium overall).
       The combined health ranking  is presented on pages 22 and 23, a partial
       listing is below.

-------
                                   15
                                                                     Kejion II
                                                                       Strttigic PUB
           Very High

  Chlorofluorocarbon depletion
   of the ozone layer
  Radon
  Indoor air pollution
  Mobile sources of air
   pollution
           High

Area sources of air pollution
Superfund sites
RCRA sites
Non-point source water pollution
Pesticide residues in food
Point sources of air pollution
Drinking water systems
                       Economics/Welfare
                            *
Along with EPA's mandate to protect human health and ecosystems is a
concern about reducing the negative effects of pollution on the welfare and
economic well-being of society.  Therefore, the region also prepared an
economics/welfare effects ranking.  This ranking was based on a tabulation
of the damages incurred as  a result of each problem area, primarily lost or
damged resources and human health care costs incurred.  The analysis
not did  include the costs needed to  control pollution. A partial welfare
ranking  is below and the complete ranking follows on pages 24 and 25.
           Very  High

  Non-point source water
   pollution
  Point source water pollution
  Combined sewer overflow
  Land  use changes affecting
   terrestrial habitats
  Land  use changes affecting
   aquatic habitats
  Indoor Air Pollution
  Mobile sources of air pollution
  Area sources of air pollution
  Extra-regional acid deposition
Point source air pollution
Accidental releases
 Radon
Chlorofluorocarbon depletion of
 the ozone  layer
Superfund sites
UST sites
RCRA sites
Municipal landfills

-------
                                          16
Region II TI-93
 Strategic Flan
       Incorporating the Rankings into the Strategic Planning Process.

       Ideally, resource utilization would correlate closely with risk reduction
       potential.  In reality, risk is only one factor affecting resource distribution.
       Also considered are legal requirements, cost effectiveness, public
       expectations and perceptions, technological and programmatic feasibility,
       and other issues.  Still, in the long-term, the ability to reduce
       environmental risk should be considered the most important factor.

       Region II has used the comparative risk rankings as the foundation of its
       strategic plan. The strategic planning initiatives which follow bear that out •
       they all seek to address high ranking risk prdblems.  In future years, as
       managers  become more familiar with the comparative risk assessment and
       the strategic planning process, it is anticipated  that the risk rankings will
       play an increasingly important role in directing resources toward the
       region's most serious environmental  concerns.


       "EPA should reflect risk-based priorities in its strategic
       planning process."

       The comparative risk, assessment reports provide a wealth of  information
       for managers engaged in planning.  There is, of course, no guarantee that
       any of that information will be used by a manager to assist in strategic
       planning, or that a manager will even engage in strategic planning.  As has
       been expressed often, the adoption of strategic planning requires the
       equivalent  of a management culture change. And culture  change does not
       come easy.  For this reason, Region II in its first  year of formal  strategic
       planning adopted two principles to help effect  this change.

       Concentration in the first year was on the development and acceptance at
       all levels of a solid strategic planning process and on a thorough
       involvement of senior managers in all stages of the process.
      Senior Management Retreats.

      The  Regional Administrator convened the first strategic planning retreat for
      senior management in December of 1989.  Senior managers gathered for a

-------
                                   17
                                                                     Region II.
                                                                      Strategic
full day's discussion of strategic planning.  Division directors presented an
independent four-year look at what lay ahead within their division in an
attempt to synthesize viewpoints  into an overall vision for the future of the
Region.

The next few times senior managers gathered together as part of the
process, the focus was on the comparative r'sk project, as described above.
Then, in October of 1990, senior managers met for another strategic
planning retreat.  With the results of the comparative risk project finalized,
the concentration was on goals and strategies for the FY-93 plan.  Some of
the specific initiatives presented below actually originated through
discussions begun at the October retreat.

In December of 1990, a third retreat was convened  to discuss strategic
planning.  This  time  managers presented proposals for specific strategic
planning initiatives.  These proposals were discussed  at length and at the
end of the day's meeting divisions rated  of each of the proposals that  had
be^n presented.  Ratings were tallied and considered by the Regional
Administrator and Deputy to determine the set of proposals that then
proceeded for further development via cross-divisional workgroups.  A total
of ten proposals were selected for development.

Initial Development of Proposals.

The proposals presented at the third retreat were developed in  different
ways.  As mentioned above,  some proposals began as discussions  among
division directors and deputies. Some proposals had  been partially
developed  some time prior to the introduction of formalized strategic
planning in the Agency but had not been fully implemented for  the lack of
an appropriate  funding mechanism.  Other proposals  were developed  •
specifically for the strategic planning effort in a single division  at the  branch
chief, section chief or senior  staff levels.

To aid in the development of proposals,  the Office of Policy and
Management produced a comprehensive strategic planning development
package.  The package contained useful documents and information.
Included were  policy and budget  guidance, a  listing of Region II workyears
by program element, listings  of permanent full-time positions by program
element and division, an extensive analysis of current resource utilization by

-------
                                          18
Region II - FT-93
 Strategic Flan
       ranked environmental problem areas,  regional and Headquarters pollution
       prevention guidance, the full Reducing Risk report of the Science Advisory
       Board, and Headquarters media offices and enforcement FY-92  to FY-95
       strategic plans. When the  FY-93 to FY-96 plans from  Headquarters offices
       became available, they were also distributed. Divisions  already had copies
       of the draft executive summary of  the regional comparative risk project and
       draft copies of the many problem area analyses and were asked to utilize
       them in developing their proposals.

       Cross-Divisional Workgroups.

       The subset of ten strategic  planning proposals chosen  by the  RA and DRA
       following the December retreat were  further developed by cross-divisional
       workgroups.  These workgroups each contained from  four to nine
       members drawn from three to six  divisions.   Members of workgroups
       ranged from senior staff to  the deputy division director  levels.  Cross-
       divisional workgroups provided significant benefits to the strategic planning
       effort.

       Some proposals were originally developed within  a single division but had
       potential implications for other program or support offices. Bringing
       participants together  from the divisions resulted in a valuable
       communication and cross-fertilization of ideas. This sharing of techniques
       and data can  have quick positive returns.  For example, the Region II
       Superfund removal program will examine TRI reports to identify companies
       which have stopped reporting as potential removal actions.

       Many strategic planning proposals are multi-media in nature.  This means
       that divisions  which are generally accustomed to working internally must
       increasingly function effectively in conjunction with other divisions.  For
       some  projects the cross-divisional workgroup is the first step  in a process
       of forging lasting multi-media links.

-------
                                  19
                                                                    iejion II  "-5J
                                                                     Strategic Pl«
      should reflect risk-based priorities  in its budget
process."

The environmental improvements envisioned in the  strategic initiatives must
be  carried  through in budget submissions and work plans.   The link
between strategic planning and the budget  process is still evolving.


The Current Relationship  Between Resources and the Rankings.

The first step in bringing resources more in line with high  risk priorities is
an  assessment of the current deployment of resources (workyears and
dollars). Money to fund workyears represents one type of  dollar resources.
The other three types are contracts and interagency agreements, grants
and loans,  and  construction grants.  While somewhat broad, these
categories help describe how resources  are currently distributed to address
risk problem areas.

Below are six bar charts, two for each of the three  types of risk:
ecological,  human  health and welfare.  For  each type of risk,  one chart
shows how Region H's workyears are distributed across risk problem areas
and the other shows how dollars are distributed.  The lengths of the bars
indicate the level of  funding directed toward each problem area in the
current  (FY-91) fiscal year.  The bars are ordered  from  highest ranking
problems at the top  of each chart to lowest ranking problem areas at the
bottom.

The regional comparative risk rankings are not independent of resource
levels. That is  because residual risk has been ranked. After twenty years
of Agency effort, areas that may have originally been high  risk, such as
point sources of water pollution, have been brought under better control
and currently represent a smaller residual risk.  In some cases,
accomplishing this risk reduction has required the infusion  of a high level of
resources over  the years..  In addition, maintaining a low level of residual
risk may require the continuing commitment of a high level of resources.
Thus a problem area may appear to be  out of sync with the  resources
devoted to it. These charts do not predict what might happen to risk if
resources currently addressing any problem area were increased or
decreased.

-------
VERY HIGH
 HIGH
MEDIUM
 LOW
  NOT
 RANKED
  WETLANDS
   LAND USE
   AGIO DEP
 NON-PTWTR
   PESt/APP
   PT WATER
      CFCs
      CSOs
  MOBILE AIR
   AREA AIR
  ACCI PELS
   STATAIR
    RCRA/D
 SUPERFUND
    RCRA/C
      USTs
  DREDGING
   SW-INCIN
   UIC (IV-V)
    SLUDGE
  RADIATION
    UIC (Nil)
WASTEWOOD
    RADON
  PEST/FOOD
    DRWTR
  INDOOR AIR
                             REGION II Fit DISTRIBUTION
                            ECOLOGICAL PROBLEM AREAS
                                   100
                                         200
                                           FTE
300
400

-------
VERY HIGH
   r
 HIGH
MEDIUM
 LOW
   I
 NOT
RANKED
                               REGION II RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION
                                  ECOLOGICAL PROBLEM AREAS
  WETLANDS ••686
   LAND USE |0"
   ACIDDEP |[^1,126
 NON-PTWTR
   PESt/APP
   PT WATER ._	
      CFCs J3295
      CSOs
  MOBILE AJR ,	
   AREA AIR ••! 1.390
  ACCIRELS •••11,701
   STATAIR
     RCRA/D
 SUPERFUND
     RCRA/C
      USTs
  DREDGING ..
   SW-INCIN p414
   UIC(IV-V) PP 1.077
    SLUDGE pHV 1,632
  RADIATION |_109
    UIC (Nil) |B 372
WASTEWOOD
     RADON r--—
  PEST/FOOD IB 526
     DRWTR tpar
  INDOOR AIR to 382
               PC&B AND RELATED
               COSTS
                                  335,925
                                                                                     156,020
                                 5,000
                                      10,000         15,000
                                    ($ IN THOUSANDS)
                         20,000
                          CONTRACTS/ [fjl GRANTS/
                          lAGs
LOANS
CONSTRUCTION
GRANTS

-------
VERY HIGH
 HIGH
MEDIUM
 LOW
  NOT
 RANKED
      CFCs
     RADON
 INDOOR AIR
 MOBILE AIR
   AREA AIR
 SUPERFUND
    RdRA/C
 NON-PTWTR
 PEST/FOOD
   STATAIR
    DRWTR
      CSOs
    RCRA/D
   UIC (IV-V)
  ACCIRELS
   PEST/APP
  PT WATER
      USTs
    SLUDGE
  DREDGING
   SW-INCIN
   ACID DEP
  RADIATION
   UIC (Mil)
WASTEWOOD
   LAND USE
  WETLANDS
                             REGION II FTE DISTRIBUTION
                             COMBINED HEALTH EFFECTS
                                    100
                                          200
                                          FTE
300
                                                                                    400

-------
VERY
HIG
MEDI
•V
LOV
NO'
RAN


CFCs f
HIGH RADON g
INDOOR AIR I
KAflDli c AID •
1 	 — MUtJILt AIH •
,. . ADCA AID •
AHtA AIH m
SUPERRJND 1
RCRA/C 1
H NON-PTWTR |
PEST/FOOD I
STATAIR I
DRWTR I
CSOs H
RCRA/D i
UICMMQ 0
L IM ACCI RELo p
PEST/APP •
PT WATER m
USTs I
SLUDGE &B
DREDGING |
SW-INCIN I
V ACIDDEP E
RADIATION I
uicn-im I
WASTEWOOD I
i AMrt i loir 1
r LANU Uot M
«ED WETLANDS 1
0
• PC&BANDI
COSTS
REGION II RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION 1
COMBINED HEALTH EFFECTS |

5295
11382
• ,| n *»*>•»
^ ....-....:::::•: . - ••.« O.^ILKJ
••01,390

••:lM:!:!:!:!J:!:-.:!KXXX^3) 4.713 I
3526 !
IBBHIBV::-^:::!:::;:::.: :::::!:K 5,796 I i
•• _JI b.29U
•H1."..".."..".."..1.. .I1 ''. |r''i
•01,091
HB1.077 !
snail, 701 i


.

Bf.j:-!!!i!.:;''!-:':'!=:-:-:!:i'-i-!':'';?^'!-:=!-:-i^:-i-!-!-!!i-^) 7 503 !
•••1,632
203
1414
mP 1.126
109
B372 I : !
100
0 !
• 686 i

156,020
335,925
5,000 * 10,000 15,000 20,000
($ IN THOUSANDS)
RELATED mm CONTRACTS/ iiii:!;;:; GRANTS/ xx? CONSTRUCTION
IB lAGs m* LOANS s8% GRANTS



-------
VERY HIGH
  HIGH
 MEDIUM
                               REGION II FTE DISTRIBUTION
                              WELFARE/ECONOMIC RANKING
  LOW
  NOT
 RANKED
 NON-PTWTR
  PT WATER
      CSOs
  LAND USE
  WETLANDS
' INDOOR AIR
  MOBILE AIR
   AREA AIR
   ACID DEP
   STATAIR
  ACCI PELS
    RADON
      CFCs
 SUPERFUND
      USTs
    RCRA/C
    RCrtA/D
 PEST/FOOD
   UIC (IV-V)
  PEST/APP
   SW-lNCIN
    DRWTR
  RADIATION
    SLUDGE
  DREDGING
WASTEWOOD
    UIC (Nil)
                          100
200
  FTE
300
                                                                          400

-------
                          REGION II RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION

                            WELFARE/ECONOMIC RANKING
          NON-PTWTR
            FT WATER
               CSOs
            LAND USE ,-
VERY HIGH   WETLANDS VP 686
    MIUH  INDOOR AIR JP382
           MOBILE AIR
            AREA AIR
            ACID DEP
            STAtAIR
           ACCIRELS
              RADON |i» 1,211
               CFCs
  H GH    SUPERFUND
               USTs
              RCRA/C
              RCRA/D
 MEDIUM
           UHbUUINU  P£WO
  L9W    WASTEWOOD  1100
   '  	    UIC(I-III)  P372
                        1,091
         PEST/FOOD P0526
           UIC(IV-V) PP 1.077
           PEST/APP pW1 1,639
           SW-INCIN 0414
            DRWTR
          RADIATION
            SLUDGE
          DREDGING
 NOT
RANKED
                                  5,000
                                               =!=!===:=!=i=!===:===!===tt=a=!=!;i;:;jii;j;!:!*^
                                                                      116,449
                                                                                        156,020
  10,000           15,000
($ IN THOUSANDS)
            PC&B AND RELATED
            COSTS
                                       CONTRACTS/
                                       IAGS
            GRANTS/
            LOANS
     20,000



CONSTRUCTION
GRANTS

-------
                                         26
   II - FT-93
Strategic Plan
      Note that the workyears addressing three problem areas, Superfund sites,
      point sources .of water pollution and RCRA sites, account for almost two-
      thirds of the  Region's available workyears.  Similarly, approximately 90% of
      the dollars being spent by the  Region in FY-91 are targeted toward point
      sources of water pollution and Superfund sites.

      Also included below is a table showing  the numbers which were  used to
      develop the barcharts, showing the entire distribution of Region II
      resources by problem area.

      Current On-going Regional Initiatives.

      While making the transition  now to formalized strategic planning,  Region II
      has been  allocating resources to address pressing regional environmental
      concerns for  some time. Currently, Region II is engaged in more than  a
      dozen  Regional Initiatives.  In  each case, a small measure of resources has
      been redirected from a national to a regional  priority. In some instances,
      resources are used  to address a problem with a high level of public
      concern, such as floatables.  In o.her instances,  the problems addressed are
      viewed a"  an especially high risk in the Region,  such as the problem of
      point- and non-point pollution in the Great Lakes, which  is being  addressed
      in the Antidegradation Implementation Initiative.  Several  of the Region's
      initiatives focus upon  improving the effectiveness of enforcement  efforts,
      while others  are testing a multi-media approach to enforcement.

      Taken together, these Regional Initiatives account for almost 25 workyears
      during FY-91, and are viewed  as the Region's current exceptions-based
      strategic initiatives.  In addition to these efforts,  the Region is participating
      in several national  initiatives (e.g.,  the Industrial  Toxics and Lead Initiatives).
      A list and brief description of the FY-91  Region II initiatives is presented in
      Appendix  C.  Many of these will continue in place through the period (i.e.,
      FY-93)  covered by this strategic plan.

-------
REGION II DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES BY PROBLEM AREA
                       [$ IN THOUSANDS]
SOURCE GENERAL COSTS PER TOTAL PtlB
PROBLEM FIE* FIE* TOTAL FIE PCtB OTHER SITE t RELATED
AREA (11(21 |1](5l FTEl(l) (11(4) TOTALM1 EXPENSESM) TRAVEL(I) TRAVEL(I) COSTS(I) 15)
GENERAL
PT WATER
CSOs
OR UIR
NON-PT WTR
UIC (t-lll)
UIC (IV-V)
VET LANDS
LAND USE
DREDGING
SLUDGE
WASTEUOOO
RCRA/C
SUPERFUND
RCRA/D
SW-INCIH
UST«
ACCI RELS
PEST/APP
PEST/FOOD
STAT AIR
MOBILE AIR
AREA AIR
ACID DEP
RADON
INDOOR AIR
CFC»
RADIATION

120.5
14.7
22.4
11.6
3.6
10.3
9.5
0.0
3.1
18.7
1.5
98.7
352.1
9.4
2.4
9.9
28.8
10.9
3.4
40.4
11.2
20.4
1.9
5.5
3.5
0.7
1.6
110.45
26.86
3.73
4.99
2.58
o.ai
2.30
2.12
0.00
0.68
4.16
0.33
21.99
10.97
2.08
0.54
1.25
2.87
2.44
0.75
9.01
2.49
4.55
0.41
1.22
0.78
0.15
0.37

147.3
20.5
27.4
U.I
*.S
12.6
11.6
0.0
3.7
22.8
1.8
120.7
363.1
11.4
3.0
11.1
31.6
13.4
4.1
49.4
13.7
25.0
2.3
6.7
4.3
0.8
2.0

47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
40.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
47.
«6.974.9 .
S969.0
•1.2V6.7
1669.2
•210.7
•598.6
•549.9
to.o
*176.6
•1,081.3
U6.8
t5.711.8
•17.664.5
1541.3
»141.2
•528.4
•1.497.0
•633.3
•195.7
•2,339.2
•647.2
•1.182.1
•107.1
•317.2
•703.2
•38.2
•94.9

•738.2
•102.6
•137.2
•70.8
•22.1
•63.4
•58. 2
•0.0
• 18.7
•114.4
•9.2
S604.
•1.392.
•57.
•14.
•50.
•136.1
•67.0
•20.7
•247.6
•68.5
•125.1
• 11.3
•33.6
•21.5
M.O
•10.0

•123.8
•45.0
•95.1
•11.1
•9.8
•27.8
•25.5
•0.0
•8.2
•50.2
•4.0
•265.2
•773.0
•25.1
•6.6
•58.0
•68.2
•29.4
•9.1
•108.6
•10.0
•54.9
•5.0
•14.7
•9.4
•1.8
•4.4

(0.0
•0.0
•0.0
•0.0
•0.0
•0.0
•0.0
•0.0
to.o
M.O
•0.0
•50.0
•377.2
•0.0
•0.0
•0.0
to.o
.to.o
to.o
to.o
to.o
10.0
•0.0
•0.0
to.o
to.o
•0.0

•8.037
•1.117
•1.529
•771
1241
•690
•6)4
10
(203
•1,246
(100
(6,6)1
•20.208
1624
•163
•636
•1.701
•no
1225
•2.695
•746
•1.362
• 123
•366
•234
144
•109
CONTRACTS GRANTS/
|6| LOANS (6)
•1.922
•762
• 110
•22
1147
170
•211
•48
10
to
•372
SO
•1.891
•127.827
•152
(0
•70
to
S3
to
• 10
•a
•a
so
so
so
•0
u
•446
•7,871
•70
•3 ,719
M.071
159
•176
•4
SO
SO
•14
SO
t7,927
•7,985
•315
•251
•6,797
SO
•904
•301
•3,091
•2,509
•20
•1,003
•845
•148
•251
•0
CONSTRUCT
GRANTS (6)
•0
•319,255
•2.898
SO
•1,724
SO
to
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
•0
10
•0
SO
•0
to
so
so
so
so
so
so
to
so
so
SOURCE
TOTAL
S2.367
•335.925
•4,195
•5.290
•4,713
•172
•1.076
»6M
•0
•203
•1.632
•100
•16.430
•156,019
•1.090
•414
•7,504
•1,702
•1.638
•527
•5,796
•3,262
•1.390
•1,127
•1,211
•382
•295
•109
     •44.456.0    •4.200.2   »2,083.9   S427.2     S51.167  »133.635   S46.796 •323,877  S553.108
TOTALS     818.58  110.45   929.0
S1E        450.96  100.58   551.5
SF         363.02    9.87   372.9
LUST         4.60    0.00     4.6

ID     FT-91 OAT*.

(21     INCLUDE* ALL RESOURCES DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PROBLEM AREA.

(31     GENERAL CATEGORY INCLUDES MANAGEMENT,  HUMAN RESOURCES.  ETC.  THIS CATEGORY PRORATED ACROSS OTHERS BY PERCENTAGE OF RESOURCES IN EACH
        APPROPRIATION IN EACN  PROBLEM AREA.

(41     REPRESENT AVERAGE FT-91  KM COSTS PER FTE BY APPROPRIATION.

(51     RELATED COSTS INCLUDE  TRAVEL. SITE SPECIFIC TRAVEL, AND OTHER EXPENSES.

(6)     FY-90 DATA.,

-------
                                         28
Region II FT-93
 Stmejlc flan
       "EPA's annual budget should more directly reflect risk-
       based priorities."

       The strategic planning effort undertaken by Region II for FY-93 has not
       been a redesign  of the regional operating plan from the ground up.  It is
       instead a fine-tuning of a national budget to reflect regional priorities.  The
       Headquarters FY-93 National Strategic Plans are the foundation for the
       Region II  plan. The ten investments in Appendix A are presented as
       proposed exceptions to the  national program plans.

       These resource shifts were developed within a number of required
       constraints consistent with Agency guidance.  Chief among these was  a
       requirement that resources not be shifted from one appropriation to
       another.  (The three appropriations involving workyears are Salaries and
       Expenses  [S&E],  Superfund and LUST; the two principal non-workyear
       appropriations are Abatement, Control and Compliance and Construction
       Grants.)  The second major  constraint prevented shifts within the S&E
       appropriation from one medium to another. (The four principle S&E media
       are air and  radiation, water, RCRA and pesticides and  toxic substances.)
       For instance, RCRA resources could not be used to address indoor air.
       Finally, the overall levels of dollars and workyears could not be changed;
       no conversion from one to the other was possible.

       Notwithstanding these  constraints, the strategic shifts envisioned in this plan
       retarget approximately 75 workyears.  In  combination with the Regional
       Initiatives  discussed above, investments in  regional priorities will account for
       approximately one-tenth  of the regional workyear total.


      Regional Strategic Investment Themes.

      Prior to the  development of strategic proposals, Region ll's managers were
      given four principles on which to base their plans.  The first, and most
      important  principle to be followed was that any shift in resources should
      act to reduce the  overall level of environmental risk.  Each of the Region's
      ten proposals will  do this. A full understanding of the risk reduction
      potential of the plan can best be gained by a review of the individual
      proposals themselves, as presented in Appendix A.  The three other

-------
                                   29
                                                                      Bejion II FT-93
                                                                       Strategic Plan
principles that guided the development of proposals are discussed in turn
below.

Pollution Prevention.

The Agency's January 1991 guidance lays out a hierarchy of activities that
are defined as "pollution prevention."  Using this definition,  seven of the
Region's ten proposals include a pollution prevention element to reduce
risk.  Three of these six  initiatives seek to prevent the pollution of aquifers.
One proposal will result in the development of individual primary aquifer
protection plans that will identify threats to  groundwater and means to
curtail those threats.  Another proposal will  require audits of facilities with
subsurface hazardous waste conveyance systems and develop pollution
prevention alternatives for  remediating high risk releases. A third proposal
prevents pollution to groundwater and other media through an intensive
review of RCRA Biennial Reports  to  identify and follow through on pollution
prevention opportunities.

A proposal to clean up metropolitan air has a number of pollution
prevention aspects.  State vehicle  inspection and maintenance  programs will
be  strengthened.  Transportation  control measures leading to fewer vehicle
miles driven will be developed. And perhaps most importantly, a major
clean fuels project will begin.

Finally, three proposals will undertake pollution prevention primarily to
reduce ecological risk. The distinctive habitats component of the Caribbean
Water Initiative will prevent pollution of some  of the Region's most  unique
ecosystems.  A non-point water source project will reduce nutrient loadings
to the Long Island Sound.  The Great Lakes initiative prevents  toxics
loadings to that valuable water system.

Multi-media Efforts.

There are six proposals  that involve  the cooperation of more than one
program office.  These types of efforts are viewed as especially important
in  breaking down the current level of compartmentalization that
characterizes the Agency and  in addressing  the complex environmental
problems  the Agency faces now and in coming years.

-------
                                         30
Hion II  FT-93
 Strategic fl»n
       In the aquifer protection and the Great Lakes projects, efforts from every
       program office in the Region will be redirected to provide a special
       emphasis in specific geographic areas.  Similarly, two proposals in the
       Superfund program, one in the removal program and one utilizing a  non-
       NPL enforcement strategy, will combine efforts with one or more other
       program offices to clean-up abandoned hazardous waste sites.

       The Superfund removal proposal and two proposals in the Region's RCRA
       program will utilize expertise, Toxic Releases Inventory (TRI) data and data
       generated in programs other than Superfund and RCRA to aid in the
       identification of violators or potential violators.

       Geographic Initiatives.

       Resources are shifted to target specific geographic areas in six of the ten
       proposals presented below.  In the air initiative that means a focus on the
       New York metropolitan area.   All four proposals in the water program,
       focus on  specific geographic areas. One will focus on the Great Lakes.
       Another will target resources in coastal areas including the Long  Island
       Sound, the New York Bight, the  New York/New Jersey Harbor and the
       Delaware Estuary.  A third water proposal deals with a variety of water
       issues in the Caribbean. The fourth water proposal will successively
       address specific primary aquifer areas in Region  II.  The initiative in the
       Superfund removal proposal will  initially target its facility identification
       efforts on a pilot project probably in Newark, New Jersey.

       Other Emergent Themes.

       Without specific central direction, other common themes  have naturally
       emerged  from  the various  strategic planning proposals.  For instance, some
       of these proposals are extensions of successful pilot programs or strategies
       that have already been  implemented on a smaller scale in the Region.  The
       Great Lakes program and the non-NPL enforcement strategy are  two
       examples. Also, although proposals are for FY-93 resource shifts, none of
       these projects will wait for FY-93 to begin implementation.  All have
       already begun some activities or will by the end of FY-91.

       Finally, it should be noted that all of the  Region's ten proposals are multi-
       year in nature.  Some proposals will develop programs to  be put

-------
                                   31
                                                                        II  rr-53
                                                                      Strangle Plan
permanently in place.  Others will extend their efforts for a number of
years before completion of the project objectives.

A variety of innovative tools for accomplishing environmental objectives
have been suggested in this first year of strategic planning.  For instance,
some of the proposals go beyond traditional boundaries for enforcement of
environmental statutes. For example, the non-NPL enforcement strategy
seeks to utilize the CERCLA authority to effect area-wide, multi-media
cleanups of non-NPL sites. A proposal based on the RCRA statute will
remediate and prevent releases from subsurface hazardous waste
conveyance systems.

A number of proposals will use outreach techniques to foster cooperation
with State and local authorities.  One example is the development of a
clean fuels infrastructure in cooperation with New York and New  Jersey
metropolitan officials.  Another example is the Caribbean water initiative
which will seek to develop partnerships with Commonwealth  and Territory
officials  to achieve two broad  goals:  improve drinking  water in the
Caribbean and protect unique ecosystems.

Another technique which  is utilized by a number of proposals  is the
reprioritization of effort based on risk.  In some cases this means  a ranking
of potential  inspection or  permittee rosters based on risk.  In  other cases it
means focusing a multi-media enforcement effort in a high vulnerability
geographic area.  A few proposals will use geographic information systems
to increase the level of understanding about a problem  and to target
protection efforts.

Regional Strategic Disinvestment Themes.

Only one  principle  governed the development of areas for disinvestment.
The increase in risk that is expected to result from a disinvestment should
be  less  than the decrease in risk that results from the paired investment.
All  of the  proposals put forward here will accomplish this.  In addition,
once disinvestments were-.identified, a number of themes emerged.

Many disinvestments continue the devolution of program activities from
federal to  state responsibility.  In some cases, this means a decreased
emphasis in state oversight. This seems to be a somewhat natural result as

-------
                                       32
   II - n-93
Strategic Flan
      state programs continue to mature and federal authorities continue to gain
      confidence in state abilities.  Total Quality Management principles are also
      in evidence in the reduction of the number of reviews that are required in
      certain programs.

      Other disinvestments primarily represent within-media reprioritization of
      efforts in enforcement or permitting.  These reprioritizations are on the
      basis of risk:  either  as a multi-media effort or through geographic targeting.

      Finally a couple of disinvestments result from the completion of certain
      program activities. The completion of these activities allow for the
      previously dedicated resources to be  retargeted toward  high risk areas.


      "EPA should improve  the data and analytical methodologies
      that support the assessment, comparison and reduction of
      different environmental risks."

      The Region  II FY-93 strategic plan attempts to achieve a few broad goals.
      The first goal, and one in which much progress has already  been achieved,
      is the development of a solid strategic planning process  and acceptance of
      the process  at all  levels of the  organization.  The primary ecological goal in
      this plan.is the improvement of the quality of the Region's major water
      bodies and protection of related habitat.  The major health goals include
      improvement in the quality of New York/New Jersey metropolitan air and
      increased protection  and more efficient remediation of the Region's
      important groundwater resources.
     Environmental Indicators.

     Setting goals is generally only effective to the degree which progress
     toward those goals can be measured.  The increasing focus on risk in the
     Agency has the added benefit of redirecting attention  from an inward
     examination of administrative success to an outward looking view toward
     environmental improvement.  Each of the ten proposals that make up this
     strategic plan  will be tracked for administrative progress and environmental
     results.  This will require the development of new environmental indicators
     of progress.  This is a complex, long-term task.   By way of illustration, it is

-------
                                   33
                                                                          II FY-T
                                                                       Strategic tlao
a relatively quick and easy task to count the number of air permits written
in the Region in a given year.  It is much more difficult to monitor air
quality throughout the Region for all substances of concern released to air.
And it is even more difficult to make the linkages between ambient
pollutant levels and ecological or human health.

Nonetheless, it is environmental improvements, not  administrative
accomplishments that are ultimately important.  These types of data are
also more informative to the general public and legislators. For these
reasons,  progress in achieving the Region's environmental  goals will
increasingly be measured in non-administrative units. The proposals below
each  list  either specific environmental indicators or a description  of some
areas of environmental quality that relate to the activities  that are proposed.
The environmental  indicator program in  Region II is  just beginning.  Its full
development and implementation will take place as  we move into the FY-
93 operating year.

Future Directions for  Strategic Planning.

Over the coming years,  Region II's strategic planning process will continue
to evolve.  In FY-92, the Region will undertake the development of a four
year strategic plan covering FY-94 through FY-97. The  Region will also
prepare a regional mission statement; perform a critical issues  analysis to
identify regional strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats; and
declare region-wide strategic goals.

The process will benefit  in its second year from a wider dispersal of
comparative risk and strategic planning information.  This will be true
within the Region, where documents relevant to these  two processes will
receive increasingly wider distribution. This will  allow for  earlier
involvement in strategic planning in coming years by a  wider range of
participants.

This information will also be communicated to the Region's State,
Commonwealth and Territorial partners.   By working with these  authorities,
the Region should be able to strengthen its plan and make more efficient
use of its limited resources.

-------
                                           34
Region II  FT-93
 Strategic Flan
       Finally,  the strategic plan from Region II will be distributed to the other
       nine EPA regional offices and strategic plans from each of these offices will
       be read by Region II.  Many of the activities, strategies and data sources
       discussed in  these plans could be utilized effectively by more than one
       region.   The exchange of this kind of information should lead to further
       improvements in the Agency's ability to protect the environment.

-------
   APPENDIX A
    Region ll's
       Ten
Strategic Proposals

-------
                                                                   Segion II  FT-93
                                                                    Strategic Plan
             MULTI-MEDIA AQUIFER PROTECTION PROJECT
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

The New York Department of Environmental Conservation has designated a
number of Primary Aquifers throughout the State.  The New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection is currently mapping aquifers.  EPA
has designated many Sole Source Aquifers (SSAs) in Region II. These
aquifers are principal sources of drinking water for  local populations, and in
many cases, have areas of high vulnerability to groundwater contamination.

Groundwater was  not ranked by the comparative risk workgroup as a
separate problem area.  However, groundwater threats from a number of
problem areas led  to their individual ranking of high in the  human health
risk and/or the welfare  effects categories.  These problem areas include
underground storage tanks, Superfund  sites, RCRA  sites, underground
injection wells and municipal  landfills.  An analysis of the  comparative risk
results showed that had groundwater been a separate proolem area, it
would have ranked in high or very high categories  for both human health
and welfare effects.

With a variety of threats to such an important resource, a multi-media
effort for the remediation and protection of groundwater  is needed.

B.  Goals and Measurable Objectives

Region II will undertake multi-media aquifer protection projects throughout
the Region in an effort to more effectively target resources  to the
geographic areas of greatest human-health risk and resource vulnerability.
1 he retargeting of  resources toward vulnerable aquifers serving large
population clusters will result in significant risk reduction benefits through
the identification and elimination of threats to the groundwater supplies.

The objectives of this  proposal are to prevent groundwater  contamination
incidents by identifying sources  of  groundwater contamination, to take
appropriate enforcement and  remedial  program actions against these

-------
                                   38

sources, to develop local groundwater protection plans, and to enhance the
knowledge of local officials and citizens about groundwater protection
issues through training and the distribution of educational materials.

By the end of FY-93 Region II expects to have achieved or made significant
progress against these objectives  at two  sole source or primary aquifers.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

The approach that will be used in developing and implementing
the multi-media protection projects includes Doth the traditional actions of
EPA's regulatory programs and non-traditional activities such as providing
technical assistance in  the development of a local ground water protection
program.

Implementation  of this project will entail a two-phased approach.
Phase I  will begin in FY-91 and will encompass the development and
initiation of a pilot project in the  Cortland Primary Aquifer system  in New
York State, and  the collection end review of background materials for other
aquifers within the Region.  During this phase regional staff will work with
state and  local representatives to identify their roles in  potential future
projects.

Phase II of the project will begin  in FY-92. During this phase, the
combined divisional staffs will initiate additional aquifer
protection projects based on the  results  of the Cortland study,  and the
outcome of the  background investigations for  the other
aquifers of interest.

Once the background  information is collected, the aquifers will be
prioritized for future action based on the following criteria:

     Location, geology and hydrology of the aquifer;
     Resource vulnerability-
     Population served;
     Existing ground water contamination problems;
     The interest of local officials; and
     The extent EPA can make a difference.

-------
                                   39
D.  Measures of Progress

The activities proposed for Region II's Water Management Division (WMD)
are not currently tracked administratively.  However, there are STARS
commitments for many of the proposed activities of the Emergency and
Remedial Response Division (ERRD) and Air and  Waste Management
Division (AWMD).

Environmental indicators  of progress  in groundwater protection may
include:

      Exceedances of maximum contaminant levels at public water
      supplies (PWS),
      The extent of contamination at hazardous waste sites,
      The frequency of volatile organic compound detection,
      Nitrate levels, and
      Pesticide levels.

The Region  will work with local officials to develop methods for tracking
these indicators.

II. OPERATIONAL PLAN

A. FY-93 Activities

During FY-93 the following activities  will be initiated for an aquifer site
within the Region:

1.    Identifying,  inspecting and/or permitting  all RCRA facilities.   Providing
      pollution prevention technical assistance to the regulated community.

2.    Conducting appropriate enhanced Preliminary Assessment/Visual Site
      Inspections for generators of hazardous waste.

3.    Inventorying and inspecting Underground Storage  Tanks.  Conducting
      appropriate enforcement referrals.

-------
                                   40

4.    Providing treatment, and completing remedial activities at Superfund
      sites.

5.    Screening potential Superfund sites to determine their Hazardous
      Ranking Score and eligibility for listing on the NPL  Conducting Site
      Investigations,  if necessary.

6.    Undertaking Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures program
      activities within designated aquifer areas. Completing an inventory of
      all SPCC  regulated facilities within the aquifer area.  Conducting
      inspections  of  20% of the  identified  facilities.

7.    Prioritizing assessments under the Groundwater Task  Force Strategic
      Initiative for NPL sites.

8.    Inventorying Underground Injection  wells, particularly Class V wells.
      Informing owners of their  regulatory responsibilities.  Taking follow-
      up enforcement actions.

9.    Working  with  local officials on  conducting and reviewing PWS
      inspections, and taking appropriate enforcement action.

10.   Providing technical assistance to local officials in developing
      groundwater management and wellhead protection  plans.

11.   Conducting activities related to a Geographic Information Systems
      application for the selected site.

12.   Inventorying and inspecting facilities with respect to emission issues
      concerning  compliance with the Clean Air Act.  (To accomplish full
      multi-media inspections in  the Cortland area.)

13.   Developing and distributing groundwater protection educational
      materials.

-------
                                  41

B.  Resource Implications

Successful implementation of this project will, require the following regional
resource commitments:

   Organization      Workyear Resources Needed

Ground Water Management       1.8
Underground  Injection Control     2.6
Public Water Supply              1.1
Water Standards and Planning     0.5
ERRD (Superfund)                 0.6
AWM (Air & RCRA)               3/L

Total                             9.7
Estimate of Contractor Support Dollars to be Expended:

Cleanup of 1 NPL Site                       $15,000,000
Oversight of 1 NPi Site                          150,000
Superfund Site Investigations                      130,000
CIS Activities                                    100,000
SPCC Inspections                                   1,000

These resource implications will not require the shifting of personnel in the
organizational structure, but will require reassignment  of work.  Following is
an analysis for each organization:

Ground Water Management - Approximately 1.8 workyears are currently
allocated for reviews,  implementation and oversight of state wellhead
protection programs.  One of these workyears are being utilized in FY-91
to initiate the Cortland groundwater pilot.  In FY-93, an additional 0.8
workyears will be diverted from review and oversight  activities and invested
in this project.

-------
                                   42
Underground Injection Control -  Inspection, permit application/closure
plans and enforcement resources will be concentrated on implementing this
aquifer protection project.

Public Water Supply - Mobilization and program management resources
within the PWS program element will  be focused toward this initiative.

Water Standards and Planning - It is anticipated that the current Inter-
governmental Personnel Agreement with the Soil Conservation  Service will
continue into FY-93  and these individuals will  perform the activities
associated with the non-point source issues of groundwater protection
planning.

The Environmental Services Division -  It will have 0.1  workyears available
to this initiative  to provide technical assistance regarding any  pesticides
issues that may  require resolution. This will not require a shift of
resources.

Emergency and  Remedial  Response Division - A total of 0.6 workyear^ will
be  expended toward achieving the objectives  of this project.  Most of the
activities proposed for the  Cortland project are currently being completed,
or are planned,  by the Division, and it is expected that similar  activities will
be  undertaken  in another aquifer area in FY-93.  For example,  the EPA-
lead Superfund site in Cortland County is currently being investigated and
the Division will be completing an inventory of the SPCC facilities within
the aquifer area.  There will  be a disinvestment of resources  from
inspecting SPCC facilities at other locations within New York State's DEC
Region 7, to inspect the Cortland  County sites.

Air and Waste Division - A total of 3.1  workyears will be available to carry
out the air, RCRA and UST portions of the activities in the Cortland pilot
project for FY-91.  In FY-93 resources  for the  project will be available from
lesser priority enforcement, lesser priority  corrective actions, redirected
from other initiatives, and a reduction  of state oversight inspections.

-------
                                   43

    CROSS-CUTTING  ISSUES
A.  Integrated Planning

The proposed aquifer protection project is a pollution prevention effort.
The development of a local ground water protection program, technical
transfer of pollution prevention information by the RCRA program
personnel and the distribution of educational materials are all concentrated
efforts to prevent future groundwater pollution incidents.

Also, the  Underground  Injection Control  program inspections and
enforcement actions should reduce volatile organic contaminants and metals
which include some of  the TRI target list of chemicals.

B. Policy  Issues

There are no issues that represent significant departure from current
national policy.

-------
                                                                   'Strategic Plan

         MULTI-MEDIA RISK REDUCTION IN THE GREAT LAKES
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

The international waterways of the Great Lakes are o* tremendous
ecological and economic value and warrant a special federal presence.  The
most serious environmental problem in the Great Lakes is the
bioaccumulation of persistent toxic substances in the food web.  These
persistent toxic substances result in considerable ecological and human
health  impacts.

The primary pathway of human exposure for toxics in the Great Lakes is
through the consumption of fish.  For  example, the consumption of 2.5
million pounds of Lake Ontario drinking water provides  the same dose of
PCBs as the consumption of 1 pound of Lake Trout from  Lake Ontario.
Therefore, the health risks to sub-populations that consume Great Lakes
fish as  a substantial part of  their diets (e.g., anglers or Native Americans)
are extremely  high.  In addition, the elevated levels of persistent toxics in
the Great Lakes have been  shown, through  numerous studies, to have
significant adverse  effects on top predator fish and wildlife species
throughout the food web.

The Four Parties (Environment Canada, USEPA, the Ontario Ministry of
Environment, and the New  York State  Department of Environmental
Conservation) currently have  in place Toxics Management Plans for the
Niagara River and  Lake Ontario.  Region II will  oversee  implementation of
these plans, and beginning  in FY-93, will participate in the development of
similar plans for Lake Erie and the St. Lawrence River.  The successful
implementation of  these plans requires a focused multi-media effort in the
Great Lakes basin.

B.  Goals and  Measurable Objectives

The goal of the Lake Ontario Toxics Management Plan is to implement
pollution prevention  programs and pollution reduction controls so that
unlimited consumption  of Lake Ontario water and fish is possible without

-------
                                   46
adverse health impacts.  Similar goals would be appropriate for the St.
Lawrence River and Lake Erie.

The measurable objectives for the Niagara River and Lake Ontario  are to
establish chemical-specific reductions based on exceedances of standards or
criteria for water column or fish tissue. Ecosystem objectives, once
adopted, will provide  quantitative measures for ecosystem  health.  Both
chemical-specific objectives and  ecosystem objectives and indicators for
Lake Erie and the St.  Lawrence  River would also be developed.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

Region II will target resources to achieve the greatest risk reduction in the
Great Lakes ecosystem.  The plan will  address all source categories within
Region II contributing toxics to Lake Erie,  the  Niagara River, Lake Ontario
and the St. Lawrence River, with particular emphasis on:

      Non-point sources (especially in-place sediments);
      Air emissions;
      Active hazardous waste sites;
      Abandoned hazardous waste sites;
      Municipal point source discharges; and
      Industrial discharges (both direct and indirect).

All of these source categories received high risk rankings (health, ecological
and/or welfare)  in the Region II Risk Ranking  Project.

D.  Measures of Progress

Measures of progress will include:

      The continued updating of the Niagara River and  Lake Ontario Toxics
      Management Plans, including the development of mass balance
      models for persistent toxic substances of concern, the development
      of a consistent set of adequately  protective water quality standards
      and  the development of ecosystem  indicators.

-------
                                  47

      The implementation of those plans through focused multi-media
      federal and state permitting, inspection and enforcement efforts.
      These include the expedited clean-up of the twenty active and
      inactive hazardous waste sites contributing 99% of the U.S. load of
      toxics to the Niagara River from hazardous waste sites/ the
      incorporation of water-quality based  effluent limits in SPDES permits
      based on the results of mass balance modeling, the incorporation  in
      SPDES permits of anti-degradation limits for persistent toxics, and
      multi-media, geographically targeted  enforcement actions.

      The development of analogous Toxics Management Plans for Lake
      Erie and the St. Lawrence  River.

II.  OPERATIONAL PLAN

A.  FY-93 Activities

In FY-93,  Region II will be engaged  in a number of activities related to the
implementation of the  Niagara River and Lake Ontario Toxics Management
Plans, and the development of plans for the St. Lawrence and Lake Erie.

Niagara River and Lake Ontario

      Continue implementation of the Niagara River and Lake Ontario
      Toxics Management Plans.

      Conduct comprehensive monitoring of toxic loadings and
      ambient concentrations in  Lake Ontario (this will begin in  FY-
      92 and continue, through FY-93).

      Expand geographic  information systems activities to map toxic
      loadings in a wider area.

-------
                                   48

St. Lawrence River and Lake Erie

These activities will be undertaken in coordination with Region  III:

      Establish a formal structure of committees to undertake the project
      activities and involve public and private stakeholders;

      Gather and assess relevant program information and data from all
      agencies involved in drafting the management plans;

      Secure commitments to  undertake joint and individual agency
      activities and track progress; and

      Report progress and refine the management plans,  accordingly.

B.  Resource Implications

The  resources,  by Division, required to support this initiative are:

Investment

Water Management Division

Niagara Frontier Program Office/Director's Office - Coordination of plan
development and implementation.
      Total:  8 workyears

Water Standards and Planning  Branch - Development and implementation
of water quality standards and antidegradation policy.
     Total:  2 workyears

Marine and  Wetlands  Protection Branch -  Remediation of contaminated
sediment; regulation of dredged material disposal.
     Total:  1 workyear

Water Permits and Compliance Branch - Permitting and enforcement for
direct and indirect industrial discharges.
     Total:  1.5 workyear

-------
                                   49

New York/New Jersey Municipal Programs Branch -  Permitting and
enforcement for municipal discharges.
     Total: 1 workyear

Environmental Services Division  - Extension of ESD's role in the existing
Toxics  Management Plans to the additional basins, and more intensive
involvement in the Lake  Ontario monitoring effort.
     Total: 4.5 workyears

Emergency and Remedial Response Division - Continuation of  existing
allocation of 3 workyears to WMD for Lake Ontario/Niagara River waste
site work; allocation of additional 1 workyear to give priority attention to
sites in the  additional basins, and to coordinate with other  Divisions on
pollution prevention before  negotiations.
     Total: 1 workyear

Air and Waste Management Division
Compliance, enforcement and pollution prevention initiatives at key air
sources of toxics  (1.5 workyears); fast-tracking priority RCRA facilities for
permitting, compliance/enforcement, and pollution prevention (2.6
workyears); and focusing Underground Storage Tank resources on Great
Lakes tanks (0.6 workyears).
     Total: 4.7 workyears

Office  of Policy and Management
Compliance, enforcement and pollution prevention initiatives at key federal
facilities.
     Total:  .25 workyear

Total Estimated Resources:  24 workyears

-------
                                  50

Disinvestment

These resources will come from disinvestments in core program activities:

Water Management Division                 Workyears

Niagara Frontier Program/Director's Office will continue
to utilize 2 dedicated Great Lakes workyears,
as follows-
Niagara River Toxics Management Plan              1.0
Lake Ontario Toxics Management Plan              1.0

New York/New Jersey Municipal Programs Branch-
Shift of Construction Grants resources to support
permitting/enforcement activities with reduction
in OWAS commitments                            1.0

Water  Permits and Compliance Branch-
Geographic targeting of existing permitt'ng/
enforcement  achieved through efficiency in
oversight of state programs                        1.5

Water  Standards and Planning Branch-
Shift in  Ocean Dumping Ban Act position           1.0
Geographic targeting within program elements
with STARS/OWAS implications                    1.0

Marine  & Wetlands Protection Branch-
Shift in  Ocean Dumping Ban Act position           1.0

Environmental Services Division

Continued shift from ESD's support of other
water program  activities                            2.0

Emergency and Remedial  Response Division

Continuation  of existing shift of resources

-------
                                   51

from site-specific activities                          3.0

Geographic focus of Remedial Actions              1.0

Air and Waste Management  Division

Shift from  similar air activities outside the Great
Lakes, and partial disinvestment from Rule Effectiveness
Study                                             1.5

Reduction  of activities for low priority RCRA
facilities in the Niagara River and Lake Ontario
basins                                            2.6

Shift of UST resources from  areas                  0.6
outside the Great Lakes

Office of Policy and Management

Shift from  activities at other  federal facilities        0.25

The Offices of External Programs and Regional Counsel are expected to
continue support for the initiative at their existing resource levels.

Total Estimated Disinvestment:                     18.5 workyears
The Region has a resource shortfall of 5.5 workyears which will require
additional resources or a reduction of Great Lakes project activities.
Additional resources are being sought from the Great Lakes National
Program Office (GLNPO).  If not received, the  Region would reduce its
support to the following activities:

      Development of the' Lake Erie and  St. Lawrence River
      Management Plans (2 workyears);

      Addressing habitat issues as identified in the Lake  Ontario Plan
      (1 workyear);

-------
                                   52
      Minimal involvement of the monitoring services provided by
      ESD beyond existing efforts (2.5 workyears);

III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A.  Integrated Planning

A regional multi-program workgroup has been formed to develop strategies
to address the persistent toxics problems in the  Niagara River, Lake Ontario
and eventually Lake Erie and the St. Lawrence River.  These strategies will
integrate cross-cutting initiatives, where  appropriate.  One of the first tasks
of the workgroup is to crosswalk the various programs' target chemical
lists, including the  priority chemicals identified for Lake Ontario, to identify
areas of overlap.  Similarly, the program workgroup members will identify
where cross-cutting and program-specific initiatives  can be applied to the
Great Lakes in a way that maximizes the use of scarce resources.

Looking ahead, Region ll's Great Lakes program  will expand beyond end-
of-pipe controls to incorporate pollution prevention activities to the toxics
management plans.

Also, the Great Lakes activities are/will be fully coordinated  with GLNPO,
Region V and Region  III, as well as  Canada and  New  York State.

B.  Policy Issues

No departures from current agency policy are foreseen at this time.

-------
                                                                  Region II  FT-«
                                                                   Strategic Elan
                  THE CARIBBEAN WATER INITIATIVE
The Caribbean Water Initiative is a set a four modules designed to address
various water issues in Puerto  Rico and the Virgin Islands.  Together these
four modules will attempt to reduce habitat alteration and prevent pollution
caused by wastewater discharge and development practices, and to
improve drinking water quality in  the Caribbean. The four modules that
follow are the Caribbean Distinctive Habitats Module, the PRASA
Compliance Module, the Virgin Islands Wastewater Treatment Module and
the Small Drinking Water Systems in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands
Module.

-------
                                   54

              CARIBBEAN DISTINCTIVE  HABITATS MODULE
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

The Caribbean Distinctive Habitats initiative has been developed to address
the ecological problem of habitat alteration and destruction. Comparative
risk projects in all of EPA's ten regions ranked physical degradation of
water/wetland habitats and physical degradation of terrestrial
ecosystems/habitats among the greatest ecological threats to the
environment.  This high risk-ranking was also highlighted in the Science
Advisory Board's (SAB) report which stated 'The aggregate impacts [from
habitat alteration] amount to an  unacceptable loss  of ecological resources,
and the irreversible nature of the impacts on biological diversity and
ecological productivity requires a major programmatic emphasis across all
governmental organizations."  Specifically, this initiative is targeted to
mitigate negative human impacts to coral  reefs, mangrove ecosystems,
seagrass beds, and phosphorescent bays in Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands.

The ecological and economic importance of aquatic habitats such as coral
reefs and  mangrove ecosystems  have been well documented.  Coral reefs,
which  are located off the  coasts  of both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin
Islands, are important as habitats for various marine species, as tourist
attractions, and as break-waters  that  aid in storm protection. Mangrove
ecosystems provide habitat for various marine species, including
commercially valuable species of fish, lobsters, crabs,  mussels,  and oysters.

These fragile ecosystems are being seriously degraded by human activity
throughout the Wider Caribbean Region.  The primary sources of pollution
are sedimentation from  land-use practices, nutrient loadings from
agriculture and  municipal waste,  toxic loadings from  industrial sources and
pesticides from  agricultural practices.  In addition,  mangrove swamps are
being filled for coastal development projects.

-------
                                   55

B.  Coals and Measurable Objectives

The long-term goal of this plan is to preserve the biodiversity provided by
distinctive habitats such as the coral reefs, seagrasses,  mangroves and
phosphorescent bays of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands for future
generations.  To achieve this goal the  Region wil' assist in the development
of an integrated environmental management program  based on  sustainable
development principles.

The measurable objectives include:

      Characterization and long-term monitoring  of distinctive habitats;

      In coordination with local and federal agencies, development of
      a Pollution Prevention and Control Program (PPCP);

      Implementation of the  PPCP in pristine areas;

      Prevention of point ar d non-point sources  of pollution (e.g.,
      sediment,  nutrient and toxic loadings) that  would have adverse
      impacts on the identified pristine areas.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

Many local and  federal agencies are involved with assessing and managing
the marine resources of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.  However,
there is no one agency with overall responsibility for protecting these
fragile habitats.  The approach the Region  will take to implement this  plan
is to provide a strong.coordinating  role with appropriate organizations. The
aim is to ensure that resources are leveraged to  the maximum extent
possible, and that programs impacting  these distinctive habitats are fully
integrated at the local, state, federal and international  levels.

The Region will  place  increased emphasis on National  Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) reviews, Clean Water Act §404 fill permit  application reviews,
and the review  of State Operating or Planning Grants. These strategies will
be  complemented by a program to strengthen local institutional controls.  It
is proposed that an Intergovernmental Coordinating Committee be

-------
                                   56

established for this plan which would be responsible for developing a
Pollution Prevention and Control Plan (PPCP) and overseeing its
implementation.

To assist in the development of the PPCP, a characterization of these
distinctive habitats, related land-use patterns and pollution sources, will be
developed primarily from existing sources of information.  From this
characterization, habitats ranging from severely impacted to pristine will be
delineated.  Based on this classification, and on  additional criteria to be
established by the Intergovernmental Coordinating Committee, several pilot
projects in the associated watersheds of pristine areas  will be initiated.

D.  Measures of Progress

Administrative measures:

      Complete the  Pollution Prevention Control Plan (in English and
      Spanish).

      Implement the PPCP in pristine areas.

      Review all local environmental impact statements and
    '  environmental assessments for proposed development  projects
      that are in geographical proximity to these pristine  habitats.

      Review all industrial and municipal permits in coastal zones (this
      measure is integrated with  the proposed PRA5A  Compliance
      Module).

Ecological measures:

Proposed  measures to assess changes in community structures and pristine
habitats may  include:

      Acreage of pristine habitats,

      Cubic yards dredged and/or filled in pristine habitats, and

-------
                                   57

      Ambient water quality (e.g., nutrient, sediment, and toxic concentrations).

II.  OPERATIONAL PLAN

A.  FY-93 Activities

Specific activities include:

      Characterize distinctive habitats in Puerto Rico and  the U.S.
      Virgin Islands  and identify coral reefs, mangrove ecosystems,
      seagrasses and phosphorescent bays which are:

      • severely degraded
      • impacted
      • pristine

      This activity will be initiated in FY-91  with contractor support
      (Water Management  Division  [WMD]).

      Develop a report that identifies all the local governmental and
      non-governmental agencies, federal, and research institutions
      with planning/development and marine conservation
      responsibilities in Puerto Rico  and the Virgin  Islands (Caribbean
      Field Office [CFO]).

      Form an Intergovernmental Coordinating  Committee to develop
      the Pollution Prevention and Control  Plan (CFO/WMD).

      Identify point and non-point pollutant sources and the potential
      impacts to pristine areas for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin
      Islands (WMD, the Environmental Services Division  [ESD] and
      CFO and the  proposed Intergovernmental Coordinating
      Committee).

      Review all environmental impact statements and environmental
      assessments for proposed development projects which may
      impact identified sensitive ecosystems/pristine areas (the Office

-------
                                   58

      of Policy and Management - Environmental Impacts Branch
      [OPM-EIB] and CFO).

      Provide workshop(s) on EIS/EA review and impact  mitigation for
      local governmental agencies (OPM-EIB and CFO).

      Initiate development of a  long-term monitoring program for
      sensitive habitats (WMD,  ESD).

      Provide technical support with respect to implementing the
      restricted use FIFRA rule in  sensitive areas.  Both Puerto Rico
      and the Virgin  Islands will be  required to develop Management
      Plans for potential impacts to  these sensitive areas/distinctive
      habitats and assistance will be provided to crosswalk these plans
      with the PPCP (ESD).

B.  Resource Implications

The Re^'on  does not receive resources specifically identified to support this
type of activity, and currently less than 1% of regional resources are
directed to address land  use related impacts to aquatic habitats. A shift of
2.5 workyears is  proposed to support this initiative in FY-93. As the
proposal  is further scoped out in  FYs-91/92 it may be determined that
more resources are needed, or adjustments to the scale  of the plan  may
be  required. Also, Headquarters  Office of  Policy, Planning and Evaluation
has provided $15,000 of contractor funds in FY-91 to begin the review of
available  data and studies on these  distinctive habitats. Continued
contractor support will be needed to complete the inventory and the initial
assessment work.

As explained in the strategies section, the Region will seek to leverage its
resources by coordinating with  appropriate  agencies and  institutions that
have ongoing responsibilities in  this area.

-------
                                  59

Investment
  Water Management Division               2.00 workyears
  Caribbean Field Office                     0.25 workyears
  Office of Policy and Management           0.25 workyears

                                            2.50 workyears
WMD:     Two workyears from the Water Standards and Planning Branch
           will be provided to support the plan.

CFO:      The Caribbean Field Office will support this initiative primarily
           from existing resources provided for regional management,
           drinking water enforcement and coastal environmental
           protection.

The  Office of International Activities (OIA) will provide contract dollars I./
the CFO in FY-92 to support United  Nations Environmental
Program/Caribbean Environment Program-related activities/travel and it is
possible that in FY-93 OIA may provide additional contract dollars.  This
funding could be used to contract a local expert to assist in the design  and
implementation of the plan,  which will directly support many of the goals
and  objectives of the  Caribbean Environment  Program.

In addition, the Region may seek funding under the Coastal America
Initiative to complete  the ecosystem and  pollutant source inventory.  If
such funding is available, the Region could coordinate with the Office of
International Activities (OIA) and the  Gulf of Mexico Program in Region IV
to assure that the data that we compile are georeferenced and compatible
with OlA's geographic information system for the Wider Caribbean Basin.

ESD:      The Environmental Services Division resource investment will be
           identified when monitoring needs are better determined.
           Technical  support will also be provided for the pesticides
           component of the plan.

-------
                                   60

Disinvestment

WMD:     Significantly reduce/eliminate 301 (h) post waiver
           monitoring reviews.

           Significantly reduce/eliminate 403(c) reviews.

These disinvestments will  require a negotiated reduction in OWAS and
STARS commitments.

CFO:      Small disinvestments in existing CFO program support
           responsibilities will be  made.

ESD:       Support to this initiative would require a disinvestment from
           monitoring activities in New York and New Jersey.  The  FIFRA
           support will involve resources currently provided for these
           activities (i.e.,  no shifts).

OPM/EIB:  Increased support for the review of EISs and EAs in Puerto Rico
           and the Virgin Islands will require a disinvestment in EA  reviews
           for New York  and New Jersey.

III.  CROSS-CUTTING  ISSUES

A.  Integrated Planning

The Caribbean Distinctive  Habitats  Initiative is a geographically targeted
pollution prevention  strategy.  EPA does not have statutory authority to
implement many of the solutions that are required to prevent degradation
and destruction to ecologically sensitive habitats.  Therefore,  in addition to
implementing appropriate  regulatory controls, the project seeks to identify
and utilize  mechanisms of pollution prevention such as integrated
environmental planning at the local level, to promote sustainable
agricultural and land-use practices.  .

-------
                                     61

B.  Policy Issues

This plan initiates one of the Region's (and perhaps the Agency's) first
projects to  specifically address the preservation of tropical habitats.  It
represents a departure from standard program responsibilities and reliance
on regulatory controls.

-------
                                  62

                    PRASA COMPLIANCE MODULE
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

The Region II Risk Ranking report identified industrial point and municipal
wastewater treatment discharges to water as high non-cancer health and
ecological risks.  Puerto Rico has been selected as a geographic area for a
concentrated effort to address this high ranking environmental problem.

Enforcement actions taken to-date against the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority (PRASA) have not resulted  in a significant reduction in
non-compliance violations.  It is anticipated  that existing compliance
problems will be compounded when the new Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA)  regulations (e.g., the Surface Water Treatment Rule  [SWTR] and
Total Collform T.ule) a,e issu ,-d.  PRASA is currently unable to meet
compliance schedules due to financial constraints, and significant additional
capital investments will also be required by the new SQWA regulations.
Consequently, the Region  is proposing to expand its enforcement efforts to
address the drinking water and wastewater  treatment problems in Puerto
Rico: The Region will combine an enhanced enforcement program with a
cooperative effort with PRASA and other local agencies to develop funding
mechanisms for needed construction projects.

B.  Goals and Measurable Objectives

The goal is to reduce  pollution from wastewater discharges and to improve
drinking water quality. Examples  of measurable objectives will include
negotiated construction schedules, prioritization of construction projects,
and an increase in the percentage of population covered by protected
water supply systems  and  appropriate wastewater treatment facilities.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

The Region plans to work  cooperatively with PRASA, the Environmental
Quality Board (EQB) and Department of Health (DOH) to incorporate risk

-------
                                   63

reduction principles into the current and future Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP).  The CIP establishes capital construction goals for the upcoming five
years and is revised on an annual basis.  Projects for drinking water
treatment and distribution as well as wastewater collection  and treatment
are included in the CIP.  It is the Region's goal to ensure that Consent
Decree activities correspond to the construction schedules  identified in the
CIP.

These planning activities will be complemented by an expanded
enforcement program. Many Administrative Orders will be closed out prior
to and during  FY-93.  A major activity of this plan will be the execution of
a new Consent Decree for 53 wastewater treatment plants.  Referrals to
the Department of Justice, including new compliance schedules and penalty
assessments, will  be  expected.  EPA will  also impose new permit
requirements on  PRASA such as those related to sludge disposal, reductions
in toxic discharges and reductions  in stormwater pollution.
                                               •
Working within the existing regulatory framework, the Region will continue
to modify its enforcement strategies to take into account the unique
economic, cultural and environmental conditions of Puerto  Rico.

Pollution prevention, including watershed and groundwater protection,
needs to be integrated into PRASA's organization and operations.  EPA will
help PRASA, EQB and  DOH to solve the identified  problems usmg these
types of integrated approaches.  EPA will provide assistance, where
appropriate, to leverage limited local resources so that projects can be
successfully implemented, resulting in reduced environmental risks.

D.  Measures  of  Progress

Risk reduction targets will be developed  for this initiative.   Such targets
may include the number of people receiving properly treated water
supplies and proper wastewater disposal.

Other potential indicators could  be:  reductions in Maximum Contaminant
Levels (MCL) and treatment technique violations of the drinking water
regulations, and reductions in pollutants discharged upstream of water
supplies or critical waters.

-------
                                  64
II. OPERATIONAL PLAN

A. FY-93 Activities (note: some actions may be initiated prior to FY-93)

     Track all existing compliance and permit reports submitted by
     PRASA, including Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR), and
     Consent Order reports by the Court Monitor,

     Prepare a compliance summary report including a needs survey
     for all facilities to comply with federal laws,

     Form three work groups within EPA, EQB, DOH  and PRASA to
     address Financial Capability, Wastewater Facility Needs and
     Drinking Water  Facility Needs,

     Develop an Action Plan including recommendations for changes
     in the CIP, implementation of an operator training and
     certification program, renegotiation of existing orders,  and
     changes in federal requirements, and

     Develop program and policy implications of the Action Plan and
     present necessary issue papers and  briefings to policy making
     officials.

B. Resource Implications

Investment

Water Management Division        2.5
Office of Regional Counsel          1.5
                     Total        4.0 workyears

Disinvestment

Existing resources identified for grants  management, permits, enforcement
and drinking water will be shifted to this geographic initiative.  There will
also be a shift of construction grants resources to permits and/or

-------
                                  65

enforcement resources with a corresponding lowering of OWAS
commitments.

III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A.  Integrated Planning

This proposal involves an integrated approach to solving significant health
and ecological problems in Puerto Rico.  It combines traditional
enforcement with cooperative efforts to develop long-range funding
mechanisms for PRASA. Multi-media enforcement actions will also be
taken where appropriate (e.g., SDWA and CWA enforcement) as part of
this proposal.

B.  Policy Issues

This plan does not represent a significant departure from current national
policy.  However, it is anticipated that some policy and programmatic
issues, possibly involving STARS/OWAS commitments,  will need to be
addressed.

-------
                                  66

         VIRGIN ISLANDS WASTEWATER TREATMENT MODULE


I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem being addressed

The Region II Comparative Risk Ranking Project identified industrial point
and municipal wastewater treatment discharges to water as high non-
cancer health and ecological risks.  The Virgin Islands, along with Puerto
Rico, has been selected for a concentrated geographic effort to address  this
high ranking environmental problem.

The Virgin Islands Department  of Public Works (VIDPW) operates 12.
wastewater treatment plants.  These plants are in various stages of
noncompliance with the NPDES permit requirements for the discharge of
municipal wastewater.  In addition, most facilities are covered  by a Judicial
Consent Order and  are in non-compliance with the Order.  The
compliance problems associated with the treatment plants include
construction requirements, major repairs and operational maintenance.
Lack of funding is the primary  reason for not meeting the requirements  of
the Consent Order.

B.  Coals and Objectives

The goal of this plan is to reduce the impacts of wastewater discharges  to
ecologically sensitive areas and to human health by bringing these facilities
into compliance.  The measurable objectives are to obtain and assure the
appropriate use of additional funding to construct and repair all needed
VIDPW facilities in order  to achieve Clean Water Act (CWA) compliance.

C.  Strategies .and Policy Options

The strategy will involve two approaches - one to secure needed funding
and the other to use existing enforcement  mechanisms to achieve
compliance.  Special funds for the Virgin Islands will be sought through  the
FY-93 budgetary  process by requesting a Congressional add-on for this
purpose.  Alternatively, a special amendment to the Clean Water Act will

-------
                                  67

be pursued to address the unique situation of the Virgin Islands.  This will
require the involvement and support of the Agency's senior management,
including that of the Regional Administrator and the Assistant Administrators
for Water and Administration and Resources Management. Concurrent
with these efforts, compliance will be  pursued through the negotiation and
enforcement  o* a new Judicial Consent Order with the VIDPW and newly
issued Administrative Orders for those facilities not covered by the Consent
Order.

D.    Measures of Progress

      Measures of progress will include:

      Achieve maximum compliance with Administrative  Orders;

      Negotiate a new Judicial Consent Order with VIDPW that will
      bring up-to-date  the status of all existing and planned facilities;

      Write or issue permits for VIDPW facilities to include current
      NPDES requirements (toxics, stormwater,  sludge);  and

      Include the VI funding issue in the  EPA FY-93  budgetary
      process and/or in a special amendment to the Clean Water Act.

II. OPERATIONAL PLAN

A.  FY-93 Activities

Many of the  activities.listed below will be initiated in FY-91 and FY-92. In
particular, efforts  to assure inclusion of funding for wastewater facilities in
the FY-93 budget (or via an amendment to the CWA) will need to be
conducted in FY-92. These will include developing all necessary
information on VI infrastructure needs, prioritization, costs, timetables  and
required authorizations; and meeting with the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) and Congressional committees, as appropriate to assure
inclusion in the FY-93 appropriation.   Other activities,  either to be started
or completed in FY-93 include:

-------
                                  68
     Track all existing compliance and permit reports submitted by
     the VI, including DMRs and Consent Order reports.

     Prepare a Compliance Summary Report.

     Develop a Compliance Action Plan, including recommendations
     for renegotiation of existing Orders and issuance of new
     Orders.

     Implement the Action Plan.

     Work with the VI to  assure FY-93 funds are obligated toward
     highest priority needs (i.e., those that would address highest
     health and ecological risks first).

B.  Resource Implications

Investment

Water Management Division -          1.0 workyear
Office of Regional Counsel -           0.5 workyear
Office of Policy and Management -     0.5 workyear

                                Total 2.0 workyears

Disinvestment

Existing  resources  identified for grants management, permits and
enforcement will be focused on this geographic project. There will be a
shift of construction grants resources to permits and/or enforcement with a
corresponding lowering of  OWAS commitments.

III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A.  Integrated  Planning

The plan, while directed to address NPDES compliance problems in the
Virgin Islands,  is part of a larger regional initiative to address health and

-------
                                   69
ecological risks in the Caribbean (Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands).  It
involves an  integrated approach toward solving these problems, that relies
on both traditional enforcement actions and on innovative efforts to secure
long-term funding for needed facility upgrades.

B.  Policy Issues

This plan does not represent a significant departure from current national
policy.  However, it is anticipated that some policy and  programmatic
issues, possibly involving STARS/OWAS commitments, will need to be
addressed.  Also, support for pursuing special federal funding for VI will be
required.

-------
                                  70
         SMALL DRINKING WATER SYSTEMS IN PUERTO RICO
                 AND THE VIRGIN  ISLANDS MODULE
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

The operation and maintenance of drinking water systems ranked high for
combined cancer and non-cancer  health effects, and very high for the non-
cancer health effects alone.  Health-related impacts, mostly from
microbiological contamination of drinking water, are of particular concern in
Puerto Rico and  the Virgin Islands where small public water systems (PWS)
generally provide little or no treatment and/or disinfection.

Studies of surface water in Puerto Rico have shown unusually high
concentrations of pathogenic viruses,  bacteria  and protozoa.  In the Virgin
Islands, studies of water quality in rainwater catchments have been  limited
to determining the presence of bacteria; however, the extremely  high
concentrations of bacteria, including some pathogens, are sufficient grounds
alone for concern.

Although documented waterborne diseases in  the Caribbean are not
common, given the. raw water quality and the lack of water treatment, it is
reasonable to assume their occurrence is often either not noticed or not
reported, and that waterborne pathogens have a significant health impact.
Diseases that are frequently linked to contaminated water such as Giardiasis
and gastroenteritis are common in both Puerto Rico and the Virgin  Islands.
The Virgin  Islands Department of  Health reported additional problems with
waterborne Legionellosis and a 1985  outbreak of typhoid, probably  caused
by  contaminated drinking water.

In Puerto Rico the major supplier  of drinking water is the Puerto  Rico
Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA).  (The PRASA drinking water
systems are addressed in the  Region's PRASA  Compliance strategic plan,
which  is one  of four modules targeted to address water quality and habitat
concerns in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.) The  maintenance and
operational problems of non-PRASA water supply systems, of which there

-------
                                  71

are over 250 serving a total population of 80,000, will be addressed by this
initiative.  This proposal augments the Region's ongoing non-PRASA
enforcement initiative, a multi-year effort that was initiated in FY-91 to
address the high significant non-compliance rate (i.e., 95%) of these
systems.

In the Virgin Islands, over 500 rainwater roof-top catchment PWSs provide
the primary source of drinking water.  Eighty percent of the population
relies on rainwater roof-top catchments for  its drinking water.  Other
sources of drinking water are some shallow wells and desalinization plants.
Concerns with respect to rainwater catchment systems are microbiological
contamination from animal droppings and dirt on roof-tops, the use of
proper roofing materials and cistern construction, and the high levels of
trihalomethanes in cisterns that are  chlorinated.

B.  Coals and Measurable Objectives

The goal of this proposal is to reduce tie risk of waterborne diseases and
chemical contamination from drinking water in Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands by appropriate water treatment and the development and
maintenance of appropriate water supply systems.

Measurable objectives include:

     Improve monthly compliance with Total Coliform monitoring
     requirements and  reduce Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)
     violations for non-PRASA ground-water systems in Puerto Rico
     and for rainwater roof-top catchment  systems in the Virgin
     Islands,

     Reduce the number of PWSs in  Significant Non-Compliance
     (SNC),

     Establish enforceable compliance agreements with all non-
     PRASA surface water systems  by the end of FY-93  (Puerto
     Rico),

-------
                                  72

     Reduce the number of non-PRASA surface water systems (Puerto
     Rico),

     Eliminate chemical MCL violations due to contamination from roofing
     and cistern coating materials (Virgin  Islands), and

     Ensure that communities served by non-PRASA water systems
     have begun to implement watershed and ground-water
     protection plans (Puerto Rico).

C.  Strategies and Policies

Strategies.to address drinking water protection differ for each of the two
areas and are presented separately.

Puerto Rico

The strategy for Puerto Rico is to implement a vigorous enforcement policy
for non-PRASA drinking water systems and to strengthen local funding and
rural water management capabilities.  As a general policy EPA will
encourage PRASA, wherever feasible, to serve non-PRASA communities and
to include associated  costs in its Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The
Region will also strongly encourage systems presently served by a surface
water source to switch to groundwater.

At present no umbrella rural water authority exists for non-PRASA systems.
To assist in the strengthening of local funding and rural water management
capabilities, the Region will  recommend that a rural water task-force be
assembled with representatives from the non-PRASA systems workgroup,
Commonwealth agencies, Federal funding  agencies such as Farmers Home
Administration (FmHA) and  Housing and Urban Development (HUD),  and
non-governmental organizations (e.g., the  National Rural Water Association).
This proposed rural water task force would have the responsibility  of
developing short and long-term strategies  to address the water quality
problems associated with non-PRASA PWSs.

Short-term strategies would focus on assisting those non-PRASA systems
which do  not require  major capital  investments to achieve compliance.

-------
                                   73
Approaches to achieving this goal would include community organization
and education, operator training and the expansion of a circuit rider
program to provide non-routine maintenance.  Longer-term strategies
would include the development of financial mechanisms to fund significant
capital improvements for surface water systems, approaches to ensure that
non-PRASA PWSs will be able to comply with new Safe Drinking Water Act.
(SDWA) regulations, the development  of an organizational structure such as
a regional rural water authority, and the implementation of watershed and
ground-water protection programs.

Virgin  Islands

In the Virgin Islands, the Region will conduct research to provide data on
the occurrence of pathogenic microorganisms associated with  rainwater
roof-top catchments and to test the effectiveness of different treatment
technologies.  The testing of treatment and disinfection technologies will
include a focus on reducing disinfection by-products which, as past
sampling of cisterns has si own, often exceed the trihalomethane MCL.
Based  on the research findings the Region will determine the
appropriateness of requiring rainwater  catchments to  provide filtration  and
disinfection  (similar to the Surface Water Treatment Rule [SWTR] but with
different performance criteria and monitoring requirements).   If necessary
the Region will propose alternate regulations  for federal adoption and
adoption in the Virgin Islands.  There is a small possibility that the Virgin
Islands would be required to adopt the federal SWTR. This would  be the
case if any of the drinking  water aquifers were directly fed by surface
water.  The Region does not think that such  conditions exist  but will
investigate  the possibility in FY-91 and  FY-92.  A national workgroup,  which
will include representatives of Regions  II and  IV, states with rainwater
catchment  PWSs and ORD, will be  established this fiscal year.

The Region is also working with the National Sanitation Foundation to
deviiop a protocol for testing and approving  roof and cistern  coatings used
in rainwater catchments.  EPA will work with Territorial agencies to regulate
the use of  coatings which could contribute to chemical contamination of
the drinking water and  to establish building code requirements for cistern
design and construction. One of the requirements the Region will  promote
is the use of the first flush  mechanism which reduces the contamination

-------
                                  74

entering the cistern by diverting the initial runoff from the roof catchment
into a drain rather than into the cistern.

The Region will continue to work on developing  and demonstrating low-
cost, low-maintenance treatment, and pollution prevention technologies
appropriate for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

D.  Measures of Progress

Progress in reducing the risk of waterborne disease outbreaks will be
measured  by tracking  compliance with the Total Goliform MCL and,  in the
case of the non-PRASA surface water systems in  Puerto Rico, by tracking
compliance with the Surface Water Treatment Rule.   In addition to those
surface water systems which install filtration and disinfection, any non-
PRASA surface system that switches to a ground-water source or which
accepts service from a PRASA facility will be counted as a system where
the risk of waterborne disease occurrence has been  greatly reduced.

Other measures of progress to be considered are the establishment and
effectiveness of an organization responsible for implementing requirements
of the Total  Coliform Rule and the Surface Water Treatment Rule, and for
implementing groundwater  and watershed protection plans.  For example,
the establishment of a circuit rider organization, which would assist with
maintenance and troubleshooting of a system, would represent progress in
reducing the risk of a  waterborne disease outbreak.

Another important measure of progress is the degree to which the
communities take responsibility for their own drinking water systems, e.g.,
the assignment of responsibility for monthly coliform  sampling and routine
maintenance to a trained  member of the community.

II. OPERATIONAL PLAN

Implementation would be focused in the Region's Water Management
Division (WMD) with the assistance of its Caribbean  Field Office (CFO).
Linkages/coordination  will be  pursued with other EPA, local or national
organizations involved  in drinking water protection activities.

-------
                                  75

A.  FY-93 Activities

Puerto Rico

      Continue to implement the non-PRASA enforcement initiative
      (WMD-lead, CFO),

      Establish a Rural Water Task Force (WMD-lead, CFO)

      Develop the framework for a non-PRASA rural water authority
      (WMD, CFO,  the  proposed Rural Water Task Force, other
      federal agencies and Commonwealth of Puerto  Rico
      representation),

      Draft a legislative  proposal for authorization and funding of the
      non-PRASA rural water authority (WMD, Rural Water Task
      Force),

      Expand the circuit rider and operator training program (WMD,
      National Rural Water Association, etc.), and

      Continue to implement watershed and groundwater protection
      programs (WMD,  CFO, Department of Health,  Environmental
      Quality Board).

Virgin Islands

      Initiate monitoring program for microbial pathogens in the
      Virgin Islands  (WMD),

      Develop regulations to address microbial contamination for
      public water supply systems supplied by rainwater roof-top
      catchments (WMD,  Headquarters Office of Drinking Water),

      Write and adopt a building code of regulations for roof and
      cistern coating materials and cistern design and construction
      (WMD, National Sanitation Foundation, Department of Planning
      and Natural Resources, etc.),  and

-------
                                  76
     Continue to develop and test alternative treatment technologies,
     including an evaluation of UV disinfection (WMD, ORD).

B.  Resource Implications

The Regional resources for this initiative will be provided from existing
program allocations which will be directed to achieve this geographically
targeted initiative.

Investment

Puerto Rico

     Water Management Division           1 workyear
     Caribbean Field Office                  1 workyear

Virgin Islands

     Water Management Division           1 workyear

                                Total      3 workyears

Contract Dollar Support

     OW-funded National Rural Water Association grants: $100,000
     (to support circuit riders in  PR and the VI)

     ORD research support:                               $30,000

Disinvestment

WMD:     Regional enforcement against non-transient public water systems
           in New Jersey, data verification and local community
           development to foster the implementation of the SDWA (i.e.,
           mobilization)  in New York.

-------
                                   77

CFO:      No disinvestment required  as resources are provided to support
           these activities.

III.  CROSS-CUTTING  ISSUES

A.  Integrated Planning

The Small Drinking Water Systems in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands
Initiative integrates pollution prevention into its plan by emphasizing the
use of proper cistern design and construction, including the  use of safe roof
and cistern coating  materials, routine maintenance  of the systems and
watershed protection.

B.  Poiic  i-sues
The Small Drinking Water Systems in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands
Initiative may diverge from national policy by exempting rainwater roof-top
catchment systems from the  SWTR.  The SWTR may be inappropriate given
the nature of these systems.  The adoption of a surface water treatment
rule that addresses roof-top catchment systems may be  proposed by the
national work group.

The other policy issue inherent in the proposal is the eligibility of Puerto
Rico and the Virgin Islands for OW-funded  grants to the National Rural
Water Association.  At this time OW has not provided grants to  Puerto
Rico and the Virgin Islands.  This  proposal relies in part  on PR and VI
receiving such assistance.

-------
                                                                   Region II  FY-9
                                                                    Scrategic'Plan
                     COASTAL WATERS INITIATIVE
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

The Coastal Waters Initiative addresses high/very high human health,
ecological and welfare risks for four environmental  problem areas as
identified in the  Regional Risk  Ranking Project.  These are non-point source
pollution, land-use changes affecting aquatic habitat, point source pollution,
and combined sewer  overflows.  For all these problem areas, the impact
on  coastal waters was the dominant contribution to the "high" risk ranking,
further confirming the coastal  waters programs as a priority.   For example,
fish tissue data from coastal waters showed a "high" health level of
concern.  The level of individual cancer risk from the  ingestion of fish
ranged as high as  10"6 to 1CT4.  In the welfare ranking, the large economic
losses in coastal  fisheries were estimated to be so "high" as to justify, by
themselves, point and non-poir t sources as a high  ranking problem area.

The four coastal waters to be  addressed  in this  initiative are  the Long Island
Sound, the New York/New Jersey Harbor, the Delaware Estuary, and the
New York Bight. These coastal waters,  with the exception of the New
York Bight, are part of EPA's National  Estuary Program. The Administrator
has convened Coastal Management Conferences to develop  Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plans (CCMP) which will determine how
the problems of these water systems can best be remedied.   The highest
risk problem areas for each of these water systems will be addressed first
as identified by the ongoing Coastal Management Conferences.

B.  Coals and Measurable Objectives

The goal of this  initiative is to  improve the water quality in each  of these
four water systems, and to also preserve and enhance highly valued
habitats and wetlands in the Delaware Estuary.

Measurable objectives would include the implementation of action items
identified in the  CCMPs, which are currently being developed for each  of

-------
                                  80

these four water systems.  Examples of these action items for each water
area include:

      Reduce nitrogen loadings to the Long Island Sound;

      Reduce the number of days of beach closures and the number
      of shellfish bed closures  in the Sound-Harbor-Bight System;

      Develop limits on  the total amount of contaminant input that
      can be discharged to the NY/NJ Harbor each day for metals
      and organics (i.e.,  Total Maximum Daily Loads [TMDL]);

      Develop a wasteload allocation model for controlling input from
      each  permit holder authorized to discharge effluent to receiving
      waters;

      Establish and implement  a no-net-loss nf function policy for the
      Delaware Estuary  (e.g., distinctive habitats, wetlands).

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

As noted above, each of the ongoing Coastal  Management Conferences is
focusing on the area of  highest risk for that water body.  However, as the
Long Island Sound,  NY/NJ  Harbor and New York Bight, in many respects
function as a single  ecosystem, and the regulated community will be
required to implement provisions contained in all three plans, inter-plan
coordination will be a high priority.

Building on the detailed analyses generated in the CCMPs and being
prepared under the auspices of the National Estuary Program, and on the
New York  Bight Restoration Plan, this initiative will  re-direct regional
resources to nigh ranking risk  reduction activities in the four water systems.

D.  Measures of Progress

Environmental indicators may include monitoring of fish and shellfish for
external fin  rot and  lesions (toxics),  birds for reproductive success (toxics),
and  dissolved oxygen (nutrients).  Additional measures that would be  used

-------
                                   81

to assess the overall health of ecosystems include keeping track of the
acres of wetlands and near shore habitat lost each year (habitat
degradation), the number of beach closures each year (pathogens), and
acreage of shellfish  beds closed each year (pathogens).

II.  OPERATIONAL PLAN

The initiative will be implemented primarily by the Region's Water
Management Division (WMD), with assistance from the Environmental
Services Division (ESD), and Office of External Programs (OEP).

A.  FY-93  Activities

      Coordinate CCMP development and implementation (WMD);

      Provide Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
      evaluations, conduct coastal monitoring, and develop
      analy jcal/bioassay methods in  estuarine  .id marine waters
      across all media (sediment,  fish tissue and  water column) (ESD);

      Provide outreach activities to the public, the press,  and elected
      officials.  Specific activities include writing press releases;
      preparing  press briefings and conferences;  providing testimony
      at hearings; participating on the Public Education Committee
      and  public meetings (OEP);

      Address nutrient and toxics  loadings in the permitting and
      enforcement programs; implement the Floatables Action  Plan
      and  Beach/Shellfish Bed Closures Action Plan (WMD);

      Plan  and  implement non-point  source and  nutrient control
      programs  (WMD);

      Develop water quality based effluent limits for toxics (WMD).

-------
                                  82

B.   Resource Implications

Investments

Division/Branch                                  Workyears

Water Management Division
 Marine and Wetlands Protection Branch:                6
 New York/New Jersey Municipal Program Branch:       5
 Water Permits and Compliance Branch:                 2.5
 Water Standards and  Planning Branch:                  1.5
Office of External Programs                            1

                                           Total      16

**   The amount of ESD investment has not been determined at this
     time.

Disinvestments

Division/Branch                                    Workyears

Water Management Division
 Marine and Wetlands Protection Branch
 will use 6 workyears  currently provided for
 coastal water studies  as follows:

     -NY Bight Restoration Plan                         2.5
     -Long Island Sound Study                          1.5
     -Delaware  Estuary Program                        1.0
     -Near Coastal Water  Position                       1.0

New York/New Jersey Municipal Program Branch
     Shift of construction  grant resources to             3.0
     support permitting/enforcement activities with
     reduction  in OWAS commitments
     Geographic targeting of existing permitting          2.0
     enforcement  resources

-------
                                  83
Water Permits and Compliance Branch
      Geographic targeting of existing permitting/         2.5
      enforcement achieved through efficiency in State
      ove , }-:ht
           •J

Water Standards and Planning Branch
      Shift from Ocean Dumping Ban Act program        1.0
      non-point source resources from non-coastal
      areas                                             0.5

Office of External Programs
      Focus  of water program support to coastal          1.0
      waters initiative                                  	

                                            Total      16.0
** BSD disinvestments to  be determined

III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A.  Integrated  Planning

Integrated environmental planning will be carried out across all program
media during the implementation of the CCMPs.  Coordination of the
planning efforts involving all the Region's estuary programs is  essential  for
effective environmental management and to  prevent conflicting or
duplicative regulatory controls.  Emphasis will be placed on source
reduction, pollution prevention and  the development of implementation.
agendas.  Public involvement through the estuary program's Citizens
Advisory Committees (CAC) and public education are also continuing
means of addressing cross-cutting issues and promoting the  exchange of
ideas.

B.  Policy Issues

The proposed  strategies for  implementing this  initiative do not represent  a
departure from the current national policy.

-------
                                                                  Region II  FY-93
                                                                    Strategic' Plan
          TRANSPORTATION AND AIR EMISSIONS INITIATIVE

I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

The Region II Risk Ranking Project ranked mobile sources of air pollution as
a "very high" priority in two of three categories, human health  effects and
welfare impacts.

Motor vehicles are the single largest source of ozone (O3) producing
pollutants and of carbon monoxide (CO) in the Northeast.  Both O3 and
CO have a deleterious effect on  human health: O3  reduces lung capacity
and CO is a poisonous gas which interferes with the blood's oxygen
carrying ability.  PM10 are  solid particles less than ten microns in diameter.
These particles come from burning diesel fuel and are capable  of carrying
adsorbed carcinogens deep into the lung.


B.  Goals and Measurable Objectives

This proposal takes as its goal the reduction of mobile source emissions.
The exact magnitude of these reductions cannot be  determined until the
State Implementation  Plans (SiPs) required by the Clean Air Act revisions of
1990 are submitted.  At this point, Region II estimates the reductions
needed to meet national ambient air quality standards  as:  a 45% reduction
in volatile organic compounds for O3 control by 2007, a 50% reduction in
CO by 1996, and a 20% reduction in PM10 by 1997.  We estimate that this
strategy will contribute 15% of the required 45% VOC reduction, 25% of
the required 50% CO reduction, and 100% of the required 20% PM10
reduction.
C.  Strategies and  Policy Options

This proposal relies on implementation  of three strategies:  the
enhancement of state motor vehicle emission inspection and maintenance
(I/M) programs, the implementation of transportation control measures, and
the substitution of cleaner fuels for gasoline and diesel fuel.  Together, the

-------
                                   86

implementation of these three strategies applies  progressive steps which
will help insure New York and New Jersey can ultimately reach and
maintain the air quality standards for Ov CO, and PM10.

Efforts to bring about near term  improvements to the state I/M programs
will assure that excessively polluting motor vehicles are  identified and
repaired.  However, the I/M effort will only assure that each individual
vehicle is kept as clean as its design allows.  Continued growth  in vehicle
use (which has been about three percent annually in the  New  York City
metropolitan area) will overtake  the benefit of cleaner cars.  This is why
transportation control measures,  the second strategy of  this  proposal is
needed.

Transportation measures affect the manner in which a vehicle is used;
techniques  include traffic design, mass  transit expansion and improvement
and lifestyle changes. Under this element such  measures will be developed
and applied by the states to limit the growth in  usage of conventional-
fueled vehicles.  If successful, this will help to hold  the  line while more
ambitious measures (e.g.,  mass transit and cleaner fueled  vehicles) can be
developed, funded and introduced.

The last strategy of this proposal is designed to lead, in  the  long term, to
the conversion to cleaner  fuels of substantial  numbers of gasoline and
diesel  powered vehicles in the New York City metropolitan area. A
conversion  of the vast majority of motor vehicles in the metropolitan area
will likely be needed to provide  for the attainment and  the long term
maintenance of the motor vehicle  related  air quality standards.
Implementation of this strategy will generate  a demand  for the
infrastructure (fueling facilities, service facilities) that will support the
introduction of cleaner-fuel vehicles in  the general population.

D.  Measures of Progress

SIP submittals will contain estimates of the emission reductions  needed for
attainment.  Actual reductions will come from the implementation of these
plans.

-------
                                 87

I/M Programs:

     Submittal of three SIPs by November 15, 1992 (New Jersey,  New
     YorK City metro area, and Upstate New York) for an enhanced I/M
     program.

     Maintenance of 95% compliance rate (i.e., 95% of the people that
     should have stickers have them).

Transportation Control Measures (TCMs):

     Submittal of two SIPs by November  15, 1992 (New Jersey and New
     York City metro area).

     Submittal of 10 Transportation Improvement Programs through 1993
     (New York and New Jersey combined).

     Number of TCM studies initiated.

     Number of projects implemented.

Cleaner Fuels:

     Submittal of one SIP by November 15, 1992 for  a clean-fuel  strategy
     for buses that  are operated in New York City.

     Start-up of clean-fuel pilot programs  in each state for fleet vehicles  by
     end of 1993.

     Number of vehicles operating using clean fuels.

For all three strategies, SIPs will contain  detailed yearly objectives from FY-
92 and beyond, each tracked through Agency accountability systems.

-------
                                  88

II. OPERATIONAL PLAN

A. FY-93 Activities

State I/M Program

Work under this element will be directed toward providing technical and
programmatic advice and assistance to the state environmental and motor
vehicle agencies in their efforts to upgrade and expand existing programs.

To accomplish this, the Air Programs  Branch will:

     serve as-the technical conduit between EPA's Office of Mobile
     Sources (OMS), other regions and states implementing similar
     programs, and  New York and New Jersey,

     meet quarterly with each state to provide them with the direct
     technical  asJstanc^  needed to design the necessary program  changes
     and draft the regulations for their implementation,

     perform at least one state program audit using established EPA audit
     guidance,

     develop and test specialized oversight activities that can be used to
     track the states' progress in implementing and maintaining these
     changes.  Activities  may include unannounced semi-annual program
     reviews, monthly sticker surveys,  and a computer interface with the
     state I/M database.

Transportation Control Measures (TCM)

To improve air quality, EPA must establish standards to ease  the burden of
congestion and excess emissions, based on the assumption that Vehicle
Miles Traveled  (VMT) will remain constant or will increase.  There  are
various measures that can be implemented to relieve congestion or
improve traffic flow to lessen the health risks that result from areas of
dense traffic flow and minimal speed.

-------
                                  89

For federally-funded transportation projects, the principal planning tool is
the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP is a list of projects
that are identified for implementation in a given area by the agency
designated to conduct this planning, the metropolitan planning organization
(MPO). Any TCMs receiving federal funding must be contained in the TIP.

Strategies to implement TCMs must involve open  communication between
the MPO, the state Department of Transportation, and  others who  will
implement the TCMs on the  roadways.  EPA must develop incentives that
will build a coalition to work  closely and  efficiently in solving transportation
related pollution problems.

To  accomolish this, the Air Programs Branch will:

      review the TIP in each  metropolitan area in  each  state. (Currently
      there are seven TIPs in New York and three in New Jersey that
      would be affected)

      review environmental assessment documents that are prepared for
      appropriate projects in each state,

      utiend at least one meeting of each MPO,

      provide technical assistance on the  design and evaluation of
      transportation control measures,

      run  computer models to confirm  the claimed impacts of
      transportation plans and projects on emissions from motor vehicles in
      each metropolitan area,

      work with the states and MPOs to  assure that transportation control
      measures are selected for SIPs from the measures listed in the 1990
      Clean Air Act,

      provide technical assistance to New York and New Jersey to
      implement the mandated program to  increase vehicle occupancy rates
      for work-related trips in severe ozone areas (expected to be

-------
                                   90
     implemented statewide in New Jersey and in the New York City
     metropolitan area).

Cleaner Fuels

Work will be directed toward maximizing the number of clean fueled buses
that operate in congested areas New York City, assuring the early and
expanded implementation of the Clean Air Act's clean fleet provisions, and
working with the states toward implementation of a broad-based clean
vehicle program.

To accomplish this, the Air Programs Branch will:

     serve as the Region II representative to clean fuel bus demonstration
     projects  in New York and New Jersey (currently 8) and  the New
     York City Alternative Fuels Task Force,

     viJt each city that is operating a clean fuels  bus program to meet
     with the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA)
     representative, regional bus operate^s, state and local  transportation
     agencies, state and local environmr--*al agencies, and  health and
     safety agencies (particularly local fire departments) to insure that
     potential roadblocks to introducing clean fuels are identified and
     eliminated,

     work with the  New York City Transit Authority in its test of 400
     buses  that are  equipped with trap oxidizers,  so as to be in a position
     to recommend a national policy on the use of such particulate control
     devices,

     work with other  federal agencies in Region  II to establish the early
     implementation of a clean fuels program for vehicles operated by the
     federal government,

     provide technical assistance to state agencies to develop programs for
     service infrastructure and fleet conversions to clean fuels,

-------
                                  91

     provide assistance to New York City in its program to convert City-
     owned vehicles to clean fuels,

     provide technical advice and assistance to the states and to the
     Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
     on ire -  efforts to develop a clean fuel vehicle program for non-fleet
     vehicles.

B.  Resource Implications

In FY-91 Region II  received $15,000 of contractor support to .further
develop this proposal.  Funds are being used primarily to inventory
metropolitan vehicle fleets.   Information  on number, type and replacement
schedules for fleet vehicles can  be used  to estimate the effectiveness of
clean fuels introduction and  to help  market the concept. Contractor
support may also provide information on infrastructure costs.

In Ff-93, workyears for the  three elements of this plan will  increase above
current levels by two workyears, for a total of five workyears in the mobile
source area.  The  investments of these positions within the  Air Programs
Branch will be as follows:
                                         Workyears
State  I/M Programs

TCMs

Cleaner Fuels

TOTAL
FY-91
1.05
1.30
0.65
3.00
FY-93
1.55
1.95
1.50
5.00
Change
+ 0.50
+ 0.65
+ 0.85
+ 2.00'
The 3 current mobile source workyears represent disinvestments from the
following areas:  federal and state regulation development, NSR/PSD
program, state toxics program development, and support and development
of computer systems. The two additional workyears for FY-93  represent

-------
                                   92

resources the Region anticipates receiving to implement the new Clean Air
Act revisions.

The Office of External Programs, Office of Regional Counsel, and the
Environmental Impacts Branch will provide assistance where necessary at
current resource levels (i.e., no shifts among allocated workyears).

III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A.  Integrated Planning

The reduced energy consumption brought about by the conversion to
alternative, less polluting fuels will reduce environmental risks.  This is in
accordance with the strategy identified for the energy and transportation
sector in EPA's Report to Congress on a Pollution Prevention Strategy.

EPA's "Six-Month  Study" identified motor  vehicle emissions  as significant
sources of toxic emissions.  This ^lan.will substantially reduce these
emissions in New-York and New Jersey.

B.  Policy Issues

The substitution of domestically produced cleaner fuels for  imported oil
may represent a departure from current national policy.

-------
                                                                      EIIII
                                                                   Region II  FY-93
                                                                    -Strategic Plan
            SUBSURFACE HAZARDOUS WASTE TRANSPORT
                          SYSTEMS RELEASES
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

In older industrial areas such as New York and New Jersey, many industrial
facilities have been  in existence for over 50 years.  Such facilities often
have waste transport infrastructures which employed construction materials
and techniques that are outdated  and have since been replaced by more
modern technology and materials in newer facilities.  Moreover, the
generally accepted standards of construction at that time allowed a certain
amount  : Joss through system joints and connections.  While the
manufacturing processes at these  facilities often have been modernized and
made more  efficient in order to remain competitive, the same investment
has generally not been made in the waste conveyance systems used to
service these industrial processes.  This proposal is based on the belief that
these systems, which  include gravity and pressurized wastewater collection,
lateral and trunk lines or force mains and trap tanks,  if not adequately
upgraded and maintained, allow significant releases of wastes to adjacent
soil and groundwater.

Such releases are of significance when industrial toxic wastes are involved.
The Region  II Risk Ranking project ranked RCRA Subtitle C "high" priority  in
two of three categories, combined human health effects  and welfare
impact.  Industrial sub-surface conveyance systems represent an unknown
but potentially significant portion of RCRA groundwater contamination
(which was  a major contributor to the "high"  risk ranking of this problem
area).

Industrial wastewater transport systems pose a special concern because
there is no existing  regulatory standard that requires such systems to meet
minimum design and protection standards.  The Clean Water Act regulates
the wastewater treatment provided and the quality of the effluent
discharged but does not address the collection and transport system.
Current RCRA program activities  also do not address these potential
sources of hazardous waste releases.  This proposal represents an

-------
                                   94

innovative approach to preventing unregulated releases of hazardous waste
to groundwater by seeking to determine the extent of the problem and
then to remediate it.

B.  Coals and Measurable Objectives

The overall goals  of the proposal  are to reduce or eliminate industrial
subsurface toxic releases and remediate the contamination  of soil and
groundwater occurring from such systems.

The measurable objectives are:

      To compile, on  a region-wide basis, a universe of facilities that are
      found  to have subsurface industrial wastewater transport  systems that
      are substandard.

      To determine, by facility, the sections (in feet) of industrial subsurface
      conveyance systems with exfiltration of hazardous waste, to estimate
      quantities of hazardous waste being released that will be prevented
      through the upgrade  of such systems.

      To determine, by facility, the ambient concentrations of contaminants
      in  soil and groundwater prior to  remediation and to measure to what
      degree those concentrations are  effectively reduced.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

The overall strategies  of the proposal are:

      To develop a set of criteria that targets facilities with a high potential
      for subsurface contamination occurring from their waste transport
      systems;

      To identify  and  prioritize those facilities whose subsurface conveyance
      systems are releasing hazardous waste and require upgrading;

      To stabilize and remediate all contaminated areas within those sites
      through Corrective Action orders or enforcement actions;'

-------
                                   95
      To enforce required  upgrades of systems and to include pollution
      prevention initiatives wherever feasible, especially during settlement
      with facilities being enforced against; and

      To include multi-media violations in enforcement actions.

D.  Measures of Progress

A number of the above  measurable objectives will be used to serve as
administrative measures  of progress.  The last two measurable objectives
will ser <~ as environmental indicators.

II.  OPERATIONAL PLAN

A.  FY-93 Activities

In order to insure the success  of the proposal, and to best utilize the
expenditure of time in FY-93, it would be expedient to do the investigative
portion of the project prior to  FY-93.  The specific tasks to be
accomplished in FY-92 will be:

      Develop criteria to identify appropriate facilities;

      Compile a preliminary list of facilities that meet prescribed criteria;

      Develop a line of inquiry to be used in RCRA § 3007 information
      request letters, and a strategy for RCRA inspectors to follow during
      routine or targeted Compliance  Evaluation  Inspections;

      Issue RCRA  §  3007 information  request letters;

      Review all information received and select  a list of candidate facilities.

-------
                                  96

FY-93 Activities

      For the candidate facilities, conduct full RCRA generator Compliance
      Evaluation Inspections (CEJ), including special emphasis on assessing
      the type and quantity of hazardous waste generated and discharged
      to the conveyance systems.  Conduct  limited  conveyance system field
      investigations (using  manhole inspection or other inspection
      techniques developed with the assistance of Water Management
      Division) to bolster evidence obtained  through RCRA § 3007
      information  request letter that releases of hazardous waste are
      occurring.

      Based on RCRA CEI  and completion of limited multi-media inspection
      checklists, determine whether full  multi-media inspections should be
      recommended.

      Based on inspection results, as well as past and current compliance
      v/ith  existing consent orders or decrees,  determine and initiate
      appropriate  enforcement response (administrative complaint or civil
      referral).

      In addition to correcting regulatory violations, Consent Orders or
      Decrees will include compliance schedules to conduct engineering
      studies, prepare plans and specifications, and construct a hazardous
      waste conveyance system which meets no-release requirements.
      Strong preference will  be given to systems which are above ground,
      or if  below, are designed to be contained in  conduits with access for
      inspection purposes. Automatic alarm systems will also be required.

      Corrective action will be required  through the Consent
      Orders/Decrees or under separate Corrective Action Orders.

      As part of settlement negotiations, pollution prevention studies will  be
      required as  appropriate. Consideration will be given to facility
      compliance  audits for the facility itself  as well as other facilities owned
      by the same corporation.

-------
                                       97

    B.  Resource Implications

    Resources for this project  will be redirected from lower priority RCRA
    enforcement and corrective action activities.  Reduced enforcement against
    land ban documentation and RCRA management violators will occur in
    order to take action against a facility illegally disposing hazardous waste via
    the type of releases mentioned above.  Fewer corrective action orders will
    be issued to facilities with non-continuing past releases in order to correct
    continuing present significant releases.

    Estimated resource investments are:
FY
ACTIVITY
WORKDAYS  # OF      TOTAL      RESOURCE
            ACTIONS   WORKDAYS  SHIFTS
FY 92     ISSUE 3007 LETTERS AWM 2
FY-93     GENERATOR
         INSPECTIONS
                  AWM 3
                              25
                      AWM 50
                      AWM 21
           LAND BAN
           WARNING
           LETTERS

           NON-TCLP
           GENERATORS
FY-93     SEWER ASSESSMENT AWM 5
                                        AWM 35
                                 STATE
                                 OVERSIGHT
                                 INSPECTIONS
FY-93
CONDUCT
RFA
PA/VSI
AWM  30
AWM 60
LOWER PRIORITY
CORRECTIVE
ACTION
FY-93     ISSUE NEGOTIATE   AWM 80
         CORRECTIVE       OKC 55
         ACTION
                                        AWM 160
                                        ORC 110
                                 LOWER PRIORITY
                                 CORRECTIVE
                                 ACTION

-------
FY-93     ISSUE NEGOTIATE   AWM 55
         ENFORCEMENT     ORC 25
         ACTIONS
98

4
AWM 220
ORC 100
LOWER PRIORITY
ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS
         TOTALS
          AWM 546
          ORC 210
           WORK YEARS
           AWM 2.3
           ORC 0.9
     III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

     A.  Integrated Planning

     This proposal will follow the approach and hierarchy set out in the National
     Pollution Prevention Strategy.  The proposal will therefore target facilities
     generating wastes included  in the TRI target list of chemicals.  In addition,
     those facilities already addressed by the Agency's  Industrial Toxics Initiative
     will be identified to eliminate duplication of effort.

     B.  Policy Issues

     This proposal offers an opportunity to address a potentially serious
     environmental risk from industrial subsurface wastewater  systems.
     Historically, national policy has not concentrated on this type of
     investigation.  This project,  therefore, offers an innovative means to identify
     and act upon what is  believed to be a significant environmental problem.

-------
                                                                      II - rr-93
                                                                    Stmigic Pl»»
            ACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATORS AND
           TREATMENT, STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES

I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

This plan affects active hazardous waste sites regulated under Subtitle C of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).  Specifically, the plan
promotes waste minimization at generators and redirects emphasis of the
permitting/corrective action program at TSDs from statutory deadlines to
environ-;. -L  .-.. -.Seance.

The Regional Risk Ranking Project identified the following risk levels for
RCRA Subtitle C facilities:

     - Ecological           Medium risk
     - Human  He*vs.       High risk
     - Welfare             High risk

The primary risks posed by RCRA facilities to human health and the
environment are exposure to contaminated groundwater and surface water,
soil, and  air releases.

B.  Goals and Measurable Objectives

To  reduce risks at  RCRA facilities a two-pronged approach will be
established for the two major types of RCRA facilities - TSDs and
generators.

TSDs

Risks will be reduced by prioritizing the permitting process to address
higher risk sites first.  Because corrective action is imposed through permit
issuance, remedial  activities have tended to be driven by permitting
priorities (e.g., statutory deadlines), and not necessarily by environmental
benefit (e.g., new capacity or treatment) or significance (e.g., severity of
contamination).

-------
                                   100

Initial measurable objectives for TSDs will be to:

      Develop a prioritization system that includes risk reduction potential,

      Use the prioritization system to rank facilities,

      Permit 100% of the prioritized  universe over a 4 to 5 year period,

      Begin corrective action at sites  in prioritized order,

      Re-evaluate priorities based  upon site-specific  risk assessment of RCRA
      Facility Investigation (RFI)  data.

Generators

Region II plans to reduce risk by focusing on waste minimization efforts.

Measurable objectives for generators will be to:

      Establish baseline levels of the generation of hazardous wastes  and
      releases.

     ' Decrease waste  generation and TRI-reported releases at these
      facilities by maximum achievable  percentages  based on efficacy of
      current practices and technological constraints.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

For TSD prioritization, the strategy is to include  both environmental
significance and environmental benefit into the ranking system.

For generators, the strategy is to more actively promote waste minimization
by review  of reported activities with  follow-up letters, meetings,  and orders
(only as necessary). Given the current  limited regulatory authority for
generators, Region II believes that further scrutiny and review of reported
waste reduction activities is the most effective way  to reduce risk posed by
generators.  This information  can  then  be used to demonstrate the  need

-------
                                   101

for regulating this portion of the universe and for subsequent enforcement
actions.

D.  Measures of Progress

TSDs

On a site-specific basis, determine quarterly and yearly a percentage of
reduction, from baseline year, in pollutant concentration found in soil and
groundwater and  also assess risk reduction.

Determine •»••» overall percentage of reduction, from baseline year, in
po!! .:•?-   . ."ic.-nt.-ation in soil and groundwater and also assess average risk
reduction rrom baseline year.

Generators

Identify baseline waste amounts generated at selected sites, over  the last
two Biennial  Report submissions.  Correlate with TRI data  of same year as
the Biennial Reports.

(Note: Many of the FY-93 activities also, serve as proposed administrative
measures).

II.  OPERATIONAL PLAN:

A.  FY-93 Activities:

TSD Prioritization System

      Under  the  Region II RCRA TSD Prioritization System, all RCRA TSDs
      (i.e., 542 facilities) will be evaluated for environmental significance.
      RCRA Facility Assessment (RFA) reports would provide qualitative,  and
      where  available, quantitative assessment of the significance.   The
      environmental significance would  be high  when relative environmental
      risks associated with releases from and/or contamination of facilities
      are high.  Where RFAs are not available, Region II will use the

-------
                                  102

     current Environmental Priorities Initiative ranking system.  Region II is
     also evaluating systems currently under development by the states.

     Evaluate each facility for environmental benefits.  Environmental
     benefits accrued from permitting each facility would be evaluated on
     the following criteria:

     Source reduction/recycling/recovery (i.ev waste minimization)

     Treatment (i.e., new technologies)

     Incineration/landfill (i.e., new or expanded capacity)

     Other factors (e.g., cross-media, TRI  releases, geographic initiatives)

     Based on environmental benefit and environmental significance, the
     facilities would be ranked according to the following tiers:

     Tier 1: High Environmental  Significance
            High Environmental Benefits

     Tier 2: High Environmental  Significance
             Med./Low Environmental Benefits

     Tier 3: Med./Low Environmental Significance
            High Environmental Benefits

     Tier 4: Low Environmental Significance
            Low Environmental Benefits

     Permit facilities based on the  ranking.

Post FY-93 Activities would include:

     Developing a site-specific risk assessment based on RFI data.

     Implementing corrective action at permitted facilities.

-------
                                   103

Generator Waste Minimization

      Identify 250 generators (use industries for which Region II has
      developed waste minimization information, e.g., metal finishing,
      printing, circuit board,  etc.).

      Identify 50 candidates for in-depth investigation; develop criteria for
      narrowing list.  Such criteria would include high TRI releases,  obvious
      non-compliance with waste minimization activities, and extremely
      large quantity generators.

      Review Biennial Reports to assess waste minimization practices.  Use
      same criteria as those used to critique Waste Reduction Impact
      Statements (WRISs) required  in permits.

      Respond to generator via letter, or meeting.  Encourage facility
      executives to adopt a pollution prevention/waste minimization
      company policy, where national corporate policy does not exist.

      Identify deficient Biennial  Reports, and request  additional information.
      Use §  3008(a) request letters  as needed.

      -• ire Information with other generators using similar processes.

      Incorporate information gained into the Region's waste  minimization
      library; share information with other regions and EPA Headquarters.

      Target  up  to 5 generators for  enforcement action.

      Compile information collected and provide recommendations to EPA-
      HQ on how to reduce risks attributable to generators' poor waste
      management practices.

-------
                                  104

B.  Resource Implications

TSDs

In FY-93, 1 workyear currently devoted to initial assessments (RFAs) will be
shifted to developing and  implementing the TSD prioritization system.
Most work would  be done within the Region's Hazardous Waste Facilities
Branch (HWFB); other groups that would  be involved (if administrative
orders are issued as a result of reviews) are the Office of Regional  Counsel
(ORC) and the Hazardous Waste Compliance Branch  (HWCB).  Superfund
currently has resources targeted for the Environmental Priorities Initiative
(EPI) and would continue this  support. Assistance will also be provided by
the Environmental  Services Division for use of TRI data.  These last two
offices will provide support without significant resource shifts.

Generators

Region II proposes shifting 1 workyear into reviewing Biennial Reports in
FY-92, with an additional workyear the following year, for a total of 2
workyears in FY-93.

Concurrently, Region II would reduce i*.s resources for RCRA permitting by
2 workyears.  This would be done by decreasing oversight of certain state
activities (e.g., storage permits). Given the quality of both states' (NY &
NJ) storage permits, it is  not believed that  decreasing oversight would affect
risk greatly.

III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A.  Integrated Planning

For both generators and TSDs, input would be needed from other
programs to  assist in prioritizing TSDs and identifying generators.  Other
programs/divisions that would be involved include: the Environmental
Services  Division, for Toxic Release Inventory data; the Water Management
Division, for  aquifer protection or geographic initiatives; the Emergency and
Remedial Response Division, for EPI evaluations, Preliminary
Assessments/Site Investigations and site information.

-------
                                   105
This proposal, with source reduction as one of its goals,  is consistent with
the National Pollution Prevention Strategy.  In addition, the Hazardous
Was*   "  reliance Branch will attempt to focus the source reduction
activities on facilities  that are targeted under the Industrial Toxics Project.
This initiative also addresses the Corrective Action  RCRA Implementation
Study (RIS)  recommendations and current Corrective Action Workgroup
proposals, which are national  program goals.

B.  Policy Issues

The national program office (OSWER) has indicated that  the 1992 statutory
permitting deadline for storage  facilities will not be met;  this plan assures
that those TSD  facilities that are permitted are ones that pose the highest
potential for risk reduction.

-------
                                                                   Region II  FY-93
                                                                    Strategic Plan
                     GROUNDWATER TASK FORCE
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

There is  much that is required from the time that a Superfund site is listed
on the National  Priorities List (NPL) until final remediation.  Often, the time
that it takes to fulfill these many requirements works to the detriment of
the environment.  In the time that passes from study to action,
contamination often spreads. This problem is  particularly true of
groundwater contaminant plumes,  where it can result in a greater public
health impact, further destruction of potentially valuable groundwater
resources and a more difficult, and therefore more expensive, cleanup
scenario.

Groundwater ingestion is the pathway of greatest impact on human health
for  Superfund sites in Region II, and S .perfind sites are considered by the
comparative risk workgroup to be  a nigh human health risk overall.

B.  Goals and Measurable Objectives

Thia _:.M:e6,c initiative is intended to expedite  the identification and
implementation of interim groundwater remedies early in the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) process;  it is aimed at  limiting
continued migration of contaminants from the  most highly contaminated
areas.  The focus of the strategy is to develop early action  initiatives to
address groundwater contamination and to formulate a task force to
provide an organizational structure to  support  such early  actions.  By
pr~ - jir^ for the timeliest capture  of groundwater contaminant plumes
possible, the initiative seeks to achieve three goals:  to limit human
exposure to groundwater contaminants; to limit destruction of groundwater
resources; and to reduce the ultimate costs of the full remediation
objective, thereby unencumbering  resources which can be  used to address
risk from  other Superfund sites.

A task force composed of staff dedicated on a full-time basis will be
established to assess the feasibility  of undertaking early groundwater

-------
                                  108

remedial actions on a site-by-site basis, by the start of the Fourth Quarter
FY-91.  Currently, it is estimated that Region II will prepare five early action
Records of Decision (RODs) in FY-92 and an equivalent number of RODs
in FY-93.  Implementation of early action  initiatives is highly dependent on
the  national funding prioritization scheme.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

Region II will  establish a groundwater task force comprising members from
the  Emergency and Remedial Response Division (ERRD) with support from
staff in the Water Management  Division (WMD).  The prime responsibilities
of the task force members will be to assist ERRD staff and managers in
identifying NPL candidate sites for early groundwater action, assist in the
development  of focused feasibility studies, provide support for the
preparation of the  ROD, and provide support for obtaining funding and
contractor assistance.  An early effort will be aimed at identifying
impediments  to early action  at any stage in the  process and recommending
alternatives for eliminating impediment (i.e., a TQM-type analysis).

The task force will provide technical and administrative expertise to regional
managers  and project management staff and work with them to move
identified projects along in an expedited fashion.

D.  Measures of Progress

The plan will  establish feedback loops from the  Remedial Project Manager

-------
                                  109

measure of progress will be the issuance of additional RODs. Outyear
RD/RA starts should also show an increase.

II. OPERATIONAL PLAN

A. FY-93 Activities

In order to implement this strategy a number of activities and tasks will be
undertaken:

      The Croundwater Task Force, comprising ERRD staff with  support
      from WMD staff will be established and a "charter" of its
      responsibilities will be documented to clearly define its role.
      Members will be both technical (e.g., hydrologist/risk assessor) and
      administrative (contract management);
      The T?sk Force will develop a set of criteria and data elements which
      will jo used to assist staff and managers in identifying NPL candidate
      sites for early action initiatives;

      The Task Force, in conjunction with ERRD staff and supervisors, will
      evaluate the necessary information to select and prioritize sites for
      early action;

      ERRD senior management will interact with their Headquarters
      counterparts and Regional senior management to facilitate the process
      (primarily the decision-making and funding portions of the process)
      and to ensure the success of the program;

      The Task Force will monitor implementation of the selected remedy
      from a technical and process viewpoint and will evaluate procedural
      aspects for  overall planning  and management;

      The process will be continually evaluated within the Task Force group
      and periodically evaluated (at set intervals) with ERRD senior
      management to identify areas of concern and improvement.

-------
                                 110

It is anticipated that the groundwork for  this strategy will be completed in
FY-91 and that RODs can be prepared starting in FY-92.  Start of Remedial
Action at these sites is dependent on the national funding prioritization
scheme.  Providing a "pipeline" of candidate sites is essential to the funding
process.  (The President's FY-92 budget stressed remedial action as a
Superfund theme.)

B.  Resource Implications

The resource investment is still being evaluated at this time, but it is
envisioned that 4-5 workyears will be required to provide the necessary
support to the strategy.  At least 2-3 workyears would be "standing"
members of the task force (hydrologist/risk assessor/contract specialist)
with additional workyears needed for supervisory .support and to account
for the role of the RPM in the process.  Thus, for any one particular
remedy selection  process, 2-3 "standing" members of the Task Force plus
1-2 "ad  hoc"  members  (RPM, ERRD supervisor, community relations
specialist, WMD support, Office of Regional Counsel [ORC] suphort) of the
task force would be required.

The Superfund National Program Office has recently indicated that an
additional  level of funding may be available to support implementation of
"Low Cost" remedial actions. At this time it is projected that each action
would require funding of $50-$100,000 for development of a focused
feasibility study and another $1-2 million to implement the remedy (e.g.,
groundwater pump and treat).  As each Superfund site is unique, these
figures represent a best estimate based on current program knowledge but
site costs may vary widely.  However, workyear resources should remain
in the current projected range.  Longer-term savings (as a result of early
plume treatment and reducing plume spread)  cannot yet be estimated.

Resource disinvestment encompasses the reprioritizing of Superfund work.
Efforts in other areas may be delayed, such as comprehensive RI/FS, or
ROD reviews due to the redirection of technical workyear resources.  The
Regional Superfund advice-of-allowance will also be affected since funding
to conduct the focused studies will be drawn from this limited budget.  (As
noted above, funding for "Low Cost" remedy implementation may be
available from Headquarters; such funding may also undergo  national

-------
                                  Ill

queuing for prioritization due to limited national funds for remedial action).
One other area of disinvestment is the "burden" placed on the Regional
infrastructure in the remedy selection  process.  The impact on the RPM,
ERRD supervisor,  ERRD  management,  support groups (ORC, WMD, Air and
Waste Management Division, Environmental Services  Division) and Regional
senior ma-Cement is yet to be gauged as more RODs may be entering
the RegLiii. -scision-making infrastructure.

III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A. Integrated Planning

By taking  early action on groundwater contamination problems, it is
expected that  other environmental resources (such as flora, fauna,  iquatic
life and  other  natural resources) will be positively  impacted.  Stopping the
spread of  a contaminated plume will result in an overall protection of the
potentially affected ecological media.  Early treatment will result in longer-
term  cost  reduction (for ultimate remedial action)  and safeguarding drinking
water supplies (a  positive impact on well-head  protection). The strategy
should meet with favorable community reception.

B.  Policy  Issues

The National Program Office and  National Contingency Plan both  support
the concept.  [Refer to  recent HQ OSWER guidance:  Guidance on
Remedial Actions  for Contaminated Groundwater at Superfund Sites -
EPA/540/6-88-003,12/88 and NCP Section 300.430(a)(i)(3/8/90].  One
other policy concern is  the role of the states in this process.   We need to
ensure that states are fully on-board with early action initiatives and fuHy
understand that these remedies do not represent the "final" site remedy.
EPA needs assurance from the states that institutional or legal  issues (such
as point of discharge or ARARs compliance) do not become impediments in
the process.

-------
                                                                        II  FY-93
                                                                     Strategic Plan
             NON'NPL SITE  MULTI-MEDIA ENFORCEMENT
I.  STRATEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

On at least four occasions, the Region jl Emergency and Remedial
Response Division (ERRD) has encountered hazardous waste scenarios
which present an unacceptable risk to public health or the environment,
yet these sites do not qualify for a fund-financed response.  Nevertheless,
ERRD has, where practical, encouraged the abatement of such  risk through
the use of two mechanisms:  1) the negotiation and execution  of
agreements with  potentially responsible parties (PRPs);  and 2) the issuance
of unilateral orders under § 106 of CERCLA against PRPs.  Both of these
tools are especially effective when the Agency has a strong liability case
against the PRPs and  is  prepared to enforce the agreement or unilateral
order in  order to achieve the intended response action.

The problem usually arises when the site presents an unacceptable  risk, yet
for whatever reason,  is  not eligible for inclusion on the National Priorities
List (NPL;. Some .sites which have fallen within the Region's "non-NPL
strategy" did not  qualify for NPL inclusion because they were not located
within the requisite proximity to a public water  supply intake.  Others
might have passed the necessary threshold for NPL inclusion, but a
particular policy in effect at the time precluded the site's NPL-listing, e.g.,  a
preclusion against listing wellfields on the NPL.

In the four previous instances, we were able to successfully address the
risks posed by the sites because three key criteria were met:  1) the
Region was able to confidently make an imminent and substantial
endangerment determination; 2) the Region had a strong  liability case
against the PRP; and 3) the PRP was viable, and was able to implement the
necessary response action.  In addition, in all cases, the Region
painstakingly provided for public participation, so as not to circumvent the
protections and safeguards which accompany adherence to the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)  procedure.

-------
                                 114

B. Coals and Measurable Objectives

The goal of the Region's non-NPL strategy is cleanup of those sites where
despite the unavailability of the Fund, EPA effort can result in complete site
remediation by  PRPs.

The objective of the non-NPL strategy is to have enforcement instruments
and/or response actions implemented at three non-NPL sites (which fit the
criteria discussed in the previous section) during any fiscal year.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

Candidate sites/areas will be identified during routine operations.  Once a
potential candidate is identified,  ERRD will coordinate with other EPA
regional program offices to  determine whether the site may best be
addressed using the authority of other regulatory programs.  If the
candidate site cannot be addressed by other programs, ERRD management
may pursue use of the non-NPL strategy.  The remediation of these areas
would be designed to mirror the relevant aspects  of the  CERCLA remedial
process.  Two examples can illustrate two different scenarios in which  this
strategy has been successfully employed in the past:  to  effect a multi-
media, area-wide clean-up and to extend a clean-up beyond an  initial
removal action.

The Reynolds Metals Company and the Aluminum Company of America
(ALCOA) sites together are  an example of the use of the non-NPL strategy
to effect an area-wide, multi-media cleanup.  These non-NPL sites  are  -
located on the  St.  Lawrence River, immediately upriver of the General
Motors - Central Foundry Division (C.M.) Superfund Site in Massena, New
York.  The G.M. Site is an  NPL Site.

Originally, New York State  requested that the entire St. Lawrence  River
system in the area of Massena, New York be listed on the NPL. The
Region analyzed the two sites, but determined that neither site could be
listed  on the  NPL.  The Reynolds  facility was RCRA regulated and  therefore
ineligible for inclusion on the NPL under  EPA's current guidelines,  and  the
ALCOA facility's preliminary hazard ranking score would  not qualify it for
inclusion on the NPL. The  Region was cognizant of the  fact, however, that

-------
                                 115

these sites presented unacceptable risk and needed to be addressed
through some mechanism.  In addition, from an engineering perspective,
the Region determined that remediation of the upriver sources (AICOA and
Reynolds) should precede river work at the down-river (G.M.) facility.

EPA issued Unilateral Administrative Orders (UAOs) to ALCOA and
Reynolds under section 106 of CERCLA.  The work sections of these orders
complement the work being performed by C.M. under a 1985
Administrative Consent Order.

EPA had  been made aware that New York State, in the context of natural
resource damage assessments,  had invited G.M., ALCOA and Reynolds to
investigate and remediate the St. Lawrence River system, so as to mitigate
the companies' natural resource damage  liability. These invitations were
rejected. Presuming a lack of consent, and therefore, determining that use
of the procedures set forth in section  122 would not facilitate an
agreement, EPA issued unilateral orders against these companies.

These UAOs ordered the investigation and remediation of the Reynolds and
ALCOA  river system contamination only.  New York State, under  its own
Consent Agreements and the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(SPDES) ore  : —. is overseeing  remediation of upland areas at Reynolds and
ALCOA  .    ...-  .. through the traditional NPL process, is overseeing
remrc :: en of the C.M. facility and the areas of the river system  adjacent
to it.  Thus contamination of the entire St. Lawrence River system near
Massena is being addressed, though the entire area is not listed on. the
NPL.  EPA estimates that the value of the work to be performed by ALCOA
and Reynolds pursuant to the UAOs will  amount to approximately $50
million.  ALCOA and Reynolds  are presently complying with the UAOs.
The cleanups require coordination with the NPDES and SPDES programs,
the TSCA program, and the RCRA program.

Another example of the non-NPL strategy is the Wallkill Well Field Site in
Wallkill,  New York.  This site began as an emergency removal action,
performed by  EPA.  During the course of the removal, EPA identified a
PRP, the General Switch Company,  and negotiated  a consent order
therewith for the performance  of the removal action with EPA oversight.
At the successful conclusion of the removal action,  EPA attempted to have

-------
                                 116

the site listed on the NPL, so that it could later negotiate remedial action
with the PRP.  However, the site was deemed a wellfield, and, pursuant to
a policy which precludes NPL-listing of wellfields, the site did not become
an NPL site.

The  Region was owed approximately $1 million for past response and
oversight costs expended during the removal action.  The Region filed a
complaint against General Switch in which it sought recovery of its costs,
and a declaration of General Switch's liability for future response costs.  In
exchange for forgiveness  of some of the past costs, General Switch agreed
to implement a Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) at the site.  The
Region estimates that the value of such an RD/RA is  approximately $4
million. General Switch's agreement was embodied in a § 122 consent
decree.

D.  Measures of Progress

The  progress of t,,e non-NPL strategy would be measured against the
environmental  indicators for NPL sites which include:  progress toward
achievement of human health  and ecological goals for a medium; reduction
or elimination of immediate health threats; and the amount of waste
treated, removed, and contained.

In addition, the Region would report on its administrative STARS measures
in the  same manner as NPL sites.   For example, the Region would report
on any Records of Decisions signed, or remedial designs started for non-
NPL sites that fiscal year.
II.  OPERATIONAL PLAN

A.  FY-93 Activities

Non-NPL strategy Site activities could include the following:  negotiating
enforcement agreements and/or the issuance of administrative orders;
initiation of remedial investigations and feasibility studies; issuance of
Records of Decision; and commencement of remedial designs and remedial
actions.

-------
                                  117
B.  Resource Implications

This project will include an investment of approximately 3 workyears
(based upon current workload) and $450/000 in extramural funds for
contractor oversight of PRPs.  The disinvestment of resources will come
from those invested in NPL activities.  Thus, for the  non-NPL strategy to be
effectively implemented there must be a reduction of NPL STARS targets
for the Region.  This reduction  will be comparable to the outputs that will
be achieved for the sites that are part of this strategy. The extramural
funding will come from the Region's enforcement budget which may  result
in less monies available for NPL sites.  This funding could come from  within
the Region's budget, or from  the national total.

This disinvestment from NPL work will not result in  significant increases in
risk to ecology or human  health.  The disinvestment will mean lengthening
the timeframe for completing a^ons at some NPL sites,  but the risk
increases will be minimal since  ihese sites  will be  subject to standard
imminent hazard/containment requirements.  Similarly, the amount of
money to be used is small in comparison to the Region's total  Super-fund
budget, yet the risk reduction benefits could be great.
III.    CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A.  Integrated Planning

The n?n-NPL strategy could potentially address multi-media groundwater
issues, or target a geographic area for hazardous waste clean-up.

B.  Policy Issues

This initiative does depart from the concept of a National Priorities List as
identified  by Congress  in the Superfund legislation.  However, it must be
recognized that there are some sites that present a risk to the public health
and the environment that may not be NPL eligible for various reasons.

-------
                                                                  Region II - FY-93
                                                                    Strategic Plan
        REDUCING  RISK OF TOXIC RELEASES AND IDENTIFYING
           HAZARDOUS FACILITIES ON A GEOGRAPHIC BASIS
I.  STRYFEGIC PLAN

A.  Problem Being Addressed

Preventing uncontrolled releases of hazardous substances is a major
component of the Superfund program.  Program resources are used to
address the most serious public health and environmental threats. The risk
associated with time critical  hazardous waste cleanup actions are high
because most actions are conducted  at abandoned facilities where
hazardous materials have been illegally disposed of, or the hazardous
materials on-site are improperly stored and the containers  have
deteriorated  The results of such conditions  can  be fire/explosion with
direc.  ::  ..,- ;nreats of toxic/hazardous materials or other releases which
threaten ecology, human health and  welfare.

The level of risk associated with  this  problem area is  increased by current
practices of small chemical  businesses that abandon their facilities without
notice  to local or state authorities. A significant number of emergency
hazardous waste cleanups performed within the past  few years were
conducted  at abandoned small chemical  businesses.  Normally left behind
are numerous drums, vats, tanks, lab pack materials,  cylinders and other
containers of hazardous substances, most of which are in deteriorating
condition, often leaking and stored near incompatible substances.  Longer
time periods  between abandonment  and removal  generally increase  the
level of risk.  Also, recovering the cleanup costs at these sites is difficult
because most of the companies have been involved in bankruptcy actions
prior to EPA involvement.

B.  Coals and Measurable Objectives

The primary goal of this proposal is to reduce the need  for federal
response to abandoned sites. This goal  can be achieved by an increased
emphasis on  civil and criminal enforcement and through publicizing
enforcement  success.  It can also be enhanced by discovering potential

-------
                                  120
removal candidates at an earlier stage so that action can be taken to
address the most significant threats.

Achieving this goal will provide many tangible benefits.  By demonstrating
the incentives to responsible cleanup and closure of sites the Region can
direct removal resources to address other high risks.   Identification of
priority operating and abandoned facilities will enhance our ability to
address the financial responsibility and capabilities of responsible parties to
effectively clean up their sites.  Working with Local Emergency Planning
Committees, State agencies, OSHA and EPA regulatory programs will focus
attention on the high priority sites, preventing future  human health threats.
The objectives of this proposal  could be measured  by the cost for removals
paid by the responsible parties.  Interim objectives include making chemical
companies aware of the penalties they face for abandoning sites by
publicizing successful enforcement actions, identifying  potential future
removal sites and improving communication with state and local authorities
that can  help  address potential  health threatening hazardous sites.

C.  Strategies and Policy Options

The focus on  enforcement actions will involve strategic choices of sites
located throughout the Region.  Choices for enforcement will  also include
those that will attract media attention.

Federal removal responses are  normally initiated by requests from state
authorities.  Region II,  however, would  like to define a geographic universe
of businesses which may potentially pose a threat to  public health and the
environment to  ensure that the highest priority sites are being addressed.
A review and status of chemical companies in a specific universe will give
Region II the opportunity to identify facilities that are not complying with
RCRA, TSCA,  Clean Air, Clean Water and State regulations.  Knowing the
current status of facilities will enable Region II to address the potential for
future toxic releases.

The Emergency and Remedial Response  Division  will  seek to improve
coordination efforts with a number of other groups.  Local Emergency
Planning Committees and participating agencies can be tapped to provide
information about facilities that utilize hazardous substances.  Information

-------
                                   121
on past violators can be obtained from other divisions in Region  II and
from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.  Toxic Release
Inventory data can be utilized to identify facilities failing to report emissions
and therefore having the potential for abandonment.

D.  Measures of Progress

Progress would be measured in the short term by noting the number of
facilities that are properly addressing cleanup activities.  The strategy
encompasses a long range program  that is designed to  reduce the need to
use Superfund to effect  hazardous waste cleanups.  The standard
environmental  indicators that are employed to document cleanup activities
could be used  to measure accomplishments. The number of facilities that
have successfully implemented financial responsibility requirements  (if that
tool is available) will be  an indication of future  compliance.

II. OPERATIONAL PLAN

A. FY-93 Activities

Activities will include developing inventories of abandoned sites and those
sites with high potential  for abandonment, investigating relative risks
throu£  siie assessments, determining viability of responsible parties and
notification and commencement of enforcement activities at target sites.
The target sites will be selected to  provide public exposure to help
promote the programs.  Specific activities will include:

-  Developing civil and/or criminal  cases  to address  abandoned sites  in
order of priority.

-  Publicizing successful  criminal and/or civil cases to make other potential
violators aware of the consequences of such actions.

-  Working with  Local Emergency Planning Committees to identify facilities
that utilize hazardous substances and compiling information about their
operations (local fire code violations, categories of chemicals,  etc).

-------
                                   122

- Working with OSHA to identify facilities that present human health
threats through their operational techniques.

- Coordinating with other divisions  in the Region to identify target facilities
that could be addressed through facility inspections.

- Evaluating, analyzing and  ranking the degree of threat posed by sites that
are identified.

- Undertaking  responsible party searches at abandoned sites.

- Working with Local  Emergency  Planning Committees to inform the public
of pending threats and compliance action activities to address those threats.

Other specific activities can  be developed if additional tools are made
available to address sites that will cause toxic releases (e.g., promulgation  of
§ 108 regulations, expanded Superfund authorities, etc).

B.  Resource Implications

The full measures of resource implications will not be known until the
available tools are fully developed.  Subsection 108 regulations would
require  additional resources to ensure compliance (similar to the RCRA
Financial Responsibility programs) as the affected community will be  large.
Technical and legal resources will  be necessary to develop both civil and
criminal cases with the addition of Department of Justice resources to
prosecute.  The need  for  contract monies and workyears must be refined
through experience. Activities  will begin in FY-91.  FY-93  estimates follow:

- Case Development  - 1  workyear technical and 1  workyear legal for 25
cases strategically located  throughout region.  (The increase in activities for
the Office of External  Programs will  be very small.)

-  Identification of facilities - significant  local resources (LEPCs,  Fire
Department, etc.) with 1  EPA workyear to explain and encourage the
program.

-------
                                  123

- Compilation of data base for universe of facilities - contract resources.
$50,000 or 0.5 workyears.

- No estimate has been developed for implementation of Subsection 108
regulations as these activities would presumably be incorporated into
program activities.

Implementation of the proposed program will require adjustment in the
regional workplan as follows:

      Enhance enforcement

      Devoting one workyear of OSC activities will reduce the number of
      removal actions performed by 2 (no SCAP adjustment necessary).
      One workyear of civil/criminal legal activities will be lost to other
      Superfund  programs  (adjustments will be made during SCAP
      negotiations).

      Identification of Facilities/Facility Database

      This activity falls within the technical assistance outputs.  It will be
      addressed with  Title  III workyears/AARP personnel.  Contract monies
      will be sought from the CEPP office.  A mechanism already exists to
      adjust commitments for other priority activities within the CEPP
      program.

It should be noted that the proposed program could be initiated on a
limited scale with a significant reduction in the required resources.

III.  CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

A.  Integrated Planning

A properly designed financial responsibility program would take advantage
of free market inducements such as the ability of owners and/or insurers .
to cleanup more economically when facilities  are closed (deteriorated
containers and aged chemicals are more expensive to remediate).  Ancillary
benefits would be realized  through the development of an inventory and

-------
                                  124

knowledge of facilities by Local Emergency Planning Committees.
Information generated would be of use to various EPA and OSHA
regulatory programs designed to control and prevent toxic releases.  TRI
data may prove useful in this new area.

B.  Policy Issues

The proposal is consistent with and enhances the EPA enforcement-first
policy.  It will encourage responsible parties to undertake cleanup activities
without resorting  to use of the fund.  The strategy would be greatly
enhanced by promulgation  of financial responsibility regulations which
would represent a change in national policy.  It should be noted the
CERCLA Subsection 108 requires that financial responsibility  regulations  be
promulgated five  years after enactment, in 1985.

-------
         Appendix B
     A Summary of FY-93



           Strategic
Investments and  Disinvestments

-------
   The Multi-Media Aquifer Protection Project
Investment
Activities
1. DEV. LOCAL GW MGMT &
WELLHEAD PROT. PLANS
2. DEV. GW EDUC. MTRL
3. INVENTORY/ENF. UIC
FTE
1.8
0.6
(0.1)
2.6
4. PWS ENFORCEMENT/MOBILIZATION 1.1
5. INVENTORY SPCC FAC.
6. CONDUCT SF REMEDIAL WRK
IN AQUIFER
7 RCRA PERMIT/ENF.
8. UST INVENTORY/ENF.
9. AIR SOURCE INVENT/ENF.
0.6
---

3.1

Program Area
GROUND WATER MGMT.
SCS - IPA
PESTICIDES
UIC
PWS
OIL SPILL
SUPERFUND
RCRA
UST
AIR
Disinvestment
Activities
1. GEOGRAPH?" TARGETING
GW/WELLHEAo ACTIVITIES
2. ONGOING WORK(NO DIVEST.)
3. GEOGRAPHIL "ARGETING
UIC ACTIVITIES
4. GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
5. GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
6. ONGOING WORK(NO DIVEST)
7. LOWER PRIORITY ENF/CA
8. REDUCE STATE OVERSIGHT
9. GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
FTE Prog ran Area
1.8 GROUND WATER MGMT.
0.6 SCS - IPA
—
2.6 UIC
1.1 PWS
0.6 OIL SPILL
SUPERFUND
RCRA
3.1 UST
AIR
Implement In
Divisions
WMO/DGWP
WMD/USPB
ESO/PTSB
WHD/DGWP
WMD/DGWP
ERRD
ERRD
AWM/HWCB
AWM/HWPB
AWM/ACB
TOTAL:                               9-8



Note: The bracketed FTEs are not  included in the Total.
9.8

-------
   The Multi-Media Project for Risk Reduction in the Great Lakes  Initiative
Investment
Act iwit ies
1. DEVEL./IHPLHENT.
TOXIC PLANS

Z.. ANT1DEGRADATION


3. CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT
4. NPDES ENF/PERMITTING


5. NPL REMEDIATION/POLL. PREV.
6. AIR ENF/POL. P. FOR TOXICS

7. FAST TRACK RCRA
8. UST FACILITIES
9. LONG TERM MONITORING;
TOXICS IMPLMNT. PLAN
10. FEDERAL FACILITIES COMPL.
TOTAL:
FTE
5.0 EXIST
3.0 NEW

2.0


1.0
2.5


1.0
1.5

2.6
0.6
2.0 exist
2.5 new
0.25
24.0
Program Area
GLNPO(2)/SF(3)
GLNPO(3)

UQ STANDARDS


OCEAN DUMPING
UQ ENFORCEMENT
UQ PERMITTING

SUPERFUND
AIR ENF

RCRA PERMIT/ENF
UST
UQ MONITORING
UQ MONIT/GLNPO
FEDERAL FACILITIES

Disinvestment
Activities
1.


2.


3.
4.


5.
6.

7.
8.
9.

10.

CONTINUE SF GEOGRAPHIC
TARGETING FOR GLNPO ACTIV.

OCEAN DUMPING BAN
GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
OF WQ STD.
OCEAN DUMPING BAN
GEOGRAPHIC TARG. OF ENF/
PERMITTING ACTIVITIES
REDUCE CONST. GRNT. ACTIV.
GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
RULE EF. _CT. REV. & •
GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING.
GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING

GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING

(18.5 EXISTING)

( 5.5 NEW
)


FTE
2.0
3.0
3.0 NEU
1.0
1.0

1.0
1.5

1.0
1.0
1.5

2.6
0.6
2.0
2.5 NEU
0.25
24.0
Progra* Area
GLNPO(2)
SF(3)
GLNPO(3)
ODBA
UQ STANDARDS

OOBA
UQ ENF.

CONSTRCT. GRANTS
SUPERFUND
AIR ENF.

RCRA PERMIT/ENF.
UST
UQ MONITORING
UQ MONITORING GLNPO
FEDERAL FACILITIES

Implementing
Divisions
UMD/DO/NFPO


UMD/USPB


UMD/MUPB
WMD/UPCB

WMD/NY/NJMCE
ERRD
AWM/ACB

AWH/HWF
AUM/MUP
ESD

OPM/EIB

(18.5 EXISTING)
( 5.5 NEW
)

* FULL PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION DEPENDS ON RECEIPT OF 5.5 ADDITIONAL FTE.

-------
   The Caribbean Distinctive Habitats Initiative
Investment
Activities
1. CHARACTERIZE HABITATS
2. IDENTIFY NON-POINT
SOURCES AND IMPACTS
3. DEVELOP LONG-TERM
MONITORING PLAN
FTE Program Area Disinvestment
Activities
COASTAL ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. 1. REDUCE 301 (H) POST-WAIVERS
2. REDUCE 403(C)
2.0
FTE Program Area Implementing
Divisions
2.0 COASTAL ENV. MGMT. WMD/WSPB
ESD MONITORING
    4.  COORDINATE ICC
    5.  REVIEW LOCAL EAS
       WORKSHOPS
0.25
0.25
COASTAL  ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT.  3.  WATER PROGRAM MGMT.
NEPA COMPLIANCE
    6.   FIFRA RULE                    (0.1)     PESTICIDES

TOTAL:                                2.5

Note:  The bracketed FTEs are not  included in the Total.
4.   EAS  NY/NJ
                                    5.   ONGOING WORK (NO DISINV.)
                                                                                                          0.25
                                                                     0.25
                                                                     2.5
COASTAL ENV. MGMT.


NEPA
CFO


OPM/EIB



ESD/PTSB

-------
 The PRASA Compliance Initiative
    Investment
    Activities
FTE       Program Area
Disinvestment
   Activities
FTE      Program Area
                            Implementing
                             Divisions
    1.  ENHANCE COMPLIANCE           2.5
        ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
        RE:   PRASA

    2.  WORK WITH LOCAL              1.5
        AGENCIES

    3.  DEVELOP ACTION PLAN

TOTAL:                              4.0
          CONSTRUCTION GRANTS/
          PERMITTING/ENFORCEMENT
         WATER LEGAL SUPPORT
1.  SHIFT EXISTING CONSTRUCTION
   GRANTS. ENF. & DRINK WATER
   FTEs TO GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS
 2.5
                                    1.5
                                                                                                               4.0
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS/
PERMITTING/ENFORCEMENT
         WATER LEGAL SUPPORT
WPC/DGWC
OPM/GRA
                                ORC/WGGL

-------
  The Virgin Islands Compliance Initiative
Investment
Activities
1. ENHANCE COMPLIANCE
ACTIVITIES (PERMITTING/
ENFORCEMENT)
2. DEVELOP ACTION PLAN
3. SEEK ADDITIONAL
' FUNDING FROM BUDGET/CWA
FTE Program Area Disinvestment
Activities
1.5 CONSTRUCTION GRANTS/ 1. GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
PERMITTING/ENFORCEMENT OF EXISTING RESOURCES
TO THE VI
0.5 WATER LEGAL SUPPORT
FTE Program Area Implementing
Divisions
1.5 CONSTRUCTION GRANTS UMD/CMPB
OVERSIGHT/PERMIT/ENF. OPM/GRA
0.5 WATER LEGAL SUPPORT ORC/WGGL
TOTAL:
                             2.0
Z.O

-------
The Drinking Water Compliance Initiative
Investment FTE Program Area
Activities
1. PUERTO RICO NON-PRASA 2.0 DRINKING WATER
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

2. VI REGS DEVELOPMENT 1.0 DRINKING WATER
fn ?R1* nU/DRINIONK UATFD

Disinvestment FTE Program Area
Activities
1. REDUCE NJ TRANSIENT 1.0 DRINKING WATER
EFFORT
2. EXISTING CFO RESOURCES 1.0 DRINKING WATER
3. REDUCE NY MOBILIZATION 1.0 DRINKING WATER

Implementing
Divisions
WMD/DGWC
CFO
WMD/DGWC
nu.un
TOTAL:                              3.0                                                                            3.0



 'Proposal anticipates 0.25 FTE of OW-HQ support for regulation development.

-------
The Coastal Waters, initiative
Investment
Activities
1. DEVEL. /IMPLEMENT
COASTAL PLANS
2. ADDRESS NUTRIENT/TOXIC LOADS
3. NON-POINT SOURCE/NUTRIENT
CONTROL
4. DEV. WQS FOR TOXICS
5. OUTREACH
6. QA/QC PLANS
FTE Program Area
6.0 EXIST ESTUARY/COASTAL PROG
3.0 NPDES PERMIT/ENF.
2.0 NPDES PERMIT/ENF.
2.5 NPDES PERMIT/ENF.
1.0 OCEAN DUMPING
0.5 WQ STDS
1 . 0 OCEAN/COASTAL
* WATER PROGRAM SUPPORT
Disinvestment
Activities
1. ONGOING
REDUCE CONSTR GRNT. ACTIV.
GEOGRAPHIC TARG. NPDES ACTIV.
2. GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
REDUCE STATE OVERSIGHT
3. REDUCE OCEAN DUMPING BAN ACT.
4. GEOGRAPHIC TARGETING
5. ONGOING
6. OTHER QA/QC ACTIVITIES
FTE
6.0 EXIST
3.0
2.0
2.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
*
Program Area
ESTUARY/COASTAL PROG
CONSTR. GRNT
WQ ENF/PERMITTING
WQ ENF/PERMITTING
ODBA
WQ STDS
OCEAN/COASTAL
QA/QC/WATER SUPPORT
Implementing
Divisions
WMD/MWP
NY/NJNCB
WMD/WPCB
WMD/WSPB
WMD/WSPB
OEP
ESD/MMB
TOTAL:
 16.0                                                                    16.0
(6 WORKYEARS ARE ALREADY ASSIGNED TO ESTUARY/COASTAL PROGRAM ACTIVITIES)
'ESD RESOURCE INPUT TO BE DETERMINED LATER.

-------
 The Transportation and Air Emissions Initiative
Investment
Activities
FTE Program Area Disinvestment
Activities
FTE Program Area Implementing
Divisions
    1. STATE I/M
    2. TRANSP. CONTRL.  MEAS.
    3. CLEAN FUELS
TOTAL:
1.05 EXIST  AIR QUAL. MGMT.
0.5 NEW     AIR QUAL. MGMT.
1.3 EXISTS   AIR QUAL. MGMT.
0.65 NEW    AIR QUAL. MGMT.
0.65 EXIST  AIR QUAL. MGMT.
0.85 NEW   AIR QUAL. MGMT.
5.0
-REDUCE  SUPPORT FOR:

 1.  FED/STATE REG. DEV.

 2.  NSR/PSD PROGRAM

 3.  STATE TOXIC PROG. DEV.

 4.  COMPUTER SYST. DEV./SUP.

 5.  NEW  RESOURCES FOR CAA
3.0




2.0

5.0
                                                                                                                          AIR QUAL.  MGMT.
                                                                                                                          AIR QUAL.  MGMT.
                                        AWM/APB
 'PROJECT ANTICIPATES  RECEIVING 2 ADDITIONAL FTE IN FY-93 FOR NEW CAA ACTIVITIES

-------
The Subsurface Hazardous Waste Transport Systems Release Initiative
 Investment
 Activities
FTE      Program Area
 .Disinvestment
   Activities
                                                                                                           FTE       Program Area
                                                                                                            Implementing
                                                                                                             Divisions
    1. 3007 LETTERS

    2. INSPECTIONS

    3. NEGOTIATE CA ORDERS

    4. ENFORCEMENT

TOTAl:
2.3      HAZ WASTE MGMT./ENF.



0.9      ORC RCRA SUPPORT

3.2
1.  LAND BAN
2.  NON-TCLP GEN.
3.  STATE OVERSIGHT
4.  LOWER PRIORITY CA

5.  LOWER PRIOhlTY ENF.
                                                                                                       2.3
                                                                                HAZ WASTE MGMT./ENF.
                                                                     0.9         ORC RCRA SUPPORT

                                                                     3.2
                                                                                                                                              AWM/HWFB/HWCB
                                                                                                                                              ORC/AWTS

-------
 The Active Hazardous Waste Generators and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSDs) Facilities Initiative
    Investment
    Activities
FTE    Program Area
 Disinvestment
  Activities
FTE       Prograa Area
Implementing
 Divisions
    TSOs:
    1.  PRIORITIZE TSDS
    2.  PERMIT UNIV.  OVER 4/5 YRS
    3.  BEGIN CA AT SITES W/ PERMITS
    4.  USE RFI DATA TO RANK

    GENERATORS:
    1.  ID GEN. VIA BIENNIAL RPTS.
    2.  DEV. WAS.  MINIZ. STDS
    3.  TARGET GENERATORS
TOTAL:
 1.0    HAZ WASTE MGMT./ENF.




 2.0    RCRA PERMITTING


 3.0
                                  TSDs:
                                 1. REDUCE RFA WORK
 GENERATORS:
1.  REDUCE RCRA STATE
    OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES
                                  1.0       HAZ WASTE MGMT./ENF.
2.0       RCRA PERMITTING
                                                                   3.0
                                       AWM/HWFB
AWM/HWFB

-------
  The Ground Water Task Force Initiative
    Investment
    Activities
FTE
Program Area
Disinvestment
 Activities
FTE       Program Area
                                                                                                             Inclement ing
                                                                                                              Divisions
    1. DEVEL./STAFF TASK FORCE
    2. SELECT ACTION SITES
    3. DEVELOP RODS
    4.  IMPLEMENT CLEANUP
 4-5    SUPERFUND
 (2-3    TASK FORCE)
 (1-2   RPMs)
                          1.  DELAY FULL SITE RI/FS
                             RODS TO ADDRESS EARLY
                             ACTION NEEDS
                                 4-5
          SUPERFUND
                                                                          ERRD
TOTAL:
 4-5
                                                                                                           4-5

-------
 The Non-NPL Site Multi-Media Enforcement  Initiative
     Investment
     Activities
FTE      Program Area
Disinvestment
   Activities
FTE      Progran Area
Implementing
  Divisions
    1.  NEGOTIATE ENF AGREE.
        ISSUE AOs
    2.  INITIATE RIFs
    3.  ISSUE RODs
    4. COMMENCE CLEAN-UP
3.0      SUPERFUND
 1.  DELAY SOME NPL
    CLEAN-UPS
                                                                      3.0      SUPERFUND
                                     ERRD
TOTAL:
3.0
                                                                                                           3.0

-------
The Reducing Risks of Toxic Releases and Identifying
Investment FTE
Activities
1. CASE DEVELOPMENT 1.0
1.0
2. ID LIKELY FACILITIES 1.0
(0.5)
Program Area
Hazardous Facilities on a
Disinvestment
Activities
SUPERFUNO REMOVAL REDUCE REMOVAL ACTION BY
SUPERFUND LEGAL SUPPORT REDUCE OTHER ENF. OUTPUT
SUPERFUND TITLE III REDUCE ASSIST. TO OTHER
SUPERFUND OR CONTRACT
Geographic Basis
FTE
Initiative
Program Area
2 1.0 SUPERFUND REMOVAL
1.0 SUPERFUND LEGAL SUPPORT
LOCALITIES 1.0 SUPERFUND TITLE III
(0.5) SUPERFUND OR CONTRACT

Implement inc
Divisions
ERRD
ORC
ERRD
TOTAL:                                 3.0



Note: The bracketed FTEs are not included in the Total.
3.0

-------
   Appendix C
Current Region  II
    Initiatives

-------
                                                                   Region II .FY-93
                                                                    Sirategic Plan
                   FY-91 Region  II  Initiatives
Air Toxic Pollution Prevention Initiative
     Air &  Waste Management Division

The SARA Title III Toxic Release Inventory revealed that numerous major
sources are  emitting toxic substances, including fugitive emissions, in large
quantities not covered by any existing regulations,  This initiative targets a
number of the largest emitters and seeks their voluntary emissions
reductions.  Twenty industrial facilities in New York, New Jersey, Puerto
Rico and the Virgin Islands were requested to voluntarily reduce toxic
emlr^lons.   Eight were found to have already successfully reduced
emissions from between 47% and 90%.  Reductions had been achieved  by
implementing one or more of the following measures:  process
modifications, improved maintenance/monitoring, control of fugitive
emissions, stopping the manufacture  of certain products, and  improved
techniques for estimating emissions.  Some facilities have developed
corporate policies to optimize reductions in f .lissio'.s.  Of these, live
established specific  numeric emissions reduction goals ranging from 68% to
90%.   It  is anticipated that at least two more companies will adopt
corporate policies and/or numerical goals as a result of their  participation in
this initiative.

      FY-91  est. workyears:   1.0
Air/UST Compliance Initiative
      Air & Waste Management Division

As one or*  -Dion's H's multi-media initiatives, the Air/UST Compliance
initiative will integrate air and  Underground Storage Tank requirements in
compliance and enforcement programs for New York City-owned tanks.

      FY-91 est. workyears:   0.1

-------
                                  144

Antidegradation Implementation
     Water Management Division

Region II and representatives of New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) are serving as co-chairs  of a Great
Lakes Initiative (GLI) steering committee workgroup, which is developing a
comprehensive antidegradation policy to address all sources (point and
nonpoint) of persistent toxic substances.  The Antidegradation Committee
has been expanded to  include Region V, EPA Headquarters and Wisconsin,
in addition to Region II and NYSDEC.  Comments  on a draft
Comprehensive Antidegradation  Policy and Implementation Procedures for
Point Sources of Persistent Toxic Substances  have  been received and a
revised document is currently being prepared.  The document  is to be
completed for Steering Committee  adoption on February 28, 1991.

     FY-91 est. workyears:  1.5
Beach/Shellfish  Colonies Closures Action Plan
     Water Management Division

The implementation of the Interagency Floatables Action Plan has been
successful in minimizing  beach closures from floatables debris wash-ups
since 1989.  However, there continue to be periodic beach closures in
Region II due to high  bacterial levels. In coordination with the states, the
Region has initiated a  preemptive action plan to stem the causes and
subsequent impacts of beach closures. The principal components of the
initiative are to identify the responsible party(s) in the event of a short-.
term or intermittent beach/shellfish bed closure and to assess  applicable
penalties.  During the summer of 1990, New Jersey issued penalty orders
to two responsible parties for contributing to beach closure events and the
Region issued two  §308  requests to  permittees to complete evaluations of
similar  events. The Region will take formal  action during the second
quarter of FY-91  against  a municipality in New York that caused two beach
closures due to unauthorized sewage bypasses.

     FY-91 est. workyears:   0.5

-------
                                 145
CERCLA/SARA Environmental Review Procedures Training
     Office of Policy & Management

The CERCLA/SARA Environmental Review Procedures Training initiative has
been on-going since 1988.  The initiative involves training Superfund
Remedial Project Managers and On-Scene Coordinators in the procedures
tha, .-; ,st be followed to ensure that CERCLA/SARA actions comply with
the requirements of other environmental laws.  The Region has provided
this training to other Regions, Headquarters, the Superfund Academy, EPA
Contractors, states  and other federal agencies.

     FY-91  est. workyears:   0.3
Enforcement Leveraging - New York State
     Water Management Division

The Region announced the NPDES enforcement leveraging program on
April 20, 1990. Categorical Industrial Users  (CIDs) with  unaddressed past
violations had until June 20, 1990 to come forward and  initiate settlement
with EPA for a reduced penalty.  Twenty facilities  responded to the
announcement, identifying themselves as either confirmed or potential
categorical industries.  Two Administrative Complaints and draft Consent
Orders were  issued in September 1990 and  both  cases have been settled
for the amounts proposed in the complaints.  In addition, a complaint was
issued to a CIU which was independently found to be violating categorical
pretreatment  standards.  Four Administrative Complaints  are projected to
be issued in the second quarter of FY-91 to facilities that responded to the
enforcement leveraging program but did not offer a settlement amount.
Evaluation of  responses to §308 requests is ongoing and  will be followed
up by site inspections.

     FY-91 est. workyears:   2.0
Enhancement of Regional Consent  Decree Tracking System
     Office of Regional Counsel

-------
                                  146
The Region initiated a program in FY-90 to enhance its consent decree
compliance tracking, and improve the reliability of the automated Consent
Decree Tracking System (CDTS).  Program staff reported actual milestone
completion dates for entry into CDTS each quarter, in addition to reporting
the overall compliance status for the STARS report.  The enhanced system,
along with improvements in  report formatting, will  provide Division
Directors with a quick overview of the general state of consent decree
compliance in their programs.

      FY-91 est.  workyears:   0.1
Floatabies Action Plan
     Water Management Division

EPA and the other involved federal, state and local agencies are
coordinating their activities to implement the Floatabies Action Plan
initiative.  The plan  consists of four key elements:  surveillance,  regular
cleanups (moon-tides and rain events), non-routine cleanups and a
communications network to facilitate coordinated use of available resources.
Implementation of the plan began during the summer of 1990, and was
extremely successful, with a total of 709 tons of debris collected in New
York and 4,656 tons collected in New Jersey.

     FY-91 est. workyears:   3.5
Improved Contingency Planning
      Emergency & Remedial Response Division

This initiative developed as a result of the Region's experiences in
responding to Hurricane Hugo, which highlighted the need for an updated
regional response strategy. A Regional Response Team was established,
with the responsibility to address environmental impacts and health hazards
associated with major disasters. The establishment of the Region II
Response Team will significantly improve our ability to address major

-------
                                 147
disasters in a comprehensive and timely manner when they occur in the
future.

      FY-91 est. workyears:   n/a
Incineration 2000
     Air & Waste Management Division

Incineration 2000 was launched due to concern over potential human
health threats that might result from the cumulative impact of emissions
from 14 proposed new sludge incinerators, 16 resource recovery plants
and 8 medical waste incinerators in the New Jersey - New York City
Metrooolitan area which are scheduled to be built over the next 10 years.
The^r r^-.v emissions would compound health threats already posed by
exist    ,wjrces, which include 1 hazardous waste incinerator,  5 sludge
incinerators, 6 resource  recovery plants, 37 hospital waste incinerators and
a large variety of indjstrial and manufacturing plants. To addre_:o ihese
concerns,  an air quality simulation was conducted to quantify the
cumulative air quality impacts of 18 toxic pollutants (including heavy
metals) emitted or to be emitted by existing or proposed sludge, resource
recovery,  medical waste, and hazardous waste incinerators (103
incinerators).  A health risk assessment will be made based upon projected
concentrations of toxics from the simulation study.

     FY-91 est. workyears:   0.1

Lake Champlain  Management Conference
     Water Management Division

The Lake  Champlain Management Conference was authorized  by the Great
Lakes Critical Programs Act passed by  Congress on November 15, 1990.
EPA's FY-91 budget included $2 million to convene the Management
Conference.  The goal of the Conference is to develop a Comprehensive
Pollution Prevention Control and Restoration Plan  for Lake Champlain
within three years.  EPA Regions I and II, along with the states of New
York and Vermont, will co-lead the Conference which comprises 32
members.

-------
                                  148
     FY-91 est. workyears:  0.3
Law Enforcement Coordinating Committees in the Caribbean
     Office of Regional Counsel

The  Region II Office of Regional Counsel is working with the Office of
Criminal Investigation and other federal law enforcement agencies in Puerto
Rico and the Virgin Islands to establish law enforcement coordinating
committees (LECCs).  The purpose of the LECCs is  to coordinate
environmental crimes investigations and prosecutions.

     FY-91 est. workyears:   0.1
Multi-Media Enforcement Pilot Project
     Office of Regional Counsel; All Program Divisions

The Region initiated a pilot project in the first quarter of FY-90 to identify
facilities with compliance problems in two or more environmental media,
and to carry out combined and/or contemporaneous enforcement actions.
Potential targets were identified by each media program  and were
presented to the multi-media workgroup. As  a result,  enforcement action
was taken against the Caribbean Petroleum Corporation in  Bayamon,
Puerto Rico, and the region is seeking a combined  penalty of $832,325 for
violations.  Other targeted facilities will be or  are being investigated during
FY-91,  with close  coordination with Region II states.

     FY-91  est. workyears:  1.0

-------
                                 149
Peconic Bay Program (Brown Tide/National Estuary Program
Nomination
     Water Management Division

The Brown Tide Comprehensive Assessment and Management Plan
(BTC  .  '•-) was  initiated in 1985 in response to the brown alga! bloom
which Cbwim&ted the scallop population and eelgrass beds in  Peconic Bay.
To date, local, state and federal funds have supported the BTCAMP.
Currently, a Governor's  Nomination Document is being prepared and will
be submitted to EPA to support the inclusion of Peconic Bay  into the
National Estuary Program.

     FY-31  est. workyears:  1.5
Regional Risk Ranking Project
     Office of Policy & Management; All Program  Divisions

The Regional Risk Ranking  project was designed to assist in setting regional
priorities as part of the strategic planning process.  The project used a
combination of available data and expert judgement (all regional
programs/divisions were represented on the risk workgroup) to rank the
severity of various environmental problems (for example, air pollution
resulting from mobile sources, hazardous waste contamination of
groundwater, and destruction of wetlands) in Region  II.  It used three
criteria to rank environmental problems: 1) risks to human  health, 2) risks
to ecological systems, and  3) damages to economic welfare.

     FY-90/91 est. workyears:    4.0
RCRA Pewit Action Environmental Review Procedures
     Office of Policy & Management

Complementing the Office of Policy and Management's CERCIA/SARA
training initiative, the RCRA Permit Action  Environmental Review Procedures
involves the development of appropriate procedures to ensure that RCRA
permit actions comply with the requirements of other environmental laws.

-------
                                 150
     FY-91 est. workyears:  0.2
Staten Island/New lersey Urban Air Toxics Assessment Project
     Air & Waste Management Division

The Staten Island/New jersey initiative resulted from the expressed concern
of the public and  environmental protection agencies about the lack of
information and possible health risks attributable to air toxics in the Staten
Island and Northern New Jersey area as compared to other areas. In
response to these concerns, the EPA, in close coordination with the States
of New York and  New Jersey, designed and implemented a plan to use
modern measurement techniques over an extended period of time to
document the  nature and extent of toxic substances in the ambient air of
the project area.  Extensive sampling was conducted  over a 2 year period.
Monitoring, meteorological, emissions and health-risk data are currently
being analyzed and  a final report is due to be  published during FY-91.

     FY-91 est. workyears:  2.0
Superfund Cost Recovery Image Processing System
     Office of Policy & Management

The Superfund Cost Recovery Image Processing System  (SCRIPS) project
will be implemented in Region II in FY-91.  The system will image cost
recovery financial documents to an  automated database.  This is an
Agency-wide project in which Region II will serve as  a pilot region.

     FY-91 est. workyears:  2.0

-------
                                  151
TSCA/EPCRA Enforcement Program Enhancement
      Environmental Services Division

Under a regional  pHot program, the Environmental Services Division was
dele-rited the authority to unilaterally issue Administrative Complaints and
Concert Agreements for certain types of TSCA and EPCRA cases without
the extensive involvement of the Office of Regional Counsel (ORC).  Since
the start of this initiative in FY-90, a total  of 31 complaints were issued.  Of
these, 19 have  been closed  and a total of $132,225 in final penalties have
been  assessed.  During the settlement negotiations, the Region granted
$50,875 in reductions to the proposed penalties for environmentally
beneficial expenditures (EBEs) that cost respondents $239,812 to
implement.  These EBEs include solvent recovery projects, improvements to
emission or discharge control systems, release warning systems and other
waste minimization/pollution prevention activities.  The average length of
time from complaint issuance to case closure was 92 days. The Region
expects to achieve a similar  level of success during  FY-91.

      FY-91 est. workyears:   3.0
Turnover & Retention Analysis
      Office of Policy & Management

A comprehensive analysis of the Region's turnover and retention problems
is being conducted.  The initiative includes: a detailed review of data on
turnover and length of service of Region II employees, a survey of all
permanent full-time employees to get their thoughts and ideas  on the
problems, the reconciliation of survey results and data and the
development of suggestions for improvement and an action plan for their
implementation.  The initial data analysis results were issued in  the second
quarter of FY-91;  the  final report is expected by the third quarter.

      FY-91 est. workyears:   1.0

-------
    Appendix D
     Region
  Federal Facilities
 Background Paper

        &

Indian Coordination
 Background Paper

-------
                                                                  Region II FY-93
                                                                   Strategic Plan
         REGION  II  FEDERAL FACILITIES PROGRAM
                     BACKGROUND PAPER
PURPOSE
The purpose of this background paper is to identify the long term strategy
and goals Tor the Region II federal facilities compliance program.

BACKGROUND

In 1978, Executive Order (EO) 12088 established the Executive Branch
program to ensure that federal agencies comply with environmental
pollution control requirements.  The program is administrative and requires
coordination/cooperation amons EPA, OMB, and other federal agencies.
Disputes regarding compliance by federal facilities are resolved within the
Executive Branch through administrative (not judicial) procedures  based on
negotiation and,  if needed, elevation between EPA and the respective
agencies.  EO  12088 established a three tiered  approach for EPA to follow
to ensure that fedeial agencies comply with environmental requirements.
The three-tiered  approach  directs EPA to:

      •     enforce environmental regulations using traditional enforcement
           mechanisms  and/or interagency dispute resolution procedures,
           when necessary;

      •     educate personnel at federal facilities about their environmental
           compliance responsibilities, and provide the technical  assistance
           necessary to enable them to carry out their responsibilities;

      •     actively participate in the planning and budget processes of
           other federal agencies through the A-106 review process, in
           order to ensure that adequate resources are  directed  to
           environmental pollution control projects.

Although federal agencies are required by EO 12088 to comply with all
federal,  state, and local environmental statutes,  there is a recognition that
traditional enforcement responses are not always appropriate because EPA

-------
                                  156

is a member of the Executive Branch. Accordingly,  EPA has developed a
special set of enforcement approaches for non-compliance at federal
facilities.

These approaches are detailed in the Federal Facilities Compliance Strategy
(EPA/130/4-89/003, November 1988).  The strategy establishes the
national goal that federal agencies achieve a higher rate of compliance with
environmental statutes than the private sector. Additionally, it  reconciles
EPA's dual responsibility of (1) providing advice/assistance under  EO 12088
and (2) enforcing federal facilities' compliance of environmental statutes.
The process involves cooperation and negotiation between  EPA and other
agencies  to  resolve compliance issues.

In Region II, there  are over 1800 separate federal facilities located on some
600,000  acres of federally-owned land.  Of these, approximately  200
facilities are  considered majors or significant minors, and are, therefore,
tracked on a regular basis for compliance with environmental requirements.
The federal  facilities of primary concern  are:

      •     the 115 that are RCRA  notifiers, including 33 TSDs;

      •     the 93  that are  listed on the hazardous waste compliance
           docket, including 56 major air emitters and 12 listed on, or
           proposed for, the NPL;  and

      •     the 7 that are water majors.

Although the compliance data are tracked by the individual  media
programs, the Region recently implemented a regional Federal  Facilities
Tracking  System (FFTS) to track all  inspections and enforcement actions at
federal facilities by the major programs (Air, RCRA, Water [NPDES], TSCA,
and Superfund). The FFTS will become the primary means of  monitoring
environmental compliance at federal facilities.  Additional monitoring is
done through  site visits and A-106  budget reviews.

-------
                                   157

 FUTURE DIRECTIONS

 EO 12088 charges EPA with three primary functions: enforcement and
 compliance, education and technical assistance, and budget oversight.
 Accordingly, the proposed future directions of the Federal Facilities Program
 are presented with respect to these functions.

 Enforcement and Compliance

 Typically, compliance rates at federal facilities are lower than those in  the
 private sector.  Overall, the compliance rates at federal facilities in Region II
 in the various media programs have ranged from 60% to 74% during the
 period from 1987 through 1990. With regard to enforcement action and
 compliance monitoring duties, the federal facilities program is decentralized,
 with all inspections and enforcement actions performed  by the media
 program.,.  The, Federal Facilities Coordinator (FFC) provides basic program
 oversight throughout the enforcement  process,  as needed.

 Because federal facilities are often large and complex and are not subject to
 all of EPA's traditional enforcement  mechanisms (e.g., they cannot be fined
 by EPA), they offer an excellent opportunity for multi-media enforcement.
 Facilities would be targeted for multi-media action using National
 Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) risk rankings that have been
 developed for the Region and the FFTS compliance data. The Multi-
 Program Enforcement Committee (recently established in Region II) would
 be a good vehicle through which to develop this  program,  possibly under a
 Sub-Committee on Federal Facilities. The program would  use a multi-
 media approach, which would provide a comprehensive view of a facility's
 environmental performance.  By focusing on facilities' total  performance, it
 is hoped that EPA could capture the attention of base commanders and
 facility managers, and (if necessary) the press and political leaders.

 In addition to the  development of a multi-media strategy, the FFC will use
 FFTS to identify facilities which need inspection, environmental auditing,
 and the development of facility-specific management plans. The FFC will
 also continue to work with the media  programs to ensure compliance with
.the Federal Facilities Compliance Strategy, and adherence to "timely and
 appropriate" enforcement response  protocols.

-------
                                  158
The multi-media nature of the program could also be a valuable asset in
pursuing the Region's risk-based, geographic, and other special  initiatives.
Also, pollution prevention initiatives can be negotiated into  Federal Facilities
Compliance Agreements (FFCAs).  The NEIC rankings and FFTS data could
be used to target future activities in these areas.

Technical Assistance and Education

EO 12088 requires EPA to provide "technical assistance and advice" to
other federal Agencies "in order to ensure their cost-effective and timely
compliance..." with pollution control  requirements.   It is a  primary
responsibility of the Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement and EPA's
Regional  FFCs to ensure that federal agencies are.provided  with such
assistance.

Typically,  the FFC  provides general compliance program assistance to
federal facilities in  Region II.  More specific technical assistance is provided
by the media program offices, as needed.  Current  FFC assistance and
outreach activities  include mailings of training information and newly
promulgated compliance guidelines; coordination of  Annual  Federal  Facilities
Conferences; coordination of quarterly Federal Facilities Roundtables;
coordination of regional visits by other federal agencies; weekly contact
with the EPA/Department of Defense (DOD) Liaison; and participation in
Department of Energy Tiger Team audits.  Future efforts in these areas  will
be targeted toward promoting risk-based initiatives,  geographic  initiatives,
pollution prevention, improving  compliance  in all media, and
implementation of the new Clean Air Act.

We also  propose to augment outreach efforts by increasing training
opportunities and site visits.  Future training efforts will include EPA-run
courses in environmental auditing and pollution prevention  techniques.
Additional on-site activity will include visits to support A-106 reviews,
meetings  between  higher-ranking regional officials (e.g., between  the
Regional Administrator and Base Commanders), and staff participation in
other agencies' compliance monitoring programs (e.g., Tiger Teams and Air
Force Environmental Audits).

-------
                                  159
The technical assistance role will also be expanded through the ..
implementation of pollution prevention  initiatives.  Regional staff will
cor* -(-3 :D v.ork with facilities in developing programs for pollution
pre  .r^ .en .inj waste minimization.  In addition, we will initiate pilot
projects at select major facilities in conjunction with EPA's Office of
Research and Development, and will perform  outreach with DOD facilities
through the  use of a volunteer West Point cadet during the summer of
1991.                                               5

Budget Oversight

Executive Order 12088 requires that federal agencies submit pollution
ab:' - - --.: :ians semi-annually to EPA for review.  The process for
developing and maintaining these plans is described in OMB Circular No.
A-106 (12/31/74).  Through this established process, federal agencies  plan
projects to ensure continuing compliance, to meet new regulatory
requirements, or to  correct problems or violations identified by  EPA or
states. The A-106 process  is unique within the government budgeting
system in that it directs EPA to review federal agency  plans for OMB to
ensure that these plans will be adequate from the standpoint of timeliness,
cost, and engineering soundness.

For FY-92,  the Region reviewed approximately 1,300 projects, valued at
$1.25 billion  (including  $0.75 billion for CERCLA/SARA projects  and $0.20
billion for RCRA projects).   Total expenditures in this area  are expected to
increase dramatically over the next several years.  The FFC is the  focal
point for this process; however, the media divisions perform a critical  role
in reviewing  projects that affect their programs.

Because the  implementation of environmental remediation activities and the
pollution control projects is so capital intensive, the A-106 process is a
valuable compliance tool.   This coupled with the projected growth in
environmental spending by federal agencies, will require more diligence in
project review.  Toward this end, we propose A-106 training for both
regional and  other agency  staff. Additionally,  there  will be an increase in
the number  of site visits by regional staff to provide greater understanding
and  participation in project  review,  as well as a follow-up on review
comments.   The A-106 budget reviews will also be  used to target and track

-------
                                      160



facilities as part of regional and  national strategic initiatives.

-------
                                                                 Jiegion II  FY-93
                                                                  Strategic Plan
                REGION II INDIAN PROGRAM
                     BACKGROUND PAPER
PURPOSE
The purpose of this background paper is to identify the long-term strategy
and goals for the  Region's Indian Program.

BACKGROUND

In 1984 EPA issued a National Indian  Policy based on the principle of
supporting Indian  self-government.  Under this policy,  EPA views Tribal
governments as the appropriate parties responsible for making decisions
and implementing programs affecting  Indian reservations, their environment
and the health and welfare of reservation populations.

EPA is committed  to providing Tribes  the same opportunities as states,  and
working with Tribes to  assist in establishing and implementi  ,g appropriate
Tribal environmental programs.  However, EPA recognizes that there are
several significant  constraints that may hamper the full implementation  of its
National Indian  Policy.  Some of these constraints include:

•    the lack of adequate current funding levels provided to Indian Tribes;

•    the fact that EPA-administered programs and statutes are not fully
     integrated, which makes it difficult for Tribes to address cross-media
     problems;

•    the lack of adequate Tribal infrastructures needed to work with EPA
     to develop and implement environmental programs.  Moreover, some
     Tribes are so small that they may lack the critical mass needed for
     environmental program development.

•    the need for EPA, when working with Tribes, to change its
     orientation from a highly  technical working partnership (as it has with
     states) to  a focus on less  technical and more fundamental  issues.

-------
                                 162

•    the need for EPA to develop a "hands-on" approach to work with
     Tribes.  The "hands-on" approach would involve EPA efforts to assist
     Tribes in developing an infrastructure, training their staff, gathering
     baseline data,  and in remaining available as  a technical resource.

•    the fact that many Tribal environmental concerns are beyond EPA's
     jurisdiction and may require state input.

There are seven federally recognized  Tribes in Region II,  all of which are
located in New York State.  They are the Cayuga Nation, the Oneida
Nation of New York, the Onondaga Nation, the Seneca Nation of Indians,
the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, the Tonawanda Band of Senecas and the
Tuscarora Nation; their estimated population and  land holdings are as
follows:

     Tribe      POPULATION   LAND HOLDINGS (in acres)

     Cayuga           420     None-Live on Seneca land
     Oneida           850                32
     Onondaga        1,463             7,300
     Seneca          5,710            64,320
     .St.  Regis         3,025            14,600
     Tonawanda       988             7,549
     Tuscarora         950             5.700

     Total           13,406            99,501
FUTURE  DIRECTIONS

Over the past three years, Region II has made some significant progress in
implementing the National Indian Policy.  Region II has increased its annual
program  funding outlays to Indian Tribes by close to 500% and has
increased technical outlays by approximately 150% since  FY-87.  Of
particular note in  this regard is the Cooperative Agreement that has been
signed  with the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, which is considered a national
model  and  has led to discussions with other Tribes concerning similar
agreements.

-------
                                  163


However, we have a long way to go before the Region achieves full
implerr -cntation of the National Indian Policy.  Accordingly, we are
considering the following steps, which will be implemented over the next
2-3 years, to implement the policy:

•    The establishment of the Regional Indian Work Group (IWG).  The
     IWG will consist of key staff from the various programs that  have
     been involved in  Indian issues. It will play an important role in
     identifying environmental risks at reservations, and in developing a
     strategy to address those risks.

•    The preparation of an  Inventory  of Indian Lands. To the extent that
     EPA Headquarters makes funding available, the  Region will prepare a
     multi-media survey of  environmental conditions and needs on all
     Indian lands  in the Region.  The most critical environmental  health
     and ecological risks will also be identified.

•    The development of a Regional Strategy. Over the years, we  have
     pursued a  number of program-specific and issue-specific initiatives on
     Indian lands.  However, there is a need to develop a comprehensive
     approach to  Indian environmental problems  that will insure that our
     disparate actions lead toward meaningful environmental gains and the
     reduction of the most  significant risks.  Development of a Regional
     Strategy will  be completed in  FY-91; implementation of the strategy
     will  be  a primary function of the  IWC.

•    An increase in Outreach and  Exchange of Information.  In order to
     promote mutual understanding between EPA and the Indian  Tribes,
     we propose  to increase outreach activities.  One of the first activities
     in this area will be to set up a meeting  between the Regional
     Administrator and  Tribal leaders.

•    An increase in Funding and Technical Assistance.  As environmental
     needs are  identified, we will make every effort  to provide the funding
     and technical assistance necessary to address those needs, within the
     context of our overall strategy.  Recognizing that Tribal governments
     are often too small to  establish discrete  programs in multiple

-------
                           164

environmental areas, we plan to make at least two multi-media grants
during FY-92.

The development of more Cooperative Agreements.  The ultimate
goal of all our Indian program activities is to assist the Region's Indian
Tribes in developing environmental programs that allow them to
address  their own environmental needs in a continuing and
comprehensive manner. Toward this end, we plan to
begin/complete negotiation of more Cooperative Agreements (based
on our model agreement with the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe) with
other  interested Tribes.
                             DATE DUE
                     US EPA REGION 2 LIBRARY
                       26 FEDERAL PLAZA, RM. 402
                         NEW YORK, NY 10278
                             (212) 264-2881

-------