Agency
Reg
*EPA901-R-98-001
-------
Please give us
your comments
on the 1998
State of the
New England
Environment
Report,
ft Prlnud on 100S poitrcontunw
non-dtlnkxl fiber pthiitd fron)
100% recycled ofllu WMU,
uiln| v«g«ubli btMd mki
-------
Please give us
your comments
on the 1998
State of the
New England
Environment
Report.
O Printed on 100% post-consumer
non-deinked fiber gathered from
100% recycled office waste,
using vegetable based inks. •
-------
Open Letter to the
People of New England
Our tiny corner of America embodies
characteristics unlike any other — a
combination of the conventional and the
contemporary, the ingenious and the
practical, die tempered and the natural.
Our environment, our. people, our com-
merce, our public institutions — all stand
as testaments to the unique and vibrant
nature of our region. It is our responsi-
bility —• EPA's and yours — lo maintain
and .enhance the natural resources and
environment which are foundations for
much that is special about New England.
Four years ago, we committed to do our
share by charting a course to make EPA,
New England a laboratory for bold ex-
perimentation —• a place where fresh,
new, innovative ideas could be.put to the
test: We set that course believing that in
order to deliver more effective environ-
mental protection, EPA needed to adapt
to changing times and circumstances. By
and large, we have made a good start in
. meeting that challenge.
We can claim victory on a number of
front*. Many of our business assistance
and alternative compliance programs —
StarTrack, CLEAN, and New England
Environmental Assistance Team among
them — arc now national models. • Our
emphasis on special places and commu-
nities •— such as Lake Champlain, Long
Island Sound, Casco Bay and the Charles
River — has delivered tangible environ-
mental benefits to those who live, work
and play in them. Our use of stronger
science and smarter economics has
achieved cost-effective improvements
from Stratford,- CT to Burlington, VT.
And our innovative use of traditional stat-
utes such as the National Environmen-
tal Policy Act, Superfund, and the Clean
.Water Act have insured a cleaner, safer
environment'in places like Cape Cod,
Nashua, New Hampshire and 'Mount
Hope Bay.
"I find the great rhing in this world is
not so much where we stand as in what
direction we are moving," Oliver Wendell
Holmes said. We at EPA's New England
office share that sentiment.
To that end, we are working hard to in-
crease EPA's presence in New England's
communities; to stand tough on impor-
tant environmental issues such as safe
drinking water and clean air, to tackle
new, troubling issues like sprawl devel-
opment; and to improve our internal
management systems so as to deliver
more inspired, cost-effective service.
We will not meet these challenges widi-
out the help of eager, able, committed
New Englahders. Environmental protec-
tion is not so much about laws and regu-
lations and agencies as it is about people
and their values, and their honest, hard
work. We have benefited from, and con-
tinue to welcome, your ideas and your
labor as we strive tp ensure a healthier.
more beautiful NYw England for
generations to come.
John P DeVillars
Regional Administrator
EPAYNew England Office
-------
This report is dedicated to the memory of
Nancy Anderson
1922-1997
A.s a research scientist, activist and founder of the
New England Environmental Network at Tufts
University her tireless pursuit to highlight and inspire
creative resolutions to environmental problems lit the
fire of awareness and activism in generations of
citizens in New England and around the world.
-------
Table of Contents
4
Introduction
7
Public Health and Our Environment
13
The Challenge of Global Climate Change
14
Sprawl
16
New England's Ecological Health
22
The Charles River A Progress Report
23
Compliance and Pollution Prevention
You and Your Environment
31
• Agency Goals
-------
Introduction
To be sure, the first quarter cen-
tury of environmental protec-
tion in this country has been
enormously successful. We've done a
tremendous job tackling many of the
big-ticket pollution problems - sewage treat-
ment plants, industrial discharges and
hazardous \vaste dumps, among them.
The benefits of this work are obvious.
Rivers that were once veritable toxic
stews are now enjoyed by kayakers and
fishermen. Many cities that were choked
with smog are now clean enough for jog-
gers and pedestrians. And, thankfully, we
rarely hear horror stories of hazardous
waste sites shutting down entire neigh-
borhoods.
But as we look hack on these successes,
' we must also recognize that our world is
now much different than it was 25 years
ago. Our collective environmental con-
science is broader and deeper. The main
engine for our economy has shifted from
manufacturing to service industries and
small businesses. New England, hi par-
ticular, has seen an explosion in sendee-
oriented businesses and tourism. And our
landscape, regrettably, is changing as well
— our populations continuing to move
further and further away from cities, trans-
forming dairy farms and open space into
commuter 'towns.
As a consequence of these and other
trends, our environmental problems have
changed, as well. We are now finding that
much of our pollution conies from ubiqui-
tous and diffuse sources -•agricultural run-
off, faulty storm drains, small businesses
and the ever-increasing number of miles
we drive. Tackling these problems is a
huge challenge, requiring both smart
strategies and sophisticated tactics.
It is incumbent for us all to recognize
that the solutions to the challenges of
the 21st century will not be resolved with
20th century approaches. As Abraham
Lincoln said, ".As our case is new, so we
must think anew and act anew."
The eight hundred professionals at EPA's
New England office realize this. We're
hard at work to develop creative strate-
gies that will make environmental pro-
tection more efficient and effective as we
tackle today's - and tomorrow's - envi-
ronmental challenges. The success of
these strategics will require innovative
technologies, stronger science, enhanced
use of economic tools and closer collabo-
ration with environmental, business, po-
litical and community leaders.
Three of the primary areas EPA New
England has focused it's staff and re-
sources on tp meet these challenges arc
community-based environmental protec-
tion, fostering environmental innovation
and streamlining how we do business.
Community-Based
Environmental Protection
New England consists of ecosystems
that by virtue of their ecological value,
recreational value or proximity to large
populations, hold a special significance
to us. EPA is focusing particular attention
and resources on these locations to
achieve environmental improvements that
may not otherwise occur through tradi-
• tional environmental protection strategies.
Prominent Places
Much of what makes New England spe-
cial are its lakes, rivers and bays, which
bond and link various communities to-
gether. Prominent ecosystems such as
the Charles River. Casco Bay,
Narragansclt Bay and Lake. Champlain
are the focus of EPA initiatives that arc
collaborative and community-based. By
enhancing coordination, pooling re-
sources, building local capacity and
sharpening our science work, EPA and
its partners are delivering tangible envi-
ronmental improvements to these areas
that will result in expanded opportuni-
ties for swimming, fishing and other rec-
reational activities.
Urban Areas
EPA recognizes that many urban areas
have not received the attention they de-
serve from environmental protection pro-
grams of the past. To reverse this trend,
we have launched an Urban Environmen-
tal Initiative, a Brownfields Program and
•enhanced enforcement and pollution pre-
. vention efforts in targeted urban neigh-
borhoods. Working with local officials and
Photo: Ed Reiner
Intrbduc'tion
-------
the public. EPA is foe-using particular at-
tention on revitalizing contaminated par-
cels so that they can bolster local econo-
mies rath<;r than hin'dcr them.
Sprawl
Development "sprawl" is a grooving con-
cern all across New England. Nonpoint
pollution, water shortages, traffic-jams
and loss of open space can all he linked
to poorly planned development. EPA is
late to the game on this issue as is virtu-
ally everyone else. But we intend to catch
up fast. Specifically, we are looking at
such statutes as the National Environ-
mental Policy Act N'EPA , Clean Air Act
and the Safe Drinking Water Act to de-
termine how (hey could better be uu'lized
to facilitate development that does not
contribute to sprawl. This wilt be the area
in 1998 where we most expand our think-
ing and our actions.
Fostering Environmental
Innovation
EPA's New. England office is committed
to (oslering innovative technologies so
that environmental protection can be
achieved more effectively and at less cost.
•U'e also are pushing ourselves and those-
we regulate to come up with approaches
that aren't necessarily in the rulebook,
but that will deliver both substantially
improved environmental performance
and a reduced regulatory burden.
Center for Environmental Industry and
Technology
EPA New England's Center for Environ-
mental Industry and Technology iCEJT)
has launched several programs to iden-
tify and promote promising environmen-
tal technologies thar are more cost effi-
cient and environmentally effective. In
Photo NOAA
A clear measure of urban sprawl is the
amount of light from earth that is visible in
space. Lights are presented in lighter blue
areas.
an effort loget new technologies into the
marketplace more quickly, t'EIT has
brought the New England states together
to do cooperative reviews of innovative
septic-system technologies and site
cleanup technologies and provided field
demonstration opportunities for mam
new technologies. C1EI I has also held
several regional forums to match entre-
preneurs with venture capitalists. 7 hesc
and other C'.EIT efforts will be expanded
upon in 1998.
Project XL
If a company or community' can show
EPA they have a better way to protect
the environment than the way the law
requires, we'll make it happen. Through
such programs as Project XL, we're will-
ing to change the rules if companies can
show us they'll achieve a superior envi-
ronmental outcome as a result. \Vc re-
cently signed one such XL agreement uitli
a New Hampshire-based manufacturer.
HADCO - the first such agreement in
New England and second in the nauon.
We have several morr under develop-
ment. The XL program may also be used
to help communities such as Manches-
ter, N.H. come up with more environ-
mental!) effective alternatives to con-
structing a full build-out of expensive
Combined-Sewer Overflows CSOs . \\e
have enlisted the help of the Conserva-
tion Law Foundation in this effort. Again.
the prerequisite is that these alternatives
generate a greater environmental ben-
efit. \Vheu we can achieve enhanced en-
vironmental protection at less cost to the
parties we regulate, it\ a plus lor ever) one.
Climate Change
EPA-New England hit* developed a
multi-pronged initiative ti > do our share
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
reverse the impacts ol global climate
change. I he plan includes an education
program to teach students at public
schools about the issue and a regional
effort to get all state and federal build-
ings to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
to 1990 levels by the year 2005. By tout-
ing the potential cost savings, we re also
persuading companies to adopt energy -
cfficicm technologies through our
\Vaste\\iSe and GreenLights programs.
Streamlining the way
we do Business
EPA-New England is streamlining its pro-
cedures so that we and those we regulate
.can achieve our environmental objectives
more easily and so that EPA can operate
more effectively and with clearer goals.
t r o d u c t
-------
•
Working With Businesses
. EPA has launched numerous initiatives
to encourage companies to do a better
job regulating themselves and achieve .
greater, environmental benefits' at the
same rime. This allows EPA to devote
more resources and staff to other activi-
ties where greater environmental benefits
can be achieved. Our StarTrack and
C.I .RAN programs are now being trans-
planted as national efforts for achieving
greater environmental benefits than can
be achieved through mere compliance
with environmental laws.
Working With States . .
EPA is also streamlining how it does busi-
ness with, the states: This is being done
primarily through Performance Partner-
ship Agreements designed to allow EPA
and the states to identify priority issues
and focus grant resources on those • is-
sues. These agreements also enable EPA
and the states to develop integrated work
plans so that federal .and state efforts
complement each other in addressing mu-
tually agreed upon environmental goals.
Improving Our Internal
Organization '. • .
EPA's New England Office has reorga-
nized its staff to improve the agency's
effectiveness in" protecting the environ-
•meiiL By slicing our management staff
in half and creating "state teams," "wa-
tershed teams" and "industrial sector
teams," more EPA employees are now
involved in direct delivery of environmen-
tal services. Borrowing a-page from pri-
. vate industry, we're also offering incen-'
rives fop employees, including bonuses
for staff members whose work is excep-
tional. We've also replaced the traditional
single-media approach to our work with
an integrated, multi-media approach that.
includes multi-media compliance inspec-
tions and pollution prevention assistance.
Setting clear environmental goals - and
assessing if'those goals are being met -
is a pivotal feature of all of these activities.
Moving Forward
We have made enormous progress over
the past, four years in our efforts to
substantially reform and revitalize EPA.
We've also been successful in
strengthening core responsibilities such
as enforcement and grants management
But we know that Will Rogers was right
when he said that "even if you're oh the
right track, you'll get run over if you just
sit there." And so, we move forward with
energy and enthusiasm and, we hope,
with your help. . •
Introduction
-0.
-------
Public Health and our Environment
"I am myself and what is around me. and if 1 do not save it. it shall not save me."
Jose ()rtega y (iaswt
In preserving both our health and our
way of life, .we New Engiande'rydepend
on a clean and sale environment. The
degree to which this region's en virorirhen-
.taJ health remain* clean relies on a num-
ber of interrelated factors wind and
water currents, settlement distribution
patterns, and the nature of regional eco-
nomic activity among them. Our envi-
ronmental laws and regulatory ap-
proaches to implementing them must take
into account these components and more
in order i >f asthma can
be greatly exacerbated by air pollution.
To better protect public health and the
environment, air pollution standards
should be regularly Reviewed, and if
necessary, revised. In fact, the Qcan .\jr
Act require* EPA to n-\iew air pollution
Standards every live years. This happened
in die lolj ol I'l'lfi. when a massive revins
id recent scientific data indicated that the
Standards foni/one and paniculate matter
smog,and soot were not sufficient to pro-
tect the public's health with an adequate
margin of safety. In irsjxinse to (lib- new
data. EPA adopted revised ambient air qual-
ity standards for these pollutants injulv ol
1'.'97 and President Clinton announced his
support lor these tough new air quality
standards.
These new standards will reduce the num-
ber ol premature deaths dueto poor air
Figure 1 Davi with Good* Air Quality
350
85 86 '87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96
Burlington. VT
PortJand. ME
• Providence. Rl
• New Haven CT
• Boston. MA
• Mincheitcr. NH
iti-ldling Day
•
•
G>
Public' Hcal-th
-------
Figure 2. Changes in the Air Quality
Ad lien in New England meet national ambient air quality standard!
for partKuUte matter (PM-10) and sulfur dioxide.
A number of sites stiK violate the standard for ozone.
Nitrate and Sulfate in Rain and Snow
Ozone, VOC. NOx
•79 '80 81 '82 '83 '84 '85 '86 W '88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 -95 '96
Particulate Matter (PM10)
198* 1»»7 198* 19t9 1990 1991 199J 199} 1994 1995 199*
PM-10 Emisuons
198* 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 199J 1993 1994 1995 1996
O3 NOx Emissions • VOC Emissions
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
0 03
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 199J 1993 1994 1995 1996
| SOZ(ppb) -._ SO2 Emissions
• Air quality data are yearly/ seasonal means for selected air quality sites.
source: AIRS/NARIP
Clearing Out Smog
I lie ha/v ondhions i!i;ii NiMiiriimf> alllin \C\\ England ;ir<- primarily i.m-i-d l>\ IC|C.IM-X ul i\\n c I.IVM-, ui" air
|ii)lliii:int.s: volatile organic compounds Y<)( ^ .ami niuo^i-n uxidi s N( )\ . I In • <• i\\(, ( oinponriii-, n-ai i in i IK- IIM'M-IH ml'
Minliu;lll In Ini in ('/inn-, ill.- |iiin< ipal mijivdii-iil •>! sinoL1.. Tlir ( llran Air An Aiiiciidinriils ,,\ I'.I'H) \MTI- di-si^m <] i.,
M-duii controlling emissions oi iiiinni and volatile organic compounds \ < >(: Imtli nuijoi
• illll|Xlll|-HI> III MllOg.
-------
quality by 15,000 people each year, and
will cut the number of hospital admis-
sions for children due to aggravated
asthma by 250,000 each year. These
regulations have major implications for
New Englanders as well. Each year,
7,000 emergency room visitors — 2,300
of them overnight admissions — suffer
from respiratory problems due'to un-
' healthy air in the region. Moreover, the
'new standards will go a long way-in re-
ducing these visits by tackling a major
cause of respiratory distress — smog.
Sunny summer days with very warm
• temperatures are. much more likely to
have high ozone levels than cooler days.
(Figure 3). The highest concentration
of ozone in New England occurs in
coastal Connecticut, from. Greenwich to
Groton, primarily due to air pollution from
'industry, its 17 million residents and their
cars, and the nearby Greater New York
City area. Vermont has some of New
England's best air quality and has not
exceeded the ozone standard since 1991.
All New England states were required
to develop regulations to control emis-
sions of NOx from stationary sources
(e.g., utility plants, industries) under the
1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Sub-
stantial reductions in NOx emissions
betweea 1990 and 1995 resxJted from
the implementation of these controls
(Figure 4). Nevertheless, the ozone
problem persists, in spitt of the large
reductions in emissions.
Analyses have shown that NOx emis-
sions can be transported much farther
than VOC emissions, and therefore
have the potential to cause air pollu-
tion hundreds of miles from where they '
are emitted. EPA's Ozone Transport As-
sessment Group (OTAG) has proposed
additional reductions of NOx emis-
sions in twenty-two states. Decreases
in NOx emissions will also result in
decreased acidity of rainfall, reduced
greenhouse gas emissions, slower deple-
tion of the protective stratospheric
ozonq layer, and lowered concentrations
of fine participates in the--air.
Figure 3. Tracking Ozone in New England
Peak 1-hour values for
July 15, 1997
r^l
/lX~x
Peak 1-hour values for /
August 30, 1997
Unhealthful
Approaching
Unhealthful
Moderate
Good
Days When Ozone Standards Have Been Exceeded
in Relation to High Temperature Days
-
- Temperatures of 90 F or Higher
—'Ozone Standard Exceedances
Ozone Exceedance Trend Line
source EPA New England
Real-Time Environmental Monitoring - Ground-Level Ozone Mapping
The ozone mapping system allows for the creation of accurate, animated and easy to understand o/.one maps transmitted to the public
on a daily basis during the ozone season 'May through September \ia the Internet and used during television news and weather iepons.
In 1908, the map will reflect the more stringent 8-hour ozone standard adopted by EPA in" 1997. KHVs future plans involve expanding the
geographic coverage of the map to include more states and also providing updated animations more frequently throughout the da<;
• These maps may be viewed on EPA New England's web page.
www.epa.gov/regionO 1 /eco/ozone/
•
•
G>
Public Health
-------
Figure 4 Change in NOx Emissions from Ma/or
Industrial Sources and Fossil Fuel-Fired Utilities
CT
ME
MA
NH
P
VT
40 60 80 100
Millions of Tons Per Year
source EPA New Englind
Hartford UEI - Reducing Risk of Childhood Asthma
and Lead Poisoning
l
Idrfen
Uthough.thi
.
•
Kedu
•
•
Phorodry;
Crystal Clear:
The Safe Drinking Water Act
and Drinking Water Quality
The Safe Drinking \Varcr Act
Amendments of 1996 provide EPA with
new regulations for ensuring the saJery of
public water supplies. The amendments
were developed with significant input from
water suppliers and state and local
officials, and create multi-level
partnerships to'protect the already high
quality of our drinking water (Figure 5).
The amendments include provisions
detailing:
• Enhanced water purification systems
management
• Source water protection activities
• Public right-to-know measures
• Increased state flexibility in imple-
menting, regulations
• Increased compliance relief and
financial assistance to small systems
These new measures will go a long way
in- improving New England's already
well protected water supplies. Unfortu-
nately, 820 systems have failed to moni-
tor or report dieir compliance data, mak-
ing it difficult to paint the whole picture.
More often than not, these are the region's
smaller systems — those that serve less
than 500 people. But while these smaller
systems make up more than 77% of the
region's water suppliers, (hey only serve
around 20% of New England's population.'
Getting a Handle on
Pesticides: The Food Quality
Protection Act
On August 3, 1996, President Clinton
signed into law the most significant piece
of pesticide and food safety legislation
enacted in many years, the Food Quality
•Protection.Act(FQPA)of 1996. The new
law calls for major changes in pesticide
regulation, particularly in two laws: the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Ro-
denticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Acr(FFDCA).
The FQPA affords EPA unprecedented
opportunities to provide greater health
and environmental protection, including
new safety standards for all pesticide resi-
dues in food, special provisions for in
P u b I i
Health
-------
Figure 5. Public Water Systems Meeong Drinking Water
Quality Standards in 1997
92% In Compliance
Bacteria (95.3%;
Orgamcs (2.9\)
Inorganics (1.3%)
Radionudides (.5%)
source: EPA Safe Drinking Water Information Systems. 1997
More than 92 of the 4.638 community arvd non-transient community (eg. day care centers) public water
supplies in the region meet federal drinking water quality standards
fanls and children, specific limits on ac-
ceptable risk evaluation and standard-
setting, aggregate assessments of pesti-
cide risks, right to know pro\isions. en-
docrine disrupter research provisions, and
new pesticide registration and regulation
procedures.
Getting'the Lead Out
After years of widespread commercial
use, lead has contaminated nearly every
pan of the developed world, particularly
urban areas. Although lead is now banned
from use as a gasoline additive and from
paint in this country, people can be
exposed to lead from the air, drinking
water, food, dust (indoors and out) and
soil, and especially from lead in paint in
older houses. In 1991, EPA published
regulations to reduce the allowable levels
of lead contamination in drinking water.
.Even with these new regulations, in some
communities around Boston, one out often
'residents drinks water containing levels of
lead higher than what EPA considers safe.
Average blood lead Icvek in the United
States are less than one-third what they
were in the mid-1970'x and they arc
still declining. Bui re.van li has estab-
lished that there appears to be no thresh-
old for many ol lead's adverse health
ctTects, and the Center for Disease Con-
trol continues to adjust their definition
of "lead poisoning" to lower blood lead
concentrations. Even at very low levels
below the threshold for "poisoning."
lead can affect childhood development
including lowering of intelligence. Popu-
lations in local "hot spots," such as in.-
ner ciu neighborhoods, have higher ex-
posures to lead, and lead in old paint
remains one of the major contributors
to elevated blood Jead levels in children.
Beginning with the Residential Lead
Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act in
1992, EPA and HUD have worked
closely to publish regulations and stan-
dards for lead in housing abatement, real
estate and tenant notification and dis-
closure. State agencies have grants and
technical support for their development
of lead programs, and our partners also
receive support for lead awareness out-
reach and education.
Maine's Answer to Radon
P.u b
Health
-------
Radon: Exposing a
Hidden Danger
Radon is a radioactive, colorless, and
odorless gas thai comes from the natu-
ral decay ot uranium and can occur in
soil containing dark shale, granite, 'and
phosphate. It can be released into the air
from radon-contaminated water. Radon
commonly accumulates in homes or
buildings through dirt floors, hollow-block
walls, cracks in the foundation floor.
walls, and openings iiround floor drains,
pipes and sump pumps. Elevated levels
of radon have been found in every state,
and potentially in one out of every fifteen
homes nationwide. Due 10 the geologic
characteristics of New England, the av-
erage is approximately one out ol lour
homes.
EPA estimates that between 7,000 and
30.000 lung cancer deaths arc attribut-
able to radon each year, making it the
second leading cause of that disease. To
tackle this problem. EPA pro\ides grants
to slates to administer radon programs.
We also develop public information pro-
grams with organizations such as the
American Lung Association. Consumer
Federation of America, and the National
Association of Counties to increase
awareness of the problem, promote test-
ing, encourage remedies, and build ra-
don resistant homes.
Protecting Children's Health
Children today face a wide array of com-
plex environmental threats to their health
from asthma-inducing air pollution,
to toxic chemicals. Millions of children
live near toxic waste dumps, hundreds
of thousands arc exposed to pesticides
each year, and nearly a million children
in the L nited States have dangerous lev-
els of lead in their blood. What is more
alarming is the fact that children have a
special vulnerability to toxic substances.
They are more heavily exposed to envi-
ronmental hazards than adults, and their
still-developing bodies are less able than
adult bodies to neutralize and expel tox-
ins. Damage to children's developing
organ systems at an early age can often
carry lifelong consequences.
To better protect the health of America's
children, EPA developed the Motional
/Igmda to Protect Childrm\ Health from Ettii-
ronmental Threats in 1996, which empha-
sized scientific, regulatory, and educa-
tional measures that the agency was to
undertake! In May of 1997, EPA opened
ie Beach Initiative
ur u
EPA'a
Photo Roy Cryiu)
the Office of Children's Health Protec-
tion to ensure the implementation of this
agenda.
Here in New England, ERA is working to.
protect the environmental health of this
region's children through the combined
efforts of our Environmental Education.
Indoor Air Environments, Regional Lead
Initiative, Urban Environmental Initia-
tive and Enforcement programs. The ac-
tivities of each of these programs have
both directly and, through the leveraged
support of our partners, indirectly deliv-
ered significant environmental benefit lor
New England's kids.
Tips for a Healthy
Indoor Environment
1. Don't allow smoking in your
home
2. Test for radon
3. Have your heating system
inspected annually by a profes-
sional, and install a carbon
monoxide alarm
4. Read the label arid follow the
directions cjosely when using
pesticides, cleaners and other
. household chemicals; then
properly discard all unnccded
pesticides, paint, and cleansers
5. Water leaks and water-damaged
areas of your home should be
repaired in order to eliminate the
growth media for microbiologi-
cal organisms
6. Keep pets away from sufferers
of asthma and other respira-
tory disorders
7. Products containing formalde-
hyde should be aired-out before
introducing them into your home
8. Have carpet with odor or mold
/• removed and, if necessary,
replaced with a good substitute
9. Keep small children away from
lead paint and have them wash
their hands after playing outside
10". Buy nontoxic cleaning products
Public Health
-------
The Challenge of Global Climate Change
"You must do the things you think you cannot do."
--Eleanor Roosevelt
In his State of the Union Address, Presi-
dent Clinton described global warming
as "our overriding environmental chal-
lenge." The President's statement ech-
oed the findings of the Intergovernmen-
tal Panel on Climate Change ,'IPCC;
comprised of 2,5t)0 of the world's top
scientists in the field of global climate
change - which indicated that humans
are influencing global climate.
Modern industrial activity — particularly
the burning of fossil fuels — leads to the
emissions of "greenhouse gases." which
trap the Sun's heat in the atmosphere
and cause a steady, gradual warming of
the Earth's surface temperatures. The
average surface temperature is now a full
degree Fahrenheit higher than it was at
the beginning of this century and may
rise another two to six degrees over the
next century (Figure 6). If this rat.- of
temperature rise continue;, scientist.-, sav
we can expert more .frequent intense
weather events, such as heat waves.
droughts and floods. They also predict
sea level rise, accompanied by a signiti-
cant loss of precious coastal resources
beaches, estuaries, and important
wetlands among them. Tropical diseases
like malaria will expand their range. In
addition, by the year 20~>0; heat-related
deaths in the U.S. could increase by up to
1.50 percent.
In December of 1997, nations from
around the world met in Kyoto, Japan lo
discuss strategies to avoid global wann-
ing, and produced a treaty committing
the nations of the world to reductions in
figure 6. Changes In the Average Surface
Global Temperature 1851-1997
Degrees Fahrenheight •
I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I
•> » i « 03 &
tout* 1PCC
greenhouse gas emissions. If the L.S.
ratifies this treaty, we will have commit-
ted to a target ol reducing greenhouse
gas emissions to 7 percent below a
baseline based on 1990 levels by
20(18-2012. To meet this commitment,
we will IK- required to develop strategies
that emphasize a cost-effective. common
sense approach to achieve greenhouse gas
reductions.
LPA's \ew England office is already work-
ing to do its part through our own Cli-
mate Change Action Plan, an aggres-
sive, multi-disciplinarv effort to reduce
greenhouse' gases without damaging the
economy. As parf of this plan. EPA will:
• Work with other federal agencies to re-
duce the U.S. Government's greenhouse
gas contribution through energy effi-
ciency measures and renewable power
purchases.
• Make educational materials on global
warming available to every state envi-
ronmental agency, library, and school in
New England.
• Collaborate with each New England
state through the New England Global
Warming Network lo generate state and
regional greenhouse gas inventories and
reduction plans.
• Increase industry participation in EPA's
voluntary greenhouse gas reduction pro-.
grams that, emphasize economically
sensible activities.
• Develop transportation policies that
demonstrate-new technologies and pro-
grams to minimize pollution — includ-
ing greenhouse gas emissions — from
the transportation sector.
i m 3 t e
Change
-------
Sprawl
"11 \ou IniiJi] ii. lliov will i nine. . ."
Shoeless Joe Jackson. Field c.f Dreams. 1989
No Place Like Home
In less than li.ill .1 cenmrv. our nation
has been transformed, I.mlnv pcic cm oi
.ill the physical structures in the L .S. have
been built in the past ")(> \ears. mosth
Hillside nl'lhe iradilicin.il population cen-
ters. I'cople are now living and working
liirther from urban areas and consuming
undeveloped land at rates greater than
ever before. Of the 25 largest L.S. cities
in 19oO. 18 have lost population. That
means people, ihe services thev need, and
the imp.icts ol sprawl continue to lie scat-
tered farther away from once-thriving
urban centerv In Massachusetts, most of
llie 1 17.1197 acres 'JSO square miles of land
developed since 1971 have been at least
twentv miles outside.Boston (Figure 7).
This pattern of growth h.is largely
occurred in an unplanned, ad hoc fash-
ion, and is. not surprisingly, referred to
as-sprawl. Koresl.s arc cleared and agri-
cultural lands are subdivided into plots
lor housing developments, which are tor
the most part decentralized, and not
part of a community center. Cars be-
come the primary source of transporta-
tion. Strip malls, industrial parks and
convenience Mores spring up to serve
neu residents and municipalities arc
pressed to provide services to a more
spread out population base. And when
suburban areas become too developed
for some residents, thev move further
away, continuing the cycle.
Sprawling Effects
As sprawl development spreads across
New England, its environmental conse-
quences become clear. Increased auto-
mobile trallic not only causes air pollu-
tion, but creates a number ol other prob-
lems. Road pavements, parking lots, and
roofs prevent runoff from seeping into
the ground where it can be filtered. The
dramatic increase in these impervious sur-
faces has increased pollutant loadings to
surface water, and degraded wildlife habi-
tat. Opening up previously inaccessible
terrain with road or residential develop-
ment divides ecosystems into fragments,
reducing the available wildlile habitat.
This impacts wildlife species by altering
migration routes, eliminating breeding
Figure 7. Indicators of Sprawl
Urban Sprawl in Eastern Massachusetts
%
•
'/•
.rife/77
I urt»%rm ni>«»nT>niiimv j.
• *- - I .•
Lower Vehicle Emissions
but More Vehicle Miles Driven
120
90
60
30
1970 1975 1980 t98S 1990 1995
CO VOC • NO,
Eminioni drami/v*hid«/m!l«)
• V«hid« mm On billioni)
: MnrapettiD Hmkif ComnMon. MqrfBS, in) EPAGB
US B» * FM
5 p r 3 w
-------
City of Providence Vacant Land Task Force
.
establi
help a . ') Mvl Minimum
-in I.
.ui
-------
New England's Ecological Health
"Each species. Id put the manor succinctly, i.x a masterpiece. It deserves that rank in the
fullest sense: a creation assembled with extreme (arc bv genius
Edward O. Wilson
Pellegrino L'liivorsiry Professor. Harvard University
For the [last twenty-eight years. New En-
gland states, federal agencies. Universi-
ties, industries. non-governmental orga-
nizations, and citizens have developed
strategies for analyzing, controlling, and
eliminating pollutants from our environ-
ment and our natural ecosystems — Mith
significant progress. Pans of these efforts
have required us to examine how pollut-
ants alter ecosystems, and how these frag-
ile svstcms can recover over time.
In our evaluation ol the health of New
England's ecological resources, we have
found trends both heartening and dis-
turbing. Most encouraging are our find-
ings that manv natural systems recover
relatively quickly once pollutants have
been reduced or eliminated. On the down
side, we are finding that in manv parts
of New England, pollutants known and
unkno\vn are threatening the widespread
health of fish and amphibian species.
Restoring New England
Waters
Healthy aquatic ecosystems are particu-
larly critical for maintaining the overall
quality of the environment in New En-
gland (Figure 9 and Figure lOa &
lOb). EPA has been working with a vari-
ety of organizations and partners to co-'
ordinate protection and restoration ef-
forts for several of these. The experience
we have gained from these efforts will
help us extend ecosystem protection to
many other areas of the region.
inal
evah.
ir river/stream >
pond acreage ami
ics arc moni-
tored lor \ 'Itlullv Bin.1
cal monitoring pragi
arc not fully developed in most
and ;rc monitored
aquatic lite use support. '1
EPA working
.pand the number of w.i
' tor biological t ommuni-
Ivi-
nsumpti<»
unfishspt' ,ir\
anii ularlv !.:•
-igure y. Aquatic Life & hsh Consumption
Are Limited in New England Waters
Impaired New England Waters
Designated Use
(Measure of Impairment)
Fish Consumption
(Advisories)
Shellfishing
(Closures/Restrictions)
Swimming
(Beach Closures)
Aquatic Life
(Unhealthy Biological
Communities)
River/Stream Lake/Pond
Miles Acres
Estuarine
Sq. Miles
34%
N/A
3%
11%
99%
N/A
17%
21%
4%
10%
source: 1996 State 305(b) Reports and Fish Advisories
'Ecological Health
-------
The Penobscot River
The Pcnobscot River basin is the largest
in Maine, and the second largest in New-
England, covering nearly 8,600 square
miles. On its main. stem, the river has
eleven dams, five pulp and paper mills,
and thirteen municipal \\aste\vater treat-
ment plants. Members of the Penobscot
Indian Nation, however, use the river eco-
system for sustenance and for cultural.
spiritual, and recreational purposes. Dur-
ing the summer of 1997, EPA-New En-
gland assisted the Maine Department of
Emironmental Protection, the Penobscot
Indian Nation, and NPDES permit hold-
ers in the largest cooperative water qual-
ity monitoring survey ever carried out in
Maine. This study involved three paper
companies — Great Northern Paper. Inc.,
Lincoln Pulp& Paper, and Champion In-
ternational — and 13 municipalities
along the river. This study has become a
model for other government/business/
tribal partnerships across the region.
Great Bay
New Hampshire's Great Bay is a
tidally-dominated inland estuary, receiv-
ing drainage from seven large rivers and
deducing CSOs to Casco Bay: A Success Story
.•rn-d clum,
1-unolfix rli.
EPA
andthi
rd by
ilit-
nuaJ
\i.i-.
ilion Dillon
'ih Poill.iml a!-<> uiil (MiitJiiut-
'
'iii|ii)ic;»;il rH-tK-litv in
( v.
\\rll ;i>, ivnpi-im
and
^
Photo Jiy Pimpare
Hyp**
K 4 f '* *t
'
Figure 10a. Causes of Water Pollution
Figure 10b. Sources of Water Pollution
[ Pithojem
Oxyjvn-Oc
River Mites t Nutn«rm
Meuli
I Toxic <
Lake ACPCS
1 Pithojwii
t Ox>ien-O«pi«i>oo
Estuary
Square Milei
] Urt)in Runoff
[ Ajncutlurt
River Miles
Pltho|*m
2 OnyteJvD*pl«oon
| Notn*ntJ
| Metili
I I |_- *--_ I '
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
't surveyed water affected
source 1996 SUM 30S (b) Reports
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
S surveyed water affected
source 1996 Sutt 305 jb
Ecological Health
-------
numerous small streams. Large fish and
shellfish populations, bald eagles,
ospreys. rare species and communities,
and old growth forests arc among the
living resources found in this ecosystem.
Although several million people live in
close proximity of the New Hampshire
coast, the Great Bay shoreline remains
relatively intact and pristine.
.-Ml but one of the Bay's major rivers cany
loads from sewage treatment plants, and
thr Bay i.s impacted by nonpoint source
pollution as well. Most of the Bay's shell-
fish flats were closed in 1988, although
some portions have been opened for lim-
ited times during recent years. In the
summer of 1995, Great Bay was ac-
cepted into EPA's National Estuary Pro-
gram 'NEP), beginning a three-year ef-
fort to protect and restore its resources
and aquatic values, with particular em-
phasis on shellfish resources. EPA con-
ducted a reconnaissance of pollution
sources, an ecological assessment of the
area and a dye study to determine pat-
terns of municipal pollution discharges
in the Bay. Key habitats and resources
of the ecosystem have been mapped,
covering over 270,000 acres of land and
water. Approximately 14,000 acres have
been designated as high value habitats.
The North American Wetland Conser-
vation Council has provided over
5800,000 for habitat protection and ad-
ditional strategies and opportunities have
been identified for habitat protection.
The Merrimack River
Pollution problems on the Merrimack
began more than 100 years ago with the
onset of the industrial revolution and
have since taken their toll on the entire
length of the river. To reverse this dam-
age and restore the river, EPA initiated
the Merrimack River Initiative, a
multi-year, multi-agency, multi-stake-
holder effort. Working together, hundreds
of people pushed to solve challenges fac-
ing the 5.010-square mile Merrimack
River watershed. This labor culminated
in March of 1997. with the Merrimack
River Initiative Management Plan, a
comprehensive, watershed-based man-
agement approach to resource protection.
Seventy different projects and planning
tools were used in the course of develop-
ing the Plan. Watershed maps for seven
sub-watersheds were produced to encour-
age a watershed planningperspcctive for
decision-making. Small grants were dis-
tributed to citizen groups, schools, local
governments and businesses for water-
shed protection projects. Thirteen tech-
nical bulletins were developed, describ-
ing best management practices for spe-
cific user groups, including snow mak-
ing, irrigation, turf management, laun-
dry facilities, and sand gravel operations.
Long Island Sound
The Long Island Sound Study (LJSS) is
a research and management project that
was founded in 1985. Long Island Sound
was officially designated an Estuary of
.\ahonal Significance under the Clean Water
Act Amendments in 1987, and the Long
Island Sound Management Conference
— the group overseeing environmental
protection activities in the sound — was
charged with developing a Comprehen-
Mount Hope Bay
shallow
Mniiiii H
jll.lli- Mil!'
till I IIT ill III' 1
• nui
UppOT
uurM-ry li.
l.l'.\-\i
I .ilx.in tin- B.iy \\hiT
•i I 1^1 .mil Wili:
ritii
mad
tinli
n tin
'irnl
trie power plant u
which had iii<
• , D| hrali d W;H.
the (olli-i I'V- \r
l.iml (illii.
i nl i
nun, .mil
H i- |il:ui!
rmal disi hargrs, li
'iviiDiimi-i
I Ho|x-B;i\ lisl
Phoio EdRener
E c o I o
H e'» I t h
-------
Photo Ro/ Cr>sul
sive'Conservation and Management Plan
(CCMP) for the estuary- To further the
CCMP effort and assist in implement-
ing the plan, Congress'passed legisla-
tion in 1990 establishing an EPA Long
Island Sound Office,
The LJSS'achieved two significant mile-
stones in the past year. The LISS Policy
Committee, composed of Connecticut
and New York environmental commis-
sioners and two EPA Regional Adminis-
trators, approved and adopted the Phase
III Actions for Hypoxia Management
and the Long Island Sound Habitat Res-
.toration Strategy. . •
Hypoxia, or low dissolved oxygen, is the
priority water quality problem affecting
the Sound. Hypoxia occurs when too
much nitrogen in the water fuels over-
abundant growth of planktonic algae,
which utilize high amounts of oxygen
during decomposition. The resulting lack
of oxygen impairs the Jecding, growth,
and reproduction of the Sound's other
aquatic life. The LISS developed a
phased approach to reduce nitrogen load-
ing within the Sound's drainage basin.
Phase I froze nitrogen loads at 1990 lev-
els, and Phase II focused on low-cost sew-
age treatment plant upgrades. Phase III
calls for a 58.5 percent reduction in hu-
man-caused nitrogen loads by 2014. By
reaching these goals, we expect that 75
percent of the areas that are unhealthy
for fish and shellfish will recover.
Healthy wetlands and shoreline areas can
filter nitrogen and other pollutants be-
fore they reach the Sound, and" serve as .
important habitats for marine species
and other wildlife. The LISS Habitat
Restoration Strategy rsiabli.shes a goal
of restoring '2,000 acres of Long Island
Sound's coastal habitats and one hun-
dred miles of rivers, complementing and
supporting efforts to reduce hypoxia in
Long Island Sound. Restoring degraded
habitats also increases economic, recre-
ational and educational opportunities.
The Sound currently gent1 rates an esti-
mated S3 billion a year lor the regional
economy through commercial and recre-
ational activities.
Tracking Mercury
Many of New England's freshwater fish
are currently under consumption adviso-
ries because of high concentrations of
mercury in fish tissue. Mercury contami-
nation can cause serious neurological and
developmental effects in animals and hu-
mans, which can include losses of sen-
sory or cognitive ability; tremors, inabil-
ity to walk, convulsions, and death. Re-
cent data from Maine have also shossii
.high concentrations of mercury in the
feathers and blood of nesting bald eagles
and loons.
The way in which mercury cycles through
the environment is complex and our un-
derstanding of it is still incomplete. We
do know that sources of mercury con-
tamination primarily include atmospheric
emissions from waste incineration, in-
dustrial processes, fossil fuel combustion,
and routine discharges to receiving wa-
tervand spills. The New England states,
eastern Canadian provinces, and;EPA arc
Runr
.umney Marsh
Restoration Plans
amn<-\ Mar-h \
:ii thr
I
Run 'kail
\imnmonial '
cribed by th-
Surrounded by comrrx
pmcnt,
dit' i used
. a dumping ground.
that
onarier.
'). v»iih i
lid private, ricmp:
nrni till, an
Ecological Health
-------
developing a joint Mercury Action Plan
to reduce mercury releases to the envi-
ronment. The plan \\ill focus on regula-
tors strategies, pollution prevention op-
portunities, public outreach efforts, and
monitoring and research needs.
Sad News: Amphibian
Declines and Deformities
Deformities in the limbs, eyes, and other
organs of amphibians such as frogs,
.toads, salamanders and newts have re-
cently been reported in at least thirty-seven
Figure 11. Types of Deformities in Frogs
Summer, 1997
New Hampshire & Massachusetts Study
Oth*r 13.,
Vermont Study
Data jutn u i '• off total deformities
A unjte froj may Ka>« multiple deiormroel
source EPA. VT. and UNH
Figure 12. New England Amphibians and Turtles at Risk
Salamanders Frogs/Toads Turtles
jourct The Nature Conservatory, 1998
states and three Canadian provinces.
Since amphibians arc considered to be
good biological indicators of environmen-
tal health, understanding diis develop-
ment has become a national priority for
several federal agencies and state pro-
grams. It is also receiving increased at-
tention in the national news media, in
part because its relevance to human
health is still unclear.
EPA-Ncw England is participating in ef-
forts to understand the extent, severity
and possible Causes of amphibian defor-
mities in New England and throughout
.North America.
The first confirmed report of amphibian
deformities in New England was made
by the Vermont Department of Environ-
mental Conservation (VTDEC) in Oc-
tober 1996, in wedands next to Lake
Champlain. Subsequent surveys in the
summer of 1997 in Vermont, Massa-
chusetts, and New Hampshire, and ad-
ditional reports from Connecticut and
Maine, have confirmed deformities in
northern leopard frogs, green frogs,
bull frogs, wood frogs, gray tree frogs,
mink frogs and spotted salamanders
(Figure 11)
In addition to suffering deformities, a
number of common species of amphib-
ians, such as northern leopard frogs, are
declining throughout their geographic
range in New England. Drainage, habi-
tat fragmentation, and filling of small
water systems such as vernal pools and
other wetlands have had dramatic effects
on salamander, frog, toad, and newt popu-
lations. Ten out of the 14 native species
of salamanders and newts arc wetland
dependent, and only one of the 13 native
frog and toad species docs not depend on
wetlands for survival. Many species of
turtles, such as the wood turtle and the
endangered bog turtle, have also declined
as a result of habitat fragmentation in
the New England landscape. In many
areas only ojd, non-breeding adults re-
main. When these individuals die, such
species are likely to permanently disap-
pear from their former range (Figure 12).
E c o I o g i c a
Health
-------
Tips for a Healthy Outdoor Environment
1. Learn about organic gardening and natural pest management.
2. Use sand instead of salt on driveways and walkways in winter.
3. Take-care of your septic'system. If not maintained properly, il may be leaking
bacteria and nutrients into the groundwatcr or streams, lakes and the ocean.
'4. Never dump motor oil, antifreeze, transmission fluid, or other automobile
chemicals into road gutters, storm drains, or catch basins.
5. Trickle irrigation is an effective way to water gardens, shrubs, and trees. Use
perforated plastic pipes to apply water directly to the plants' root zone. This
cuts water use between 30" o and 7(1° o and slows the growth of weeds. Water in
early morning or late in the day and never during midday.
6. Use a broom instead of washing sidewalks, driveways, patios, and decks.
7. Do riot plant trees or shrubs near drain lines since roots can clog them.
8. Make sure your car engine does not leak gas or oil.
9. Consider using ground cover plants as well as grass in your sard.
10. Choose permeable surfaces such as wooden decks, porous pavement, bricks, or
stone, rather than solid pavement, to allow for maximum absorption of
water into soil.
Photo Matt Schwetsfaerg
Water Levels and Adequate Row
Although we have made great strides in
reducing surface water pollution, our
progress is threatened by the increasing
diversion of water for snow-making, hy-
dropower generation, industrial and
commercial use, agriculture, and mu-
nicipal water supplies. \Vater withdraw-
als and (low alteration can significantly
and sharply reduce stream and lake lev-
els. Such disruptions in flow can con-
tribute to the loss.and diversity of
aquatic species by reducing food sup-
plies and altering habitat.
Hydroelectric power can be an efficient
source of energy. Improperly managed
dams, however, can degrade water qual-
ity and have a devastating effect on fish
and wildlife. Dams can block the migra-
tion offish- and contribute to increased
water temperatures, decreased levels of
dissolved oxygen, and the accumulation
of toxic compounds in sediments. This,
along with industrial pollution has led to
the loss of many native fish, such as
salmon, shad, and sturgeon.
Dams must periodically be relicensed —
once every few decades — by the agency
that oversees hydropowcr, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERCi. Such rclicensing presents an
opportunity to address the environmen-
tal concerns mentioned above. In col-
laboration with Indian Tribes, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, the National
Marine Fisheries Service, state resource
agencies, and non-governmental orga-
nizations, EPA-New England is part of a
team to review hydropower projects and
identify and establish ecologically criti-
cal flow levels in rivers, streams, and
wetlands that may be affected by the
project. In the past year, this team has
been involved in a number of significant
hydropowcr licensing cases:
• EPA participated in pre-liccnsing dis-
cussions concerning New England
Power's Fifteen Mile Falls hydroelec-
tric project located on the Upper Con-
necticut River- the .largest hydropower
project in New England. The resulting
multi-party settlement agreement pro-
tides for Rows and impoundment level
controls that significandy improve fish
and wildlife habitat and establishes per-
manent conservation easements on ap-
proximately 12,000 acres of land.
FERC staff reflecting the \iews of
EPA. the Penobscot Tribe, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, and others
have recommended against the con-
struction "I the new Basin Mills dam
on the Penobscot River, which was
once an important Atlantic salmon
fishery in New England. Among other
environmental concerns, a new dam
would have jeopardized the ongoing
efforts to restore wild salmon to the
Penobscot River. The Commission '
has not yet issued a final decision, but
EPA is hopeful that FERC will once
again uphold the recommendation
that (he Basin Mills dam not be built.
FERC denied the license application
and ordered the decommissioning and
removal of the Edwards dam — the
first obstacle migrating fish encoun-
ter on the Kenncbcc River in Maine.
This is a landmark decision by FERC
and one watched closely by the entire
nation. Removing the dam will en-
able striped bass, rainbow smelt. At-
lantic and shortnose sturgeon to ac-
cess their full historic range in the
Kcnncbec.
E c o I o
c a I Health
-------
The Charles River: A Progress Report
"Peace, like aiiver, ran through the city..."
— Paul Simon
The Charles River is one of the trea-
sured open spaces in Massachusetts, en-
joyed by tens of thousands 'of people a
day from spring to fall, and contributing
almost SI00 million to the economy
through property values and recreational
activity. At the annual Head of the
Charles Regatta, the largest rowing event
in the world, 5.000 rowers compete and
hundreds of thousands more line the
banks in celebration. Unfortunately, bac-
terial pollution from Combined Sewer
.Overflows 'CSOs,, contaminated storm
drains, sporadic, releases of oil and
chemicals, and polluted stormwater run-
off has caused the Charles, like .many
urban ri\-ers, to become severely degraded.
In 1995, svc launched the Clean Charles
2005 initiative, aimed at making the '
river fishable and swimmablc by Earth
Day 2005. Since then, the amount of
time the river meets swimming and
boating standards has doubled. In
order to improve on this progress, and
meet our 2005 goal, EPA has under-
taken a multi-point action plan for the •
.coming year.
Boston University
-
ipani
EdRvnv
Storm Water Management EPA is
working with each of ihc Ic'n lower
Charles Communities and four .state
agencies to create statc-of-lhe-an storm
water management plans by July. 1998.
Aggressive Enforcement and Assistance
Enforcement has led to the discover)' of
more than 400 illegal discharges
contributing more than.700 thousand
gallons per day of sewage to the Charles
and its tributaries. To date, a total of
more than 20 million gallons per year of
sewage discharge has been eliminated.
Report Card We have developed an
annual "report card." grading the river's
water quality on an annual basis. In
199b. the Lower Charles River received
a grade of D, but by 1997, that grade
improved to a C-. There is, however, still
a long wav to go.
Water Quality Flagging EPA and the
Charles River Watershed Association are
instituting a water quality and sampling
program that will produce timely data
about the condition of the river. Color-
coded flags located at boathouscs along
the Charles will inform the public of the
water quality on any particular day-
Relief from Sewer Overflows When it
rains, millions of gallons of mixed
sewage and storm water overflow into
the Charles. EPA is pressing facilities to
sharply control- and reduce these CSO
discharges.
Scientific Research EPA, the Common-
wealth of Massachusetts, the Massa-
chusetts Water Resources Authority and
the Charles River Watershed Association
currently support efforts to increase
scientific understanding of the Charles
River, including the most comprehensive
study to date of water quality for the
entire river.
Better Infrastructure Maintenance EPA
and the-Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection arc working
with cities and towns along the Charles
to increase inspection and maintenance
of aging sewer systems.
C h a
e .s
-------
Compliance and Pollution Prevention
"\Vc abuse land because we regard it as a commodity which lx-longs to us. When we see land
as a community to which we belong, then we may begin to use it with love and respect."
—Aldo Leopold
Our scxiety has the technology and li-
ability to Tmd creative ways to solve
'environmental problems that will
ensure a clean and safe environment as
well as economic stability. EPA's New
England office works together with
individuals, businesses, municipalities
and other agencies to restore and preserve
' New England ecosystems and resources
for sustainable, productive use. Our
Assistance and Pollution Prevention
Office works diligently to help thousands
of businesses and municipalities meet
— and exceed — environmental regulations
through voluntary compliance assistance
and pollution prevention programs. Al
the same time, EPA maintains a vigor-
ous enforcement presence in New England
to stop those who flout environmental
regulations, recklessly pollute the envi-
ronment and gain unfair economic ad-
vantage over those who operate by the
rules. Both offices integrate and coordi-
nate their activities to generate the
maximum amount of environmental
protection EPA can provide.
•
Getting the Green Back:
Assistance and Pollution
Prevention
Iran ounce of prevention is worth a pound
of cure, an ounce of pollution1 prevention
may well be worth its weight in gold.
Throughout New England, a growing
number ofbusinesses arc improving their
operations through pollution prevention,
toxic use reduction, resource conservation,
and recycling - and recognizing in the
process that environmental steward-
ship is sound business strategy. To help
. even more companies realize this,
EPA-Ncw England's Getting the Gnm Back
campaign is reaching out to businesses, to
help them improve environmental perfor-
mance while preserving financial health.
detting tlie CiTCfn SacA'nighlights the we irk
ot EPA - New England's Assistance and
Pollution Prevention A&I'L' Office.
which offers a number of voluntary pro-
grams thai emphasize compliance and
pollution prevention assistance, regula-
tory flexibility, public recognition, envi-
ronmental technologies, environmental
management systems, and small bu-.i-
ncss assistance. The philosophy behind
these programs is th.it businesses and
industries can be kry players not only for
New England's economy, but for her en-
vironment as Well. By seeking to lap
corporate innovations and professional
knowledge, we believe that it rs possible
to bring about even greater environ-
mental results.
In order to get the word out to busi-
nesses and municipalities, in 1997
EPA-New England conducted eighty-six
workshops on issues ranging from pol-
lution prevention in the'metal plating
industry to community right-to-know
data. Our staff made more than 'JOO
public presentations during the year to
provide information aboul pollution pre-
vention and compliance assistance. And.
our New England Environmental Assis-
tance Team's newsletter. Pollution Prnen
tion and the Bottom Line, is now distributed
quarterly to more than 3.000 businesses
throughout the region.
Really CLEAN: Compliance
Leadership Through
Environmental Auditing and
Negotiation
EPA-Ncw England has launched the
CLEAN (Compliance Leadership
Through Environmental Auditing and
Negotiation) initiative to promote pollu-
tion prevention and improved compliance
for small metal finishers, printers, and
wood coalers. CLEAN offers small and
medium-sized businesses free, on-site
compliance and pollution prevention au.-
dits, with limited enforcement discretion
for violations, in exchange for an agree-
ment to correct violations and begin a
"beyond compliance" project. CLEAN
U.S. v. Eklof Marine
.
upv%.,i-
oft tri.
-|>ill and \iol.uiii" li
ihc Miu
:itandthc '
part iif il.
-3 mil-
criminal fin.
•lement. il
! >e alto
Jilion.il SI .."• mill
-
C o m p
-------
C.M Almy ar
np.im
the- p.
.
"..uid lli<
'
Figure 13. Superfund NPL* Sites Cleaned Up
'91 '92 93 '94 95 96 97
' National Priority List
source EPA New England Office of Site
Remediation and Restoration
has conducted.on-sitc assessments at
metal plating businesses in New Hamp-
shire and Maine, and at print shops in
Maine. Funds are in place ro expand
CLEAN to other states and businesses.
StarTrack and Project XL
The Next Generation
In 1997, EPA-New England and its state
partners condnued to test the concept of
third-party certification by working with
eight New England companies who are
participating in the StarTrack pilot
project. StarTrack -companies voluntar-
ily agree to assess their environmental
management systems and compliance
performance, and to have this perfor-
mance publicly certified by a third party.
In return, EPA offers limited enforcement
discretion reduced inspections, and ex-
pedited permitting, with a goal of ex-
panding the use of environmental com-
pliance and management systems au-
dits to improve environmental efficiency..
In 1997, the eight SiarTrack companies
provided EPA with publicly available en-
vironmental performance reports.
Project XL (eXcellcnce in Leadership) en-
courages real-world tests of innovative
strategies that achieve cleaner environ-
mental results than traditional regula-
tory .means. EPA will grant regulatory
flexibility in exchange for the use of in-
novative approaches which result in su-
perior environmental benefits. In 1997, a
final project agreement was signed with
the HADCO Corporation of New
Hampshire which enabled the company
to make smarter use of its metal-bear-
ing sludge. Massachusetts DEP is also
working toward a final project agreement
to develop a self-certification program
for small pollution sources. By the end of
the year, several other XL champions will
be helping EPA to find cleaner, more in-
telligent ways to protect our environment.
Community Involvement in
Permit Discussions
In order to Help people understand en-
vironmental issues facing urban com-
munities in Chelsea, Revere, and East
Boston, members of the EPA Urban
Environmental Initiative (UEI) team
are working with neighborhood repre-
sentatives to help communities better
understand how they can get involved
in the EPA permitting process. In do-
ing this, UEI organized a community
workshop to explain and describe
pending National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits for nearby oil tank storage fa-
cilities. Participants included the Mas-
sachusetts Department of Fish and
Wildlife Riverways Program, the
Chelsea Green Space and Recreation
Committee, and the East Boston Ecu-
menical Council. The workshop dem-
onstrated how community groups can
interact with the federal government
and paved the way for the establish-
ment of an ongoing working group to
make comments on future permits.
Putting Technology to Work:
Superfund Reform
Technology. Initiative
To properly address the cleanup of an
average hazardous waste site in New
England, the time span between the ini-
tial investigation and the completion
of cleanup can be more than'ten years.
What's more, the monitoring and
remediation costs associated with
cleanup of a site can be millions of
dollars.
The savings can be remarkable. A re-
cent EPA national assessment of 17 sites
using innovative technologies estimated
a savings of 521 million or 62% over
conventional technologies. In order to
' save both time and money at hazard-
pus waste sites, EPA's New England of-
fice is serving as a catalyst for the de-
velopment and use of promising new
environmental technologies that will do
the job faster and cheaper. In New En-
gland, about 60% of the Superfund sites
are using innovative monitoring or
remediation technologies.
C o m p' I i a n c e
-------
Enforcement:
A Key Part of the Picture
Targeting Our Efforts
We make great efforts at.EPA to partner
with businesses, municipalities, and pub-
lic agencies. But when that partnership
is violated and that trust is broken —
whether it is by negligence, or flagrant
violation of environmental laws — there
can be very significant consequences. To
be sure, one of EPA's highest priorities is
detecting, and correcting environmental
violations (Figure 14).
The strong enforcement of environmen-
tal laws serves a number of purposes.
Enforcement maintains a level playing
field,' so that violators do not gain an
unfair economic advantage over those
who play by the rules. It- reduces envi-
ronmental risk. It deters violatipns by
sending a clear message that those who
do not meet environmental standards will
pay an appropriate penalty. Addition-
ally, enforcement requires violators to pay
for the cfeanup and repair the environ-
mental damage caused by their actions.
EPA's New England office takes a strate-
gic approach to our enforcement activi-
ties. In recent years, wtf have targeted
our efforts toward a numberof different
areas. Our Sensitive Ecosystem Team
applies an integrated, multimedia ap-
proach to environmental problems in tar-
geted geographic areas, including the
Mystic River and South Coastal Mas-
sachusetts. The -Urban Environments
team pursues a community-based ap-
proach to urban environmental problems
and improved the quality of life in New
England's densely-populated areas —
last year, over 400 inspections were con-
ducted in urban areas. The Compliance
Targeting team identifies large facilities
with the potential for major violations.
and our Industrial Sectors team focuses
on compliance issues in specific indus-
tries, such as metal plating and chemical
manufacturing.
Often, EPA's Enforcement and Compli-
ance Assistance staff work together for
maximum impact. One example of this
can be seen in our Chlorine Initiative.
Most municipalities in the U.S. use chlo-
rine as an integral part of their water and
wasrewater disinfection processes, but
many fail to comply with the environ-
mental standards regarding chorine lev--
els in receiving waters.- To combat this.
EPA crafted a compliance strategy that
used a range of enforcement tools — tar-
geted inspections, penalties, and publi-
cizing cases — along with compliance
assistance tools — technical and-regula-
tory assistance and pollution prevention
advice. This combination maximizes the
effectiveness of both approaches by pro-
viding incentives for municipalities to
take advantage of compliance assistance
opportunities, which in turn allows EPA
to shift its attention towards those who
ignore the law.
Getting the Job Done
In 1997. EPA's New England office col-
lected nearly SI.5 million in civil fines
and proposed penalties of another S3
million of the same. Additionally EPA
funnelcd more than S1.2 million towards
Supplemental Environmental Projects —
community -based environmental efforts
ranging from the development of neigh-
borhood parks to the installation of
state-of-lhe-art pollution prev ention tech-
nologies. In fact. 43° o of EPA-New
England's enforcement actions in 1997
resulted in ecosystem protection or envi-
ronmental restoration and 39° o produced
Figure 14. Compliance and Enforcement Accomplishments
Inspections
E 600
z
\->14 1445 l'4i 1447
300
250
150
100
Civil Actions
1944 1945 l^'1'
source: EPA New England
Criminal Actions
40
•
30
:s
*
15
10
5
0
Compliance
-------
Underground Storage Tanks:
Don't Wait Until It's Too Late
I hmuyhou! NVu Knyland. there .in- approximately I.'.").!!!!!! "bare
steel, leak prone ' unprotected underground storage tanks I Sis in
use l>\ businesses, municipalities, and private citi/ens. Because thc\
Ji.iM1 nci safeguards m uarnun; s\Atem- In prewnt leaks, tlirsr tanks
aic c onsidered in he .1 thrrat li) gTOUndwalcr (|U.llil\ a( rnss tin- re-
ui"ii. Prtiulrum nr li.L/aidiuis Milistani cs I'rnni leaking I'STs arc ihr
niiixi innimml>lrin. l.PA prn\idrs ncarK S> inillnm each \car in ilu- \i-\\ hn-
nl.iml stales liir iiispi-ctiiiiis. lank ri'i;i>lraliini. tr.iiliint;. cincryciu \
• rr.spini.sc stall, and nvi-p>ii;lH of cleanups, These prn^ranis h.i\e m>nc
.1 Inny ua\ in reducing the number nl petroleum rricascs nou
numbering nmtc than 12.HIM) in Neu England. IA'.\ sup|>nrts
stale eflnn.s \\itli nur nun LSI program, \\liiih has conducted over
lj")ll inspeitinns n\er the past four" veal's, issuing n\er I tilt citation.-:
1 his pminani usi-s a corr|bination nl compliance .ind technical as-
sistance and limited enlnrccmcnl Inrherfianie to ensure that uiik
.owners learn hnu to properly manage their I Sis ,ind avoid luture
\nnlatinns. In addition in these ellnrts. KPA is ,d>n sponsoring die
"Don t \S'ait L'ntil '9H" canip;ui{n, targeted at hrlpini; I S'l owners
meeLKPA's and the states' December I'IMHTl^.idline for upt;radmi; or
replacing unprotected tanks .
Figure 15. New England's Underground
Storage Tank Program
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 .1996
• Protected SW and DW Systems
• Existing Bare Steel Unprotected Tanks
• Cumulative » of Closed Tanks
source EPA New England
fhe Groton Fuel Cell
rth-
C o m p I
-------
Photo Ed Re
improvement in human health or worker
'protection. Additionally, in 1997, our
criminal enforcement 'program yielded
more indictments, convictions and sen-
tences for more than twice as many indi-
viduals and corporations than ever be-
fore. Last year, 13 criminal sentences were
dojed out, 26 criminal cases were referred
to the U.S. Department of Justice for pros-
ecution, and the region won the largest
environmental criminal fine in New En-
gland history' —:S8.0 million — for the
Eklof Marine case.
Public Agencies
Public agencies have often lagged in
compliance with environmental laws.
To rectify this, EPA's New England of-
fice has established a cross-media team
which has targeted both enforcement
and compliance assistance to this sec-
tor. In 1997' the Public Agency Team,
along with other members of our en-
forcement staff, conducted a total of 234
inspections of public agencies, result-
ing in a total of 116 enforcement ac-
tions. EPA often uses enforcement ac- •
tions to leverage environmental im-
provements. Fbr example, an EPA en-
forcement action against Haverhill, MA
resulted in Haverhill's agreement to
build a household hazardous waste col-
lection center; to conduct quarterly haz-
ardous waste collections; and to edu-
cate residents on techniques to reduce
their use of hazardous materials in the
home. EPA's Public Agency team has
also focused on transportation depart-
ments and state universities in .several
states, and has found significant viola-
tions in such facilities. Continued en-
forcement against public agencies will
send a clear message that governments
must lake environmental laws as seri-
ously as the private sector.
Alternate Dispute
Resolution Program
Our Alternate Dispute Resolution pro-
gram is breaking new ground in promot-
ing the use of mediation and neutral fa-
cilitation in the environmental law con-
text. Havingjust completed its fifth year.
the program has grown exponentially in
the. range of services presided and the
volume of cases handled. In 1997. the
Enforcement Office utilized alternative
dispute resolution to resolve sixteen
Supcrfund and seventeen non-Superfund
cases. Cleanups at federal facilities are
especially good candidates for the use of
neutral facilitators, who are able to en-
hance communication with local citizens.
The program is encouraging the in-
clusion of mediation provisions as part
of settlement agreements in an effort
to avoid disputes as well as resolve
existing ones.
Massachusetts Military
Reservation
cludiii, , imrili-
it'd, thr
.mil (In '
be drinking
•
i I'ininiiiniii.
tiiund in tin- .ujuilri.
- ipcrtmul N
Priori
.mup. In I't'iT. |;|'\ had to
Oil'
pdllul
11 train-
iinp.i "iiM.it
di-rrd tl" •• of the liri'
.uid lead mu-
niliui 'I prrtpellants
thai unlit-.
IM in- malandpub-
pivln
undei
small jn .UK)
tha
pollution prevention
•• HH.ll fill 11
tan
irier .uid will contii :lirr
iliat
^H
C o m p
-------
You and Your Environment
"Heaven is under our feet as well as over our heads."
Henrv David Thoreau
7"he abundance and diversity of habitat.
plants, and wildlife in New England are
a measure of the natural wealth of our
environment. Working together, the
people of New England can maintain
and improve the condition of our
wonderful surroundings with signifi-
cant results.
Waste Not
One of the most important things we
can do to protect the environment is to
minimize the amount of waste we pro-
duce. Americans produce over 208 mil-
lion tons of solid waste each year — 14
million of it here in New England.
That's 4.3 pounds per person per day—
more than any other country in the world.
The good news is .that as a nation, we
have moved from recycling 11% of our
trash in 1986 to our present recycling
rate of 27%. EPA has set a national re-.
cycling goal of 35% by the year 2005.
In order to reach this goal, there are a.
number of measures we can take, all of
which can be summed up with the famil-
iar phrase, "Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle."
There are hundreds of different products
we can buy, household items we can re-
cycle, and activities we can support to
produce less waste. To raise public aware-
ness about recycling, the theme for the
first annual EPA-sponsored America Re-
(ydcsDat, held on November 15,1997, was
"Keep Recycling Working: Buy Recycled."
Ip order to make recycling work, how-
ever, there must be markets for recycled
products to transform curbsidc materi-
als into material goods. More than 1,500
processors and manufacturers in New En- '
gland now depend upon recy clablcs for
their raw materials. EPA's New England
office is working to expand this number
and create and sustain markets to handle
recyclables. Last year, we provided more
than SI .2'million to help fund innovative
source reduction and market develop-
ment grant programs. Additionally, EPA
has been developing a recycling market
infrastructure since 1994 through a pro-
gram called Jobs Through Recycling
JTRi. One JTR grant to the State of
New Hampshire for start-up recycling
businesses will generate over 100 jobs.
and divert 27.000 tons of waste, into new
products with recycled content.
EPA is also beginning to create new mar-
kets for commodities not yet recycled.
Two collections for electronics equipment
were piloted in 1997, with the aim of .
testing whether a collection program can
be created for computers and other elec-
tronics. Over 20j0'00 pounds of
"cnd-of-life" electronics were collected,
including televisions, office equipment,
computer systems, kitchen appliances,
and various miscellaneous electronic
equipment.
Citizens Working for the
Environment
The Path to Greenways — Efforts
Along the Quinnipiac
The Quinnipiac River flows through
south central Connecticut, and is the fo-
cus of a number of inspirational citizen
efforts. The Quinnipiac Linear Trail Ad-
visory Committee recently completed a
survey of the river's entire six-mile course
through Wallingford, including the fa-
mous 90-acre Community Lake site,
which is now being considered for resto-
ration. The group intends to link its
Photo: Roy Crynal
Your Environ
e n t
-------
forts with those in other1 towns in order to
form a recreational grcenway that spans
the watershed. This effort is widely sup-
ported within the community, and the
group's membership already numbers
over fifty active volunteers. One early
benefit of the effort is that the trail com-
mittee has become an intcr-gcncrational
team, bridging a division in the commu-
nity that erupted hist year when teenag-
ers and senior citizens clashed over the
recreational use of the downtown area.
The Quihnipiac River Watershed Asso-
ciation has undertaken extensive out-
reach activities to raise awareness of the
Quinnipiac River and the issue of
non-point source pollution. Thanks to
EPA's Section 319 grant to the State of
Connecticut, the Association has been
able to conduct five canoeing and ihrcr
hiking events in the watershed to intro-
duce people to the natural attributes of
the nvcr and us surrounding lands.
Norwalk River Watershed Initiative a
National Model
The 62 square mile Norwalk River wa-
tershed is located in southwestern Con-
necticut and includes parts of seven com-
munities in both Connecticut and New
York. Fhe river is one of several small
tributaries in Fairfield County that drains
into Long Island Sound. Proposed by
the Long Island Sound Study as a pilot
project to more actively involve commu-
nities in watershed protection efforts, the
Norwalk River Watershed Initiative
NRWI is a voluntary, community-based
watershed planning effort. Designed to
Figure 16. Beach Debris Collected in 1997
9,948 volunteers picked up 108,430 pounds of debris on
456 miles of New England shoreline*
Other Plastic f~
Foam Cups I
Beverage bottles |
Straws H
Cups/Utensils
0 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000
Number of Items
*8 volunteers in Vermont brought up 350 pounds
of debns from one underwater site
lource Center for Mjnne Conservation
address issues of water quality, habitat
restoration, land use, flood protection.
open space, and education and steward-
ship, the NRWI Committee consists of
watershed residents, local officials, inter-
ested organizations, and state and fed-
eral representatives. To benefit the work
of the NWRI. EPA, the USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service, and the
Connecticut Department of Environmen-
tal Protection are providing both techni-
cal and financial assistance. The NWRI
committee has already identified some
preliminary implementation actions that
will take place in the watershed, includ-
ing restoration of vegetated riparian
buffer zones along the river and its tribu-
taries, adoption of consistent septic sys-
tem maintenance ordinances among the
seven watershed communities, and es-
tablishment of a volunteer water quality
monitoring program.
Beachcombing for the Environment
This year, an estimated 151,502 people
across the nation participated in beach
cleanup activities, including 11,170 from
New England's coastal states. New En-
gland volunteers picked up 117,605
pounds of trash along 608.6 miles of
beach. Beach debris can endanger ma-
rine wildlife; create the aesthetic degra-
dation of ocean waters and beaches;
cause economic hardships for coastal
communities and the fishing industry,
and; endanger the health and safety of
beachgoers. EPA is providing funding lo
the Center for Marine Conservation to
select research sites to develop beach
cleanup techniques and monitoring meth-
ods. A few .of these sites will be in New
England (Figure 16).
Pulling Together: Partnerships in the
Pawcatuck Watershed
The Pawcatuck watershed is located in
southwestern Rhode Island and portions
of southeastern Connecticut and covers
194,000 acres, approximately one-quarter
the size of Rhode Island. Il is the home
of the Narragansett Tribe and contains
lands held by the Mashantucket Pequot
Tribe. In 1989, EPA designated the wa-
tershed a "sole source aquifer," meaning
its residents are totally dependent on the
Your En
r o n
e n t
-------
groundw atcr for their drinking water sup-
ply. The \\atcrshed also contains
unfragmcnlcd, rare and critical habitats.
and important wetlands. In 1996 it was
designated as one of the state's nine highly
valued Resource Projection Areas by
Rhode Island's Resource Protection
Project Workgroup, a collaboration
among federal, state, local and-pris-atc
organizations. Federal agency partners
have also targeted this watershed as one
for coordinated support of protection
strategies.
The Pawcatuck Watershed Partnership
PWP is hosted by two local
community-based organizations the
Southern Rhode Island Conservation
District and the Wixxl-Pawcatuck Wa-
tershed Association, along with a num-
ber of local, state tribal and federal part-
ners, including EPA. The P\VP identifies
management issues in the watershed
such as growth management, prevention
of habitat fragmentation, deforestation,
wetland protection, and planning ca-
pacity and develops strategies to ad-
dress these issues and improve the
watershed's environment quality. EPA
is also working with the PWP on the
issue of managing current and future
water supplies.
No Discharge Area
In the fall of 1997. Rhode Island as
part of the Narragansett Bay Estuary
Project Plan applied for a No Dis-
charge Area from EPA's New England
office. As part of this designation,
boats are prohibited frum dumping
treated or untreated sewage into the
bay or in nearby tidal flats and salt
marshes. Rhode Island is the first state
in the nation to want all of its marine
water 400 miles of coastline, 90,000
acres -of open water marked as a No
Discharge Area.
There are approximately HI,608 boats
registered in RI 26,697 are recreational
with an estimated 20,000 more un-
registered. Discharged waste from these
vessels and from those passing through
the state can affect the quality of water
in the Narragansctt Bay, designated by
the National Estuaries Program as "An
Estuary of National Significance."
Before granting "No Discharge Area"
status, EPA makes sure" that there are
adequate pumpout facilities available-
so that boaters are not inconvenient ed
by the new rules. The boaters connect
a hose to a fitting on the boat's sanita-
tion device and empty the contents into
an on-shore tank for treatment at a
sewage treatment plant. Over the past
five years, the state of Rhode Island
has worked very hard and hand in hand
with marina owners, yacht clubs, mu-
nicipalities, and environmental groups
to ensure that funds from the Clean
Vessel Act for the installation of
pumpout facilities were used to their
fullest. There are forty-three pumpout
stations around Narragansctt Bay, in-
stalled using Clean Vessel Act monies,
along with additional private stations.
Tips for Waste Reduction
1. Buy recycled product*
'2. Think before you buy iry to reduce the
packaging material you bring home from .
the supermarket and other stores. Bring
your own bags and reuse them.
15. Find out about your community ivrv-
cling program and how you can help. If
your community dors not recycle, forni
a committee, study the issue, and start a
program.
t. Encourage a recycling program in your
local school system
.5. Increase the kinds of material your com-
munity recycles
lc
such as used motor oil — properly.
8. Encourage others to recycle, reuse, and
reduce their solid waste
Figure 17. EPA's New England Office
Recycling Program
T990
1992
30.000 60.000 90,000 120.000 150,000
• White Piper (Ita) Aluminum (cans)
source EPA Now EnjUnd
Your Environ'
e n t
-------
Agency Goals
A Growing Environmental Community
As.all of us Icam more about our envi-
ronment, we also work together more ef-
fectively to protect it, enjoy its benefits.
and ensure that its quality will be sus-
tained for generations to come. At EPA,
ensuring the environmental quality ofth'e
future is a critical pan of our daily livrs.
We have adopted the following ten goals,
and we ask that you join us in learning
and working to protect the environment
we all share. .
1. Clean Air
The air in every American community
will be safe and healthy to breathe, as
determined by the latest, best scien-
tific evidence. In particular, children,
the elderly, and people with respira-
tory ailments will be protected from
health risks of breathing polluted air..
Strategies to reduce air pollution will
also restore life in damaged forests and
polluted waters.
2. Clean and Safe Waters
All Americans will know that their
drinking water is clean and safe. Effec-
tive protection of America's rivers,
lakes, wetlands, aquifers, and coastal
• and ocean waters will sustain fish,
plants, wildlife, as well as recreational,
subsistence, and economic activities.
\Salcrshcds and their aquatic ecosys-
tems will be restored and protected to
improve public health, enhance water
quality, reduce flooding, and provide
habitat for wildlife.
3. Safe Food
The foods Americans eat will b<- tree
• from unsafe pesticide residues. Chil-
dren especially will be protected from
the health threats poM-d by tainted
food, because they arc among the most
vulnerable groups in our society.
4. Preventing Pollution and Reducing
Risk in Communities. Home.s,
Workplaces, and Ecosystems
Pollution prevention strategies, risk
management, and remediation strat-
egies aimed at cost-effectively elimi-
nating, reducing, or minimi/ing emis-
sions and contamination will result in
(leanerandsalerenvironments in which
Americans can live, work, and play.
EPA will saleguard ecosystems and
promote the health of natural conv
muniues that are integral to the qual-
ity of life in this nation.
5. Better Waste Management and
Restoration of Abandoned Waste Sites
America's wastes will be stored,
treated, and disposed of in ways that
Photo K Kile,
prevent harm to |x'c >ple and ti i die natu-
ral environment. EPA will v\ork to
clean up previously polluted sites and
restore them to u-.es appropriate for
Mirn >unding communities.
6 Reduction of Global and Cross-Border
Environmental Risks
I he I'nited States will lead other na-
tions in successful, multilateral el-
lorts to reduce significant risks to
hum.tii health and ecosystems from
climate < li.irigc, stratospheric o/one
depletion, and other ha/ards of in-
ternational concern.
7. Expansion of Americans' Right to
Know About Their Environment
Eas'v access to a wealth of informa-
tion about the stale of their local
environment uill expand c iti/en in-
volvement and give people tools to
protect their families and their com-
munities as they see III Increased
information exchange between sci-
entists, public health officials, busi-
ness, citi/.ens. and all levels of gov-
ernment will foster greater knowl-
edge about tin- environment and what
can br done to protect it.
8. Sound Science, Improved Under-
standing of Environmental Risk, and
Greater Innovation to Address
Environmental Problems
. EPA will develop and apply the Ix-st
available science for addressing cur-
rent and future environmental hazards.
as well ;LS new approaches toward im-
proving environmental protection.
9. A Credible Deterrent to Pollution and
Greater Compliance with the Law
EPA will ensure full compliance with
laws intended to protect public health
and the environment.
10. Effective Management
EPA will establish a management in-
frastructure that will set and imple-
ment the highest quality standards for
effective internal management and fis-
cal responsibility.
Agency
G o a
-------
EPA Contacts and Credits
http://www.epa.gov/region01/
Fpr general information, customer assistance, to report a tip
or complaint about a potential environmental violation or to
request technical assistance from the New England
Environmental Assistance Team:
Customer Assistance Line
(888EPA-REG1 (888-372-7341)
Emergency- Response:
(for reporting spills/environmental incidents):
(800 424-8802
EPA New England Office Library:
(888) EPA-LIBR (888-372-5427'
The 1998 State of the New England Environment
is published by.
The Environmental Protection Agency
New England Office
John E Kennedy Building
Boston, MA 02203
Project Managers
Diane Switzer & Carol Wood
Policy Coordinator
Michael OTHallcy
Editing
Tatiana Brailovskaya, Ncreus Communication, Inc.
CoverArt
Elizabeth Montesi, MTI
Graphics Design & Layout
Elizabeth Montesi & Mars Clark, MTI
CIS Support
Deb Cohen & Jim Fritz. Signal Corporation
Library Services
Peg Nelson, Garcia Consulting, Inc.
All data is from EPA or indhidual New England states
unless otherwise noted.
Special thanks to the following:
New England Plant Conservation Program; The Nature
Conservancy, Maine Audubon "Society, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration; Center for Marine Conservation;
Penobscot Indian Nation; Mark Racket & David Soule,
Metropolitan Area Planning Council;
John Ljpman, MA EOEA
Thanks to EPA's New England Office staff for their contribution,
including die following members of the 1998 Workgroup:.
Lois Adams, Rob Adlcr, Susan Beede, Norm Beloin.Janine Burke,
Rich Burkhart, Eugene Benoit, Jennie Bridge, Bob Cianciarulo,
Dave Conroy, Don Cooke, Doug Corb, Mel Cote, Joe DeCoIa,
Peyton Fleming, Irish Garrigan, Nancy Grantham, Cynthia
Greene, Mona Haywooid, Greg Hellyer, Betsy Higgins, Maureen
Hilton, Kira Jacobs, Mark Kern, Ronnie Levin, Man Liebman,
Karen Lutnino. Kathy Lynch, Linda Marinilli, Katie Mazer,
Maureen McClelland, Bob McConnell, Wendy McDougall, Ken
MorafT, Peter Nolan, Margo Palmer, Sieve Rapp, Ed Reiner, Ann
Rodney, Man' Rosenstein. Bruce RosinofT, Myra Schwartz, John
Smaldone, Mary Beth Smuts, Elissa Tonkin, Alan Van Arsdalc,
Alison Walsh, BUI Wakh-Rogalski, Jen Weiss.
-------
Form Approved
OMB Control No.2090-0019
Approval expires 10/31/99
Please give us your comments on the 1998 State of the New England Environment Report.
1. a. Is this report easy to read and understand? YES NO
b. What would make the report easier to read and use?
2. Which section was the most informative? Were any specific topics of particular interest to you?
3. In what setting do you plan to use the report? (check all that apply)
—Academia—Small Business Home Local Community Industry Other
4. We welcome any other comments you have and recommendations for future reports.
5. Would you like to receive a copy of future reports? If "yes* please provide thefollowing information:
Name . •
Organization • .__ ,
Address
Town/City _ ._., State Zip Code
Thank you for your response!
Environmental Protection Agency
Region I. New England Office
Region 1, New England
&EPA
Tbtpubfc reporting and record keeping bunton far thhcotecbon it eitiiratadto«wr^5niinut«perrwponie. Burdenmeini**^
Pmrate ami provide Mbnnatxxi requested. iKkid^reviev^
acotecdcn of Mentation unlen it <£spltyiicwnn^
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
JFK Federal Building
Boston. MA 02203
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300
NO POSTAGE
NECESSARY IF
MAILED IN THE
UNITED STATES
BUSINESS REPLY MAIL
FIRST CLASS MAIL PERMIT NO. 11663 BOSTON, MA
POSTAGE vyiU. BE PAID BY ADDRESSEE
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 1 - Mai Code RAA
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
------- |