Year in Review
Region I - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAULG.KEOUGH
DEPUTY REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR page 1
AIR MANAGEMENT DIVISION
LOUIS F. GITTO, DIRECTOR page2
WASTE MANAGEMENT DIVISION
MERRILL S.HOHMAN, DIRECTOR page6
WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION
DAVID A. FffiRRA, DIRECTOR page 10
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIRECTOR
EDWARD J.CONLEY, DIRECTOR page 16
OFFICE OF REGIONAL COUNSEL
PATRICK A. PARENTEAU, REGIONAL COUNSEL page 18
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT DIVISION
HARLEYF.LAING, DIRECTOR page 20
OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
STEPHEN F. ELLS, DIRECTOR page 23
OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
BROOKE CHAMBERLAIN-COOK, DIRECTOR page 24
CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
STANLEY J.PAC, COMMISSIONER page 26
MAINE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
HENRY B. WARREN, COMMISSIONER page 28
MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
JAMES RHOYTE, SECRETARY page 29
NEW HAMPSHIRE - A STATE OF ENVIRONMENT
GOVERNOR JOHN SUNUNU pageSl
RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ROBERT L.BENDICK, DIRECTOR page 32
VERMONT AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
LEONARD U. WILSON, SECRETARY page 33
-------
MICHAEL R, DELAND
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
Dear Friends of the
New England Environment:
Each year our environmental challenges
loom ever larger and last year was no ex-
ception. However, 1985 was a year in
which we won many battles and waged
even more in our ongoing campaign to
guard New England's environment and
protect its public health.
Our successes are due to the unwaver-
ing dedication of each and every employee
in Region I, to the strong contributions by
the Region's six states, to the zealous
efforts of environmental groups - large
and small - and to the deep concern of
all New Englanders for the unrivaled
quality of our environment.
Mark Twain once said, "Thunder is
good, thunder is impressive. But it's
lightning that does the work." This Year
in Review presents information about
where and how lightning struck in 1985.
I have no higher priority than firm but
fair enforcement of our national en-
vironmental statues. Last year, we exceed-
ed our record setting pace of 1984 by is-
suing 40% more administrative actions
and referring 25% more civil and criminal
cases to the U.S. Department of Justice.
In so doing, we did not simply "run up"
numbers but brought tough and meaning-
ful cases to protect our environment and
public health.
For Boston Harbor, 1985 was the "Year
of Decision." Historic progress was made
to clean up the harbor, currently one of
the most flagrant violations of the
Clean Water Act in the country. In
1985, we successfully brought suit in
federal court as a first step toward a
court-enforceable schedule to ensure
that harbor cleanup occurs in this
century.
Despite tremendous controversy, a deci-
sion on siting the new Boston Harbor
wastewater treatment facility was
made and the environmental impact
statement was completed. The stage is
now set in 1986 we must maintain this
momentum by starting to implement
the decisions made last year. High on
the agenda for 1986, the "Year of Com-
mitment," are actions to move the Deer
Island prison, to develop a schedule to
stop sludge discharges into the Harbor,
and to designate a Boston Harbor State
Park which includes Long Island.
By denying 301(h) waiver requests that
would have exempted the Massachu-
setts Water Resources Authority and
the South Essex Sewerage District from
secondary treatment requirements, we
reversed long-standing abuses of criti-
cal natural resources and set new
courses for protection.
We demonstrated that negotiation
rather than litigation is a viable and
preferable way to resolve environmen-
tal disputes. At the Keefe Environmen-
tal Services site in New Hampshire, we
negotiated the nation's first major par-
ty Superfund cashout with over 100
responsible parties at a value of almost
$6 million.
We demonstrated that we have the
capacity and the resolve to litigate,
when necessary, by winning the na-
tion's first Superfund liability trial at
the Ottati and Goss site in Kingston,
New Hampshire. This trial, the longest
federal environmental trial in the na-
tion's history, lasted over 100 days and
resulted in a precedent setting EPA vic-
tory on all counts.
We expanded our emphasis on criminal
violations. We obtained the nation's first
criminal sentencing in 10 years for
violations of EPA asbestos renovation
and demolition standards against a
Connecticut wrecking company and a
building owner. The building owner
received a one year sentence (11 months
of which were suspended) and both
defendants received a $25,000 fine, were
placed on 5-year probation, and were
ordered to perform 1,000 hours of com-
munity service
Our continuing enforcement effort is
complemented by other priorities and in-
itiatives. Integration across media lines
and a focus on system-wide effects of en-
-------
vironmental pollution rank high on this
list.
For example, we took significant long-
term steps to protect New England's ir-
replaceable groundwater resources. Work-
ing with our state and local partners, we
began the arduous process of developing
a comprehensive protection plan for the
Cape Cod sole source aquifer. This ap-
proach emphasizes prevention of con-
tamination not reaction to environmental
emergencies. We are hopeful that this
pilot project will provide important lessons
that can be applied to the management
of aquifers elsewhere in the region and the
nation.
Inextricably linked to high quality
groundwater in our interconnected en-
vironment is wetland protection. Drain-
ed by farmers, destroyed by developers,
dredged for navigation and used as
dumps, our wetlands have been lost at a
rapid rate Last year, we took several ac-
tions that signal a more active presence
in the administration of the federal
wetlands program in New England. We in-
itiated a .process to provide for public
review of a. proposed Army Corps of
Engineers permit to develop a shopping
mall in an Attleboro, Massachusetts
swamp. And, we developed a wetlands
strategy designed to enhance our ability
to preserve these critical resources.
We started comprehensive evaluations
of our coastal and marine waters. Work-
ing closely with the affected communities,
we conducted broad scale environmental
studies in Narragansett Bay, Buzzards
Bay and Long Island Sound - three of the
Northeast's most valued estuaries. These
studies, part of the national multi-million
dollar effort in four bays, are designed to
determine the nature and extent of the
threats to these resources and develop
long-term protection strategies.
We continued to make headway in long-
term cleanup at National Priority List
Superfund sites. We started some phase
of construction at more than one-half of
the Superfund sites in New England and
expended over $85 million. Due to Con-
gressional failure to reauthorize Super-
fund, we were forced to slow down the pro-
gram in August 1985. While the slow
down postponed long term cleanup at
some sites, the contamination is under
control in every instance.
Despite the forced slow down, we
honored our commitment to respond to
hazardous waste emergencies that posed
immediate threats to public health or the
environment. Where imminent threats ex-
isted, we took 18 emergency actions under
Superfund at a cost of over $6 million.
One of our most serious long-range air
pollution problems is ozone, more com-
monly referred to as smog. Ozone (the
pollutant, not the atmospheric layer that
we need to protect) is formed when volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) mix with ox-
ides of nitrogen in the sunlight. Sta-
tionary sources, especially petrochemical
plants, dry cleaners and gasoline stations,
contribute about 60% of the region's VOC
emissions while motor vehicles account
for the remainder. The environmental
result of continuing emissions is that each
summer an estimated two million people
in New England suffer health risks
because the smog levels are unacceptably
high.
Last year, we identified almost 600 sta-
tionary sources subject to VOC regula-
tions and developed compliance schedules
for these sources. In addition, we testified
before the Connecticut legislature to en-
dorse the defeat of a bill that would repeal
the state's automobile inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program. In another
case, we testified before the New Hamp-
shire legislature on behalf of an I/M pro-
gram for the Nashua area.
While these are by no means last year's
only achievements, they do reflect the
kinds of actions we initiated in response
to our highest priorities.
We accomplished much in 1985, yet
much remains to be dona During 1986,
we will continue to aggressively enforce
the nation's environmental statues and
protect our environment and public
health. We will further refine our work-
ing relationships with all constituencies:
citizens, environmental and business
groups, federal, state, and local officials,
and the academic community.
In the year ahead, we will continue to
seek innovative answers to the unique
cleanup questions presented by our hazar-
dous waste sites. We hope to improve our
understanding of health risks associated
with environmental contamination by
creating working arrangements between
environmental protection and public
health officials. This is a critical initiative
that could increase consistency in assess-
ing the risks of exposure to environmen-
tal contaminants and which could im-
prove our ability to communicate the
nature of what we know and do not know
to a frequently confused public.
In 1986, we will continue to assess
emerging environmental problems, in-
cluding lead-in-soil radon gas, and other
indoor air pollution. We will persist in
meeting the long-term challenges such as
Boston Harbor cleanup and wetlands
protection.
Rene Dubois once said that we must
"think globally and act locally." The en-
vironmental challenges of the years ahead
require that we act personally to reduce
the risks of exposure to pollution.
By making informed decisions about our
lifestyles and the indoor environments in
which we spend 90% of our time, we as in-
dividuals can limit our exposure to toxic
substances. For example, instituting a
smoking ban in EPA offices likely remains
the most significant step that I have taken
to protect public health.
Reduction of ozone levels, mitigation of
indoor air pollution sources, and proper
disposal of household chemicals and
wastes are other examples of the kinds of
solutions that are within our control. lb
illustrate, since each one of us is respon-
sible for the generation of one ton of waste
per year, we can make a significant con-
tribution by reducing the amount of waste
that is directly within our control.
As President Abraham Lincoln said
more than a century ago, "Public senti-
ment is everything. With it, nothing can
fail. Without it, nothing can succeed." Our
environmental challenges are great but,
given New England's strong sentiment,
we will, together, succeed.
-------
PAUL G. KEOUGH
DEPUTY REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
As Deputy Regional Administrator, I am
responsible for overseeing the manage-
ment of the region's day-to-day activities.
I also have been asked by the Regional Ad-
ministrator to direct several critical
initiatives important to the agency, to the
New England region and to our environ-
ment. Enforcement is one area where I
have devoted a considerable amount of
time. It is the backbone of environmental
protection.
In 1985, I continued my role as coor-
dinator of the region's overall enforcement
effort. Thanks to the ongoing dedication
and determination of our regional enforce-
ment staff, this region met or surpassed
all its enforcement goals. In a nutshell, it
was a record year. Region I issued 40%
more administrative orders, referred 25%
more civil and criminal cases to the
Department of Justice and collected more
penalties than in 1984, breaking that
year's record.
In addition, Region I set the pace na-
tionally for developing enforcement pro-
cedures. The region now has in place
signed enforcement agreements with each
of the six New England states for all pro-
gram areas. These agreements allow the
states the first opportunity to take action
against violators. In some instances, the
states may refer cases to the EPA for
federal enforcement; or, when action by
the state is not timely or appropriate, EPA
can take action.
Mike Deland has made enforcement a
continuing high priority in FY 86, and I
intend to see that we implement a tough
and aggressive program. Among the
region's enforcement priorities for 1986
are:
Enforcement of regulations to reduce
volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
emissions which contribute to the ozone
(smog) problem;
Enforcement of the asbestos-in-schools
and asbestos renovation/demolition
regulations;
Implementation of the National
Municipal Policy (NMP). In New
England, 15 municipalities that will
not have secondary treatment by the
July 1,1988 deadline will be placed on
court-enforceable schedules;
Development of wetlands protection
measures;
Crackdowns against those who illegal-
ly tamper with emission control devices
or engage in fuel-switching
and
Aggressive cost-recovery action against
responsible parties who refuse to pay
their share for cleaning up hazardous
waste sites.
Human resources was another priority
for me during 1985.1 was honored to be
elected the first chairperson of the agen-
cy's National Human Resources Council.
EPA is at the forefront of an effort to at-
tract the best and the brightest to our
organization and to strengthen the
management skills of our present super-
visors. EPA is also committed to improv-
ing the skills of our clerical and
secretarial staff. We rotated some of our
senior managers to give them a variety of
assignments, and we granted some of our
employees temporary assignments to
state and local agencies under the Federal
Intergovernmental Personnel Act.
In the area of civil rights which I direct
for Region I, the New England office set
the pace nationally for bringing
minorities and women into the Agency in
1985. Also, the region set a national prece-
dent by becoming the first region in the
country to hire a fulltime Federal Women's
Program Manager.
In the area of federal-state partnership,
I meet frequently with the state en-
vironmental secretaries to assess their
performance and to provide a forum for
the states to discuss issues of concern. I
will continue to hold these meetings since
it is essential for us to expand and solidify
this growing interdependent relationship.
Hence, we include in our report this year
presentation from our state counterparts.
As an internal manager, 1986 poses
many problems. We will face cuts under
the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit
Reduction Act. And, we will face continu-
ing problems in Superfund unless Con-
gress takes action to reauthorize this
vitally important program.
While region I faces another busy year
in 1986,1 am confident this office will con-
tinue to show the tremendous progress
seen in the previous two years.
-------
AIR MANAGEMENT
DIVISION
LOUIS F GITTO, DIRECTOR
The Air Management Division (AMD)
is responsible for the oversight of air,
pesticide, environmental radiation and
toxic programs in New England. These
responsibilities are carried out directly us-
ing federal laws, or through state pro-
grams. In addition to direct grants to the
states, we provide technical support, work-
ing in close coordination with state
agencies.
Some of the major accomplishments of
the Air Management Division this past
year include: the highest number of
federal air enforcement actions and air in-
spections in any year; and the nations's
first criminal conviction with a jail term
in a case involving the demolition of a
building containing asbestos.
Stationary sources that emitted ex-
cessive levels of volatile organic chemicals
(VOCs) and violations of federal rules
governing the safe removal of asbestos
during demolition and renovation projects
was the primary enforcement focus. The
Region conducted 199 inspections and
resolved 12 cases involving significant
violations of air pollution regulations. We
issued 13 notices of violation, 22 ad-
ministrative orders and referred 8 cases
to the U.S. Department of Justice. Among
the referrals was the criminal case involv-
ing a deliberate violation of EPA's asbestos
demolition/renovation requirements.
The combined efforts of EPA and the
New England states resulted in a high
level of stationary source compliance (see
Chart 1).
The Air Management Division par-
ticipated in 3 national air task forces this
past year. They include the issues of (1)
stack height regulations to determine the
level of emission controls required; (2)
emission trading policy to determine what
swapping between facilities will be al-
lowed; and the (3) post-1987 ozone task
force to recommend ozone control strategy
to the Administrator.
CONTROLLING SMOG
Smog (or ozone) is a public health pro-
blem in many areas of the country. The
East coast is one of the most affected areas
of the country. Large population centers
generate VOCs and oxides of nitrogen
(NOx) which combine with sunlight to
form smog. Smog problems are most
severe in summer on hot, humid days with
little or no breeze.
Even though EPA, the states, local
governments, automobile manufacturers,
gasoline stations and industry have
worked for many years to solve the smog
problem, it still persists.
To address the ozone problem, EPA and
the New England states have in place
strong, enforceable regulations to control
VOCs. Early in FY 85, the regional VOC
task force developed this Region's VOC
stationary source enforcement strategy. It
was announced at a technical conference
sponsored by the Air Pollution Control
Association. The strategy is designed to
maximize the benefits of inspections by
focusing on those industries with a large
number of sources and significant VOC
emissions. In the past year, the task force
established a good inventory of sources
(seeChart 2) and in each state we iden-
tified three or four key industrial source
categories.
During 1985's state air program audits,
the permit and inspection files of over 100
sources were placed on EPA's significant
violator list. This list targets the most im-
portant pollution sources inadequately
reducing their air emissions. Many other
sources were identified for state or federal
inspections. Together with the states, the
Region will work from this list to achieve
compliance with the regulations by 1987.
In addition, the states and EPA are ad-
dressing the smog problem through
mobile source control. In the past year,
Connecticut and Massachusetts have con-
tinued to run strong inspection and
maintenance programs, and EPA has im-
plemented a new mobile source enforce-
ment strategy.
Also, Region I is on the national VOC
task force to ensure that industries in
other parts of the country are held to the
same high standards as New England in-
dustries; The-two primary goals of our
task force work include controlling in-
dustrial pollution upwind from New
England and uniformly regulating New
England industries and its competitors.
Region I is a principal participant in the
national ozone task force. It was created
to recommend to the administrator what
ozone reduction standards must be
achieved by December 31, 1987. If they
cannot be, we are working with the New
England states to find a solution.
In summary, while we are enforcing ex-
isting regulations to control smog, we con-
tinue to work on a longer term plan to
solve the problem. Efforts include the im-
plementation of a mobile source inspec-
tion program, and detection of tampering
with automobile emission control equip-
ment. These checks should reduce ozone,
carbon monoxide and toxic levels in the
air. (see Charts 3-4)
-------
MOBILE SOURCE
ENFORCEMENT (CASE
STUDY)
Mobile source pollution accounts for a
large part of the total emissions of carbon
monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOx)
and hydrocarbons (HC). Connecticut and
Massachusetts have statewide inspection
and maintenance (I/M) programs for the
testing of vehicle emissions and a limited
program in New Hampshire starts in
September 1987. The I/M programs con-
tinue to be very successful in reducing
auto emissions.
In addition to I/M, the region fought
mobile source pollution by implementing
a mobile source enforcement program. In
December 1984, Region I began inspec-
tions to detect tampering with automotive
emission control systems and the use of
leaded gasoline in vehicles designed for
unleaded fuel. This is a unique regional
initiative because the mobile source en-
forcement program is centralized in EPA
headquarters and no other region has pur-
sued its own inspection program. Region
Fs effort complements the existing na-
tional inspection program, allowing EPA
to provide broader coverage and quicker
response to public complaints.
Recent field surveys show that approx-
imately 10% of vehicles have been
misfueled and 16% have been tampered
with in New England. The emission con-
trol systems are integral to the proper per-
formance of cars. Tampering and misfuel-
ing increase driving costs for the motorist
because of decreased performance and in-
creased repairs. Most importantly,
tampering and misfueling can cause emis-
sions to increase as much as 800%.
Overall, automobile pollution is responsi-
ble for about 50% of the HC and NOx and
75% of the CO emitted to the atmosphere
Much of New England is still not attain-
ing the nation's ambient air quality stan-
dards for CO and smog. (HC and NOx are
precursors to the formation of smog.)
Region I inspects service stations, repair
shops, automobile dealerships and fleet
operations. Depending on the type of
operation to be inspected, inspectors sam-
ple unleaded gasoline to test for lead con-
tamination, measure nozzles on gas
pumps to determine if they are the prop-
er size and examine the premises for
evidence of tampering with emission con-
trol equipment. If necessary, inspectors ex-
amine repair records and invoices and
make follow-up inspections of tampered
vehicles.
Inspection targets are based on records
of previous violations, random selection
and complaints received by the regional
office A significant component of the pro-
gram is a toll-free hot line for the public
to report cases of suspected tampering and
misfueling. The hot-line numbers are
1-800-631-2700 for Massachusetts and
1-800-821-1237 for other New England
states. Clean air counselors from the
American Association of Retired Persons
support Air Management Division staff in
conducting inspections and related public
awareness activities.
Cases are referred to headquarters for
enforcement follow-up and violators are
Chart 1
TOTAL NUMBER & COMPLIANCE STATUS OF MAJOR SOURCES
subject to civil penalties of up to $2,500
per violation. New car dealers who tamper
with emission controls are subject to
penalties of up to $10,000 per violation.
Although Region I's program has only re-
cently begun, we have conducted more
than 300 inspections and referred 23 cases
for enforcement action resulting in propos-
ed penalties of more than $250,000. We
have determined through discussions with
auto service personnel that these actions,
and the continuing presence of EPA in-
spectors in the field, are new and effective
deterrents against misfueling and
tampering.
Legand
CD TOTAL KUHICX
VT
The region awarded $6.7 million in air
program grants to the New England
states to be used for the development of
SIPs ambient air monitoring of six
regulated pollutants and for permit pro-
grams for the review of new sources of
pollution and the enforcement of permit
limits. Thanks to state efforts, Region I
continued its 100% on time review of state
implementation plans, which set emission
limits for existing pollution sources. And,
the Region awarded $565,000 in state
grants from a national pool of $3 million
to address potential implementation issue
for acid rain control.
Four of the six New England states and
the Northeast States for Coordinated Air
Use Management (NESCAUM) received
the acid rain grants. Region I serves as a
link between national research programs
and interested parties in New England
and helps disseminate information related
to the national acid precipitation pro-
gram, including the national surface
water survey which sampled nearly 800
lakes in the northeast.
The first results of this survey released
this past fall showed that 9% of the lakes
in the northeast have pH levels at or below
5.5 and 20% of the lakes have acid neu-
tralizing capabilities at or below 50
microgram equivalents per liter. Finally,
the Region increased the number of
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) inspec-
tions conducted in the past year by near-
ly 50%. The 193 inspections resulted in 19
civil and one criminal complaint. Twenty-
six notices of non-compliance were issued
for lesser violations. Connecticut received
a renewed cooperative enforcement grant
of $144,200 for its current year effort. A
new cooperative enforcement grant for
$50,876 to New Hampshire will permit
greater emphasis on PCB inspection and
enforcement in that state
The Region began several new programs
aimed at providing either technical or
financial assistance for reducing the risk
of asbestos exposure The region estab-
lished an asbestos information center, one
of three in the nation, at Tufts University
3
-------
25X 10X TJX IOO%
TOTAi. Pa_U/TANTS CAUSED BY MAM
Nawnsl Center for Vehicle Enwsons Control and Safely Department ol InduBiial
Saence*. Colorado Sun Unvcmy. fan CoOm. Colorado 80SB
in Medford, MA. This allowed for a train-
ing and educational program for asbestos
hazard identification and control.
A program of financial assistance in the
form of interest free loans or grants for
asbestos control to needy school districts
began with the passage of the Asbestos
School Hazard Abatement Act. In FY 85,
more than $2 million was made available
to assist 20 projects in New England.
The region is supporting state efforts to
establish licensing programs for contrac-
tors who handle asbestos. As such, the
Region awarded contractor training and
certification grants to Connecticut and
New Hampshire to assist them in develop-
ing these programs.
The Region took action to increase pro-
tection for state and local government
employees in the workplace The new
asbestos abatement projects regulation
applies occupational safety and work prac-
tice standards to persons who were not
previously protected by any regulation.
Because of limited resources, we con-
ducted fewer inspections to monitor com-
pliance with the asbestos-in-schools rule
However, a more stringent enforcement
policy, requiring the issuance of ad-
ministrative civil complaints with
penalties, is in effect and continues to
alert school officials and the public to the
importance EPA places on asbestos
identification and reporting.
The Region addressed air toxics issues
through grants, technical support and in-
formation exchange
Specifically, the division participated in
work groups like the interstate commit-
tee now developing a regional standard for
perchloroethylene In addition, it spon-
sored a series of workshops for states on
issues such as risk assessment, dioxin
emissions from resource recovery facilities
and accessing automated information
systems for toxicological data. The Region
initiated a regional radon work group and
co-hosted a workshop for federal and state
governments, contractors and acade-
micians.
Elevated levels of naturally occurring
radioactive gas in homes and buildings is
an emerging problem in New England.
Radon, at high concentrations found in
some isolated locations in New England,
is a serious cancer causing health risk.
Caused by the decay of natural uranium
in mineral deposits, the indoor radon pro-
blem has been exacerbated by energy con-
servation efforts which reduce air ex-
change with the outside. While the Agen-
cy does not have standards to regulate the
amount of airborne radon allowable, the
division has established an interprogram
task force to gather technical information
and develop regional responses. In con-
junction with NESCAUM, Region I spon-
sored a radon workshop for the New
England states to share this information
and to develop coordinated responses to
monitoring protocol, health advisories and
remediation measures. Such efforts
include:
Working with federal, state and local
agencies in refining and testing the
radiological emergency response plans
for six nuclear power plants in New
England, and developing detailed
response plans for the Seabrook (NH)
station; and
Providing guidance and technical
assistance for non-ionizing radiation,
like radio frequency radiation, in-
cluding detailed modeling in a 0.6
square mile area of Needham, MA
which contains six antenna towers serv-
ing eight radio and eight television sta-
tions. Results indicated that radiation
levels are well within acceptable safe-
ty limits to protect area residents.
The Region provided technical and
grant assistance of $100,200 to the New
England states to train and certify
pesticide applicators. During FY 85, the
New England states conducted 1,983
pesticide enforcement inspections. In
about 45% of these, the division found
violations of either federal or state rules.
This resulted in 33 license suspensions or
revocations.
The Region worked closely with Maine's
Department of Agriculture and Board of
Pesticide Control and with the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) to in-
vestigate a large scale misuse of an
unregistered herbicide
MONITORING
PESTICIDE USE
Early in the growing season of 1985, a
Maine inspector working under our
cooperative pesticide enforcement grant
came upon a farmer using one of the
newer herbicides on potatoes. A careful
use inspection revealed that this pesticide
was registered primarily for use on cotton
and soybeans but not potatoes. Further
checking revealed this was not an isolated
incident.
Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungi-
cide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), it is
unlawful to use a pesticide for an "unregis-
tered" use. In the registration of a
pesticide, maximum residue levels are
established for uses involving food or feed
crop production. Food or feed which have
levels of residue which exceed allowable
tolerance levels are subject to embargo or
seizure
Chart 2
MASS CTG VOC EMISSIONS BY SOURCE CLASSIFICATIONS
Legend
(Z2 B-1980
El A3-I980
ES Al-1980
V 6-1987
CD A2-1987
CZ A1-I987
-------
EPA was alerted and worked closely
with Maine officials and the FDA to deter-
mine the extent of pesticide misuse and
the levels of residue present in potatoes.
At a strategy meeting between the state,
FDA and EPA, plans were made to iden-
tify purchases, user locations, extent of
use The group also developed a sampling
strategy. Identifying those who purchased
the herbicide for illegal use was difficult
since sales records for the product are not
required. However, careful checking re-
vealed the identity of about 200 who pur-
chased the herbicides. This accounted for
an estimated 85% of sales volume "Stop
use" orders were sent to purchasers and
promptly followed up by inspections to
determine the area treated and disposi-
tion of the unused pesticide Statements
were taken from those who indicated sales
persons had recommended the illegal use
After use locations were identified, potato
samples were collected and an analysis
conducted to detect levels of the pesticide
residue
Evidence collected by Maine resulted in
fines levied against 106 users and enforce-
ment actions taken against three dealer-
ships. In addition, prompt action stopped
the use of much of this material. For-
tunately, after repeated analysis of
potatoes, the FDA was unable to detect
the presence of an illegal herbicide in-
dicating the potatoes were safe for
consumption.
Air management initiative for 1986
include:
continuing to ensure that national air
quality standards for sulfur dioxide,
total suspended particulate matter, car-
bon monoxide, ozone, nitrogen oxide
and lead are met;
providing guidance and technical
assistance to state agencies in develop-
ing SIPs to achieve the ozone standard;
continuing to stress stationary source
compliance, especially VOC and
asbestos sources, as well as mobile
source compliance including I/M and
anti-tampering;
Increasing efforts on air toxics, indoor
air pollution and acid rain;
continuing the Asbestos School Hazard
Abatement Act program;
enforcing a new fire safety rule on fire
hazards posed by transformers contain-
ing PCBs in commercial buildings;
concentrating on enforcement of
pesticide use regulations and state
plans for certification and training of
applicators; and
continuing to work with states in ad-
dressing the radon problem and provide
guidance and technical assistance on
other radiation issues including low-
level radioactive waste disposal.
Charts
OZONE MONITORING DATA
DAYS EXCEEDING THE OZONE STANDARD
AVERAGE NO. OF DATS EXCEEDING THl OZONE STAN
, * a a
/'
- '/
:. /
'/ ' /
; . '/.
' /
' '/
PW"
CT UC
JU
1
Sf /
1 1
UA NH Rj VT
STATE
Legend
2 tS'-'MJ
Chart 4
OZONE MONFTORING DATA
HIGHEST (SECOND HIGH) OZONE LEVELS
E3 TM1-TM3
CD IM4 '
STATt
-------
WASTE MANAGEMENT
DIVISION
MERRILL S. HOHMAN, DIRECTOR
Region I's Waste Management Division
administers EPA's two federal statutes
governing the management of hazardous
waste.
The first, the Comprehensive En-
vironmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980,
known as Superfund, created a federal
response program to cleanup hazardous
waste sites which have resulted from past
improper management activities and
which present significant risks to health
and the environment.
The second, the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, establishes a regulatory
framework for the "cradle-to-grave"
management of hazardous wastes.
To achieve the goals of these statutes,
our major initiatives this year have been:
continued progress in cleaning up
hazardous waste sites, placing major
emphasis on sites on the Superfund na-
tional priorities list;
private party cleanups of hazardous
waste sites or reimbursement of ex-
penses incurred by government in
short-term and long-term remedial ac-
tions under Superfund;
implementation of the RCRA waste
management program in Region I, giv-
ing emphasis to state program develop-
ment, delegations, permitting, enforce-
ment and monitoring; and
corrective actions under the broad new
authority of the 1984 amendments, cor-
rective actions which require RCRA
facility owners and operators to remedy
any present or prior contamination
problems.
HAZARDOUS WASTE
SITE CLEANUP - THE
SUPERFUND PROGRAM
EPA has developed a Superfund na-
tional priorities list, an increase of 12 sites
since 1984.
Charts
CERCLIS - Region I
G.M.1 National
Priorities List Sites
As of: 12/12/85
The total funds committed in Region I's
Superfund program through September,
1985 is $85 million. During this past year,
we have initiated some phase of construc-
tion at 29 sites. Studies to identify pro-
blems and select final cleanup options are
either completed or underway at 48 sites.
j-
57 TOTAL NPL SITES
6
-------
During 1985, Regional Administrator
Michael Deland approved nine records of
decision, or formal announcements by
EPA of the final cleanup remedies to be
implemented at:
Charles George Landfill,
Tyngsborough, MA - capping and
leachate collection;
McKin Co., Gray, ME - onsite aeration
with groundwater cleanup;
Plymouth Harbor/Cannon's Engineer-
ing, Plymouth, MA - removal of onsite
tanks;
Hocomonco Pond, Westborough, MA
capping of former lagoon area, replace-
ment of storm drain, dewatering of Ket-
tle Pond, and disposal of soil and waste
in onsite landfill;
Winthrop Town Landfill, Winthrop, ME
capping the landfill, completing an
alternate water supply and ground-
water monitoring;
Nyanza Chemical, Ashland, MA - con-
solidation of wastes and capping,
groundwater and surface water diver-
sion, post-closure monitoring;
Western Sand and Gravel, Burrillville,
RI capping contaminated soil and
sludges;
Beacon Heights Landfill, Beacon Falls,
CT - closure by capping and leachate
collection/treatment, groundwater
monitoring and municipal water sup-
ply extension;
Picillo, Coventry, RI - landfilling con-
taminated soil and sludges.
Interim cleanup measures were under-
taken at two sites. The regional ad-
ministrator authorized $400,000 to design
and install a standby treatment system
and restore Well fil, a major drinking
water supply for the Ibwn of Groveland,
MA. He also authorized $1.4 million to
remove contaminated tanks and
buildings, relocate the water main and
temporarily cap areas of high soil con-
tamination at the Baird & McGuire site
in Holbrook, MA. However new detection
techniques led to the discovery of low
levels of dioxin at the site and delayed
work until the full extent and level of con-
tamination could be determined.
While emphasizing sites on the national
priorities list, we often undertake action
to protect public health under our emer-
gency authority at sites that may never
qualify for the list. Over $5 million was
spent in 1985 on emergency response ac-
tions. Region I has used this rapid
response authority throughout New
England to provide emergency drinking
water, fencing of hazardous areas and
isolation of asbestos wastes improperly
disposed of in residential areas.
In Region 1,1,236 potential hazardous
waste sites have been identified and
preliminary assessments were completed
at 906 sites. The region conducted
McKIN SITE
GRAY, MAINE
Recent remedial measures undertaken
at the McKin Superfund site in Gray, ME
are good examples of how the joint efforts
of EPA and private parties can result in
private participation in the cleanup of an
abandoned hazardous waste disposal site.
The seven-acre McKin site, located ap-
proximately 15 miles north of Portland,
is an abandoned waste collection, transfer
and disposal facility which operated be-
tween 1965 and 1978. When organic
chemical contamination was detected in
nearby residential wells in 1979, an alter-
nate water supply was built. Between
1979 and 1983, EPA removed all surface
drums and tanks from the site
In 1985, the Maine Department of En-
vironmental Protection, funded through
a cooperative agreement with EPA, com-
pleted studies which determined the
nature and extent of contamination re-
maining at the site and evaluated poten-
tial technologies to reduce any en-
vironmental or public health hazards. The
studies identified volatile organic
chemical soil contamination in specific
areas on the site and contamination of the
nearby aquifer.
On July 22, EPA announced its decision
to attack both problems. For the onsite soil
contamination, EPA chose to aerate the
affected soils under controlled conditions.
For onsite groundwater contamination,
EPA decided to pump contaminated
groundwater and treat it in a new treat-
ment plant to be built at the site
EPA's decision did not specify whether
this work would be done by the govern-
ment or by private parties with liabilities
associated with the site. However, short-
ly after EPA made its cleanup decision,
two companies previously identified by
EPA as potentially responsible parties
offered to carry out the approved remedy.
On August 23, 1985, EPA formally
ordered these companies, Fairchild
Camera and Instrument Corporation and
Sanders Associates, to begin cleanup ac-
tivities including a pilot study for soil
aeration.
The purpose of the pilot study, to be con-
ducted in the winter and spring of 1986,
was to investigate the effectiveness of one
or more methods of aerating soil to allow
volatile contaminants to evaporate The
aeration must take place in an enclosed
environment with continuous air
monitoring.
This method of enclosing the soil aera-
tion process and treating air emissions is
the first of its kind at a Superfund site.
The system is designed to treat soil in an
enclosed mixing plant while controlling
the levels of air pollutants in the air
around the site. To ensure that this hap-
pens, an elaborate air monitoring system
has been designed for the site and near-
by residential areas.
Five permanent air monitoring stations
encircle the site and a sixth monitor emits
treated air from the soil aeration process.
Data from these stations and from a
weather tower onsite are continuously fed
to a computer in a trailer at the site. The
computer records and stores the data and
will produce visual and audible signals if
activities need to be modified to reduce air
emissions. This continuous computerized
monitoring network designed for the
McKin site is the most comprehensive to
have been used this way in New England.
To keep residents informed of the site
status and construction schedules, EPA
has established a local telephone hot-line
in Gray. The hot-line gives periodically up-
dated recorded messages regarding the
site status and air quality monitoring, and
records the caller's questions. In addition,
the EPA project officer meets with local
officials and leaders of a citizens group to
share information and help EPA in its
oversight of this important project.
thorough onsite investigations at 201 sites
where further study was warranted. Data
from site investigations are used by the
Agency to determine which sites pose
enough risk to be added to the National
Priorities List (NPL). Region I awarded
over $1.5 million in grants to the New
England states, much of which was used
to help them conduct preliminary
assessments and site inspections.
At each site on the national priorities
list, EPA seeks to identify parties whose
past practices may have been at least part-
ly responsible for conditions at that site
We have the authority to enter into nego-
tiations with these "potentially responsi-
ble parties" to arrange for the site cleanup
or for reimbursement of the trust fund for
government expenses on site related work.
If these negotiations fail, EPA can refer
cases to the U.S. Department of Justice for
court actions to recover costs incurred by
government in cleaning up sites. To date,
more than $20 million in private funds
have been committed at 18 sites in New
England.
A unique feature of many of the Super-
fund sites in New England is the large
number of potentially responsible parties
linked to a particular site. At the Keefe
Environmental Services site in Epping,
NH EPA successfully negotiated with
more than 100 potentially responsible
parties. This settlement is also notable for
a mechanism that protects the govern-
ment from the risks of settling before all
-------
response costs are known. At the Silresim
Site in Lowell, MA over 200 potentially
responsible parties formed the nation's
first-of-its-kind trust to conduct a site
study. Through an administrative order
issued to the trust, EPA oversees and en-
forces the proper performance of the study.
The Superfund law of 1980 established
a $1.6 billion trust fund with taxing
authority that expired on September 30,
1985. As this was written, legislation was
under consideration by Congress to renew
the Superfund law. Although substantial
progress has been made in Region I and
throughout the country to address the pro-
blem of abandoned and uncontrolled sites,
it is evident that much work remains to
be done.
Since August 1985, EPA has been forced
to operate the Superfund program on very
limited funds. The impact of this slow-
down of the Superfund cleanup program
was the delay in new design and construc-
tion projects. Remaining trust funds were
earmarked to continue essential Super-
fund response actions and the continua-
tion of studies. In Region I, this meant
that we were unable to provide approx-
imately $30 million required for
construction-related activities at the
Nyanza site in Ashland, MA and the
Charles George landfill in Tyngsborough,
MA.
Despite the Superfund slowdown, we
continued to pursue an aggressive enforce-
ment program to require private parties
to pay for studies and cleanup. At the
McKin site in Gray, ME, which is dis-
cussed below, a settlement with responsi-
ble parties allowed a cleanup using in-
novative technology to proceed during the
slowdown.
HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT - THE
RCRA PROGRAM
Region I provided state hazardous waste
programs with $3,775,956 of federal grant
assistance in FY 85 and worked closely
with state personnel in the following
areas:
providing technical engineering,
hydrological and laboratory assistance;
conducting facility permit application
reviews;
inspecting waste facilities to determine
compliance with waste management
requirements;
developing special expertise in the area
of storage and treatment of hazardous
waste in tanks;
taking enforcement actions when
necessary; and
assessing the continuing readiness of
state agencies to administer com-
ponents of the federal hazardous waste
program.
In addition, Congress appropriated
grant funds for FY 85 which were used for
activities not traditionally funded by the
state program grants. These funds were
awarded under §8001 of RCRA and were
used in Region I on four projects to inform
small quantity generators of their respon-
sibility under revised regulations, and on
a facility siting study.
The RCRA program is designed to pre-
vent future Superfund sites from develop-
ing. Through a comprehensive "cradle-to-
grave" management process, EPA and the
states track hazardous wastes from
original generation through transporta-
tion, treatment and storage to final
disposal. All waste treatment, storage and
disposal facilities must have an RCRA
permit detailing how they will meet EPA
standards for safe operation and
maintenanca There are 374 of these
facilities in New England. The pie chart
shows their distribution.
Because RCRA, like most environmen-
tal laws, encourages states to take over the
responsibility for program implementa-
tion from the federal government, Region
I has continued to maintain a strong com-
mitment to the state authorization pro-
cess. Three New England states have
received final authorization to run their
own hazardous waste programs.
Authorization decisions for other states
are pending at this time. Under the
statute interim authorization expired on
January 31, 1986, at which time those
states which had not received final
authorization entered into an agreement
with EPA to assist in administering the
federal RCRA program until final
authorization is granted.
RCRA, enacted in 1976, was amended
in 1980 and again on November 8, 1984,
to reflect changing needs. The 1984
amendments, called the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA),
significantly expanded both the scope and
the detailed requirements of RCRA.
One of the most significant changes in
the RCRA program is the phasing out of
land disposal of hazardous waste. In the
future, waste generators will have to
reduce the amounts of hazardous waste
generated, recycle their waste and use
other technologies to the maximum extent
possible Anyone who wants to operate a
land disposal facility must meet minimum
technological requirements, including
double liners, leachate collection and ade-
quate groundwater monitoring. Facility
owners and operators are required by the
new law to clean up any contamination
Charts
Region I CERCLA Expenditures to September 30, 1985
Total: $73.2 million
Connecticut
3.6
4.9X
Rhod* bland
8.0
10.9X
*Does not include regional sunnorc activities
8
-------
Chart?
REGION I'S NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST FILE
COHHECTJCITT
Laurel Park. Inc.
Saugatuck Borough
Southingtcn
YAworalci Ma*te Lagoon
Canterbury
Kcll 0-39-Dee ring Moll Field
Old Southington Landfill
Southington
MAIXC
F. O'Connor Site
KcKin Co.
Gray
Pinattc'a Salvage Yard
Hinthrop Landfill
Winthrop
Union Charcoal Co., Inc.
So. Hop*
Brunivick HAS
Bfunawlck
MASSACHUSETTS
HEW HAKPSHIRE
RHODE 1SLASD
Charloi Ccor«
Landfill
Tynsborough
Plymouth Harbor/Canr.o;
Londondcr;
> Kear»agc !
Ro»c Dlipo>al
> Coakloy Landfill
Northampton
» Hottolo Pig Fare
Raymond
Kavorhill
s«l«e Acrei
Sales
» Shpjclc Landfill
Nortan/Attleboro
We*toorough
Irxdustrl-Plex 128
Woburn
New Bedford
New Bedford
Nyanxa Chceical Mai
Aahland
PSC Reiourco*
Falser
which escapes from RCRA facility. This is
accomplished through new permit re-
quirements or enforcement remedies. Con-
gress intended to discourage land disposal
of hazardous waste because of long-term
uncertainties about its persistence, toxici-
ty, mobility and accumulation in plant,
animal and human tissue Certain mate-
rials will be excluded unless they receive
specific EPA approval. Land disposal can
be permitted only if the waste meets
pretreatment levels or standards.
The region sent out 183 advisory letters
under RCRA §3007 to owners and
operators in order to implement the
HSWA provision for final permit deter-
minations and certification of compliance
with groundwater monitoring and
financial responsibility requirements for
land disposal facilities. 53 enforcement ac-
tions were necessary to enforce the infor-
mation request.
Environmental cleanup through correc-
tive action orders or permits is a priority
UNDERGROUND
STORAGE TANKS
One of the most far-reaching of the new
RCRA provisions deals with an estimated
one million underground storage tanks in
the United States containing hazardous
substances or petroleum products. The
underground storage tank (USD program
breaks new ground in that, for the first
time, RCRA applies to storage of useful
materials as well as wastes. Under a new
subtitle I, RCRA now regulates under-
ground tank storage of all petroleum prod-
ucts (including gasoline and crude oil) and
any substance defined as hazardous under
the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation and Liability Act
of 1980 (Superfund).
"Underground storage tank" is defined
as any tank with at least 10% of its
volume below ground, including any pipes
attached. Thus, above ground tanks with
extensive underground piping may now be
regulated. The UST program bans the in-
stallation of unprotected steel tanks,
initiates tank registration, coordinates
federal and state program development
and provides federal inspection and en-
forcement, and will set technical stan-
dards for all new and existing tanks.
The New England states are national
leaders in developing regulatory programs
for underground storage tanks. Most
states in Region I will be regulating tanks
well over a year before the eventual
federal program. EPA Region I has
negotiated state UST grants for FY 86 to
assist the states in managing the required
registration process, and begin to enforce
the federal interim prohibition. The
grants will also support certain innovative
ideas including a tank installer certifica-
tion program in Maine, a low-interest loan
program for tank replacement in Rhode
Island and a videotaped message for tank
owners with the University of Connecticut
and the Connecticut Department of En-
vironmental Protection.
for the agency, and is extremely signifi-
cant in Region I because of the number of
facilities lost their interim status on
November 8, 1985 and must close their
land disposal units. The agency will be
closely overseeing closures throughout the
region and believes that necessary correc-
tive action can most appropriately be im-
plemented during the closure process.
As a result of the loss of interim status
provision of HSWA, 119 of the region's 141
land disposal facilities must close. Each
of these will be inspected by EPA to en-
sure that they are no longer using then-
land disposal units. If they are operating,
EPA will take administrative civil or
criminal action. The 22 companies retain-
ing interim status will also be in-
vestigated to assess the legitimacy of their
compliance certifications and permit ap-
plications. If they are deficient, action will
be taken requiring that they cease using
the units and penalties will be assessed.
Possible criminal action will also be con-
sidered for filing a false certification with
the agency. (Federal enforcement has been
strengthened by Congress through the ad-
dition of offenses treated as criminal and
by increasing maximum penalties.)
Enforcement of applicable standards for
waste handlers is a key component of the
RCRA program. Tb identify any deficien-
cies or violations, 220 EPA inspections
were conducted in FY 85 by Region I,
resulting in 105 enforcement referrals to
the authorized states. From January 1,
1985 to November 8,1985, Region I issued
14 complaints and assessed $317,000 in
penalties.
9
-------
WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION
DAVID A. FIERRA, DIRECTOR
The Water Management Division ad-
ministers the federal Clean Water Act
ICWA) for water pollution control, the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) for drinking
water protection, provisions of the Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act
(MPRSA) pertaining to the permitting of
ocean dump sites, and evaluates en-
vironmental impacts of EPA's own and
other federal actions covered by the Na-
tional Environmental Policy Act. This
report highlights progress during the past
year in restoring and protecting the
valuable water resources of New England,
including accomplishments in the follow-
ing priority areas:
cleanup in Boston Harbor,
protection of marine and coastal
environments,
protection of wetlands,
restoration of water quality in lakes
and streams,
development and implementation of
strong groundwater protection, and
state-EPA cooperation.
Approximately 65% of New England's
major stream segments meet the CWA
standards for fishing and swimming, and
approximately 90% of all streams in-
cluding smaller upland waters meet
fishable/swimmable standards. Drinking
water is generally of high quality.
THE CLEAN WATER ACT
To restore water quality which protects
aquatic life and permits swimming and
boating, EPA provides technical and
financial assistance to state and local
governments for water quality planning,
monitoring, permit development and en-
forcement, construction grant manage-
ment and groundwater protection. This
year Region I provided more than $14.4
million to state governments for water
pollution control, water quality manage-
ment planning and management of the
municipal construction grants program.
WATER QUALITY PLAN-
NING AND STANDARDS
The New England states began develop-
ing control strategies for toxic pollutants
and solutions to problems in priority
waterbodies.
Assisted by EPA, the states completed
field studies and set permit limits on the
Naugatuck River in CT, the Pawtucket
River in RI and the Ten Mile River in MA.
(See Ten Mile River case study.)
EPA awarded clean lakes grants for
pollution abatement designed to improve
the quality of Lake Waramaug, and
Candlewood Lake, CT, Cochnewagon Lake,
ME; and Lake Moray, VT.
The New England states will enforce
standards for the control of toxic
discharges and developing antidegrada-
tion policies to bring continued improve-
ment of water quality.
NONPOINT SOURCE
PROGRAM (NFS)
The national nonpoint source policy and
strategy to be applied by federal, state and
local governments and the private sector,
aims to restore and maintain water quali-
ty in critical estuaries, lakes, headwater
streams, wetlands and the Cape Cod, MA
aquifer. Best management practices
(BMPs) are to be adopted by public agen-
cies, farmers, loggers, construction com-
panies and individual citizens.
A series of state-by-state coordination
meetings strengthened cooperation
among U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA), state agricultural/water quality
agencies and EPA. Now in its third year,
the rural clean water project for St.
Albany Bay, VT, with USDA cost sharing,
has seen 90% of the problem farms adopt
BMPs for animal waste management and
conservation tillage to reduce erosion and
sedimentation.
The 1986 NPS strategy will target NPS
problems discovered in the Naragansett
and Buzzards Bay studies, Cape Cod
aquifer management program, and criti-
cal wetlands, assistance to the states on
better control of erosion, sedimentation,
and toxics runoff from highway construc-
tion and large-scale shopping mall and
resort development.
PROTECTION OF
COASTAL AND MARINE
ENVIRONMENTS
For centuries the estuaries and coastal
waters of New England have been receiv-
ing industrial and domestic waste
effluents, combined sewer and nonpoint
source runoff. The resulting degradation
in water quality from excess bacteria,
heavy metals, nutrients and organic
chemicals that have seriously impaired
both the recreational and commercial use
of the water.
Where wastewater treatment plants
were constructed or combined sewer
overflows corrected, noticeable improve-
ment in water quality and water use has
occurred, resulting in lower human health
risks, reduced toxicity and decreased
potential for eutrophication ("choking" by
aquatic weeds).
10
-------
301(h) WAIVER FROM
SECONDARY TREAT-
MENT PROGRAM
Under Section 301(h) of the Clean Water
Act coastal communities may use primary
wastewater treatment if EPA agrees to
waive the general requirement for secon-
dary treatment where it can be demon-
strated that no major adverse environ-
mental impacts will occur. EPA Region I
has reviewed 39 applications with respect
to the physical, chemical, biological,
recreational, aesthetic and water quality
impacts that the primary effluent could
have on the marine environment. All but
12 applications were formally acted upon
by the end of FY 85, including denial of
the waiver application of the Massachu-
setts Water Resources Authority (MWRA)
for ocean disposal of metropolitan Boston's
sewage after primary treatment.
OCEAN DISPOSAL
PROGRAM
The Marine Protection, Research and
Sanctuary Act allows EPA, in conjunction
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
to designate dredge spoil, industrial waste
and sludge disposal sites in the ocean. Due
to the natural siltation of harbors and
rivers, periodic dredging is necessary to
maintain navigational channels. To meet
these needs, EPA and the Corps are in the
process of formal designation of interim
dredge disposal sites off Maine and Mas-
sachusetts (north of Cape Cod), and
through the development of an environ-
mental impact statement (EIS), EPA and
the Corps are also investigating a south-
eastern MA/RI dredge spoil disposal site.
NATIONAL ESTUARINE
PROGRAM
In 1985, $4 million of special appropria-
tions supported by Senators Chafee (RI)
and Weicker (CD were earmarked for com-
prehensive water quality management of
Long Island Sound, Narragansett Bay,
Buzzards Bay and Puget Sound in the
state of Washington. The goal of the pro-
gram is to improve and protect the bays'
resources through coordinated research
and management programs. Region I is
responsible for the Narragensett Bay,
Long Island Sound and Buzzards Bay
studies. Due to interest on both a state
and federal level, an estuarine program
for Massachusetts Bay may be forthcom-
ing with the continued funding of the na-
tional program.
The following case study of Nar-
ragansett Bay gives more specifics on the
formulation of a study.
NARRAGANSETT BAY
STUDY
Approximately $1 million has been
directed towards funding for Narragansett
Bay to be jointly administered by EPA and
the Rhode Island Department of En-
vironmental Management (DEM).
Narragensett Bay serves a variety of
commercial and recreational uses such as
shellfishing, finfishing, lobstering,
aquaculture, boating and water contact
sports. It is also the host for numerous
wading bird rookeries and a winter home
for a family of harbor seals. It receives
domestic and industrial wastes from Prov-
idence, Cranston and Warwick in the up-
per portion of the estuary. The Narragan-
sett Bay workplan serves as a prototype
for federal, state, local and private efforts
toward comprehensive estuarine manage-
ment and protection. The workplan
outline is as follows:
identify management issues and goals
for Narragansett Bay,
identify past, continuing and potential
problems associated with water quali-
ty and other reasons why Bay uses are
impaired,
identify critical resources in need of
protection,
identify relevant, ongoing programs of
federal, state, local and private
organizations,
determine what additional projects and
studies are needed to resolve Bay-
related management issues, and
determine what public education and
participation would be appropriate for
the project.
Major goals in 1986 will be development
of an environmental master plan, in-
creased NPDES permit compliance
monitoring for discharges to the Bay and
the establishment of maximum discharge
limits for toxic and nutrient discharges to
the Bay.
WETLANDS
PROTECTION
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
regulates the discharge of dredged or fill
material into the nation's waters through
a permit program administered by EPA
and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Its
purpose is to protect wetlands and water
quality. When adverse impacts cannot be
avoided, we seek full mitigation or offset-
ting of wetland losses.
Increased staff and funding improved
EPA's wetland protection program in 1985
and allowed the region to pursue several
initiatives. We reviewed over 500 proposed
projects in 1985 ranging from small boat
docks to major wetland fills for highways
and commercial development. EPA recom-
mended modification of permits in near-
ly half the cases to reduce environmental
impacts and occasionally permits were
denied. Permit conditions typically in-
clude reducing the amount of wetland
filled or compensating for lost habitat
through creation of new wetlands.
During the latter half of 1985, the
region devised a comprehensive strategy
to improve coordination among state and
federal agencies involved in wetlands pro-
tection and increase the use of EPA's own
authority in the 404 program. Under our
404(c) "veto" authority we intervened in
the controversial Attleboro (MA) Mall
case. We also participated in a joint pro-
gram with Corps, the U.S. Fish and Wild-
life Service and the National Marine
Fisheries Service to evaluate compliance
with permit conditions. In 1986 we plan
to initiate a program to identify important
wetland areas throughout New England
in need of advanced designation and pro-
tection by EPA.
NATIONAL ENVIRON-
MENTAL POLICY ACT
COMPLIANCE
The National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) requires that any major actions
taken by federal agencies which signifi-
cantly affect the environment be accom-
panied by an environmental impact state-
ment (EIS). Less significant actions re-
quire preparation of an environmental
assessment.
Major EISs worked on in the past year
include: 1) The French River EIS (MA) -
The issuance of the draft EIS in October
1985 recommended three actions to im-
prove water quality, (a) advanced
wastewater treatment for the towns of
Webster and Dudley; (b) sediment control;
and (c) low flow augmentation for Buffum-
vill Lake. 2) Boston Harbor EIS - In
December 1985 EPA issued the final EIS
for the siting of wastewater facilities in
the harbor. The EIS recommended Deer
Island. As a final step in the process the
region will develop an EIS on sludge
disposal options for the MWRA.
PERMITTING AND
COMPLIANCE
The Clean Water Act permit program
limits the amounts and kinds of pollu-
tants that can be discharged into naviga-
ble waters. In Region I, there are 2,650
such permits issued to both municipal and
industrial sources, most of which were
issued in the early and mid '70s for five
year terms. In the states where EPA has
primary permit issuance authority
(Maine, Massachusetts and New Hamp-
shire), the backlog of expired major per-
mits was all but eliminated in October
1985. We are now working with the states
having delegated National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permitting authority (Connecticut, Rhode
Island and Vermont) to complete reis-
suance of their major permits that have
expired. It is anticipated that the states
will substantially complete that effort in
FY86.
11
-------
The new permits require reductions in
toxic pollutant levels to assure protection
of the receiving water. The region is us-
ing two powerful tools which more ac-
curately assess the water quality impact
of toxic discharges: (1) EPA's new criteria
for toxic pollutants and (2) new toxicity
testing (bioassay) procedures. The Ten
Mile River case study is an illustration of
the effective use of these tools in establish-
ing permit limits. In addition, many of the
municipal permits incorporate pretreat-
ment requirements which will begin to
regulate toxic discharges to municipal
sewer systems.
TEN MILE RIVER
The Ten Mile River flows for 20 miles
through industrialized areas of Massachu-
setts and eastern Rhode Island. Almost
half of the river is impounded by dams,
and a good portion of the remaining
length is encased in man-made walls. The
Massachusetts section of the Ten Mile
River receives waste from 15 major in-
dustrial and two major municipal dis-
chargers, many of which are associated
with the jewelry and metal finishing
industry.
Intensive surveys conducted in 1984
found high concentrations of metals in the
water column and in the sediment in-
cluding cadmium, lead, copper and silver.
Copper has been found at levels far ex-
ceeding EPA's water quality criteria along
much of the river's length. It is estimated
that during low flow conditions about 90%
of the entire stream consists of wastewater
effluent.
The region is working with the Massa-
chusetts Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering (DEQE) to cleanup
the Ten Mile River. The results of the in-
tensive study and sampling program done
during the summer of 1984 were reviewed
and modeling resulted in effluent limita-
tions for draft permits becoming available
in June, 1985.
The Ten Mile River survey and analysis
is the first in the region that combined
traditional chemical monitoring with
biomonitoring and effluent toxicity test-
ing. Permit limits and enforcement strat-
egies have been developed that are tied
directly to the site-specific uses of the Ten
Mile River. In a continuance of this com-
bined biological and chemical data gather-
ing and analysis, the NPDES permits will
contain biological limits along with con-
ventional chemical limits.
EPA sent draft permits to the discharg-
ers in July, 1985 and held a meeting with
them in early August. This was followed
by a 30-day public comment period and
public hearing. During the comment peri-
od, several people requested a summary
report on the survey results and limita-
tion basis along with additional time to
comment. EPA and DEQE granted these
requests and planned to distribute a
report in February, 1986. That report
would be followed by a 60-day reopening
of the public comment period.
After issuance of the permits with a
stringent water quality-based limitation
in 1986, EPA plans to develop administra-
tive orders with compliance schedules and
interim limitations for each discharger.
CLEAN WATER ACT
PERMIT COMPLIANCE
Ninety percent of all major municipal
facilities and industrial dischargers re-
mained in compliance with permit limita-
tions during the past year. The region
completed 242 inspections of permitted
facilities, issued 43 administrative orders
and referred seven cases for judicial ac-
tion. Inspections completed during FY 85
are as follows:
PRETREATMENT
Of the 81 New England communities re-
quired to limit industrial discharges of
specific chemicals into municipal sewer
systems, 67 have pretreatment programs
which EPA has approved, and approval
of the remaining 14 communities'
pretreatment programs will remain a
high priority.
In a new audit program to determine if
communities are complying with approv-
ed pretreatment requirement, nine audits
wer performed by regional staff in FY 85.
Federal enforcement actions were
initiated against three industrial
dischargers who did not comply with
federal standards. The region will also
review state and locally developed pro-
grams to ensure they are strictly enforced.
One community has already been referred
to the Department of Justice for neglect-
ing to comply with pretreatment re-
quirements.
Charts
compliance sampling .
compliance evaluation
performance audit ...
pretreatment audit. ..
Municipals Industrials
21 5
129 25
36 17
9 _0
195 47
NATIONAL MUNICIPAL
POLICY
The national municipal policy requires
all municipalities to construct wastewater
treatment plants by July 1,1988 with or
without the assistance of federal funds. In
New England this policy affects 96 com-
munities. All the New England states
submitted municipal policies consistent
with national policy.
The region and the New England states
are working closely to ensure that all
operating facilities are in compliance, all
fundable facilities are on a schedule and
all communities which need treatment
facilities but will not be eligible for federal
funding prepare the required compliance
plans. At the end of 1985 77% of the com-
munities were on enforceable schedules,
and 8% were awaiting 301(h) waivers or
waste load allocation decisions. The re-
maining 15% will be placed on judicial
schedules during the next two years.
The region has issued 13 administrative
orders to enforce community compliance.
The states and the region are establishing
a priority order for all communities not
scheduled to receive federal funds. We
will initiate enforcement actions where
appropriate to require these communities
to construct needed wastewater treat-
ment facilities.
CONSTRUCTION OF
MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATER TREAT-
MENT PLANTS
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS
Between October 1,1984 and September
30, 1985 the region processed approx-
imately 380 construction grants totaling
$212.8 million to help local governments
build wastewater treatment plants and
other facilities designed to improve water
quality.
COMBINED SEWER
OVERFLOWS (CSOs)
Congress appropriated $60 million for
the elimination of combined sewer over-
flows (CSO) to marine waters. In FY 84,
$12.3 million was obligated for projects in
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts and
New Hampshire. In FY 85 four projects
totaling $4.7 million were funded in
Maine and Massachusetts. Tbgether these
projects will help eliminate marine CSOs
in the Housatonic River estuary (CT),
Boston Harbor, Great Bay/Piscataqua
River estuary (ME and NH), St. George
River estuary (ME) and the Maine coastal
area near Old Orchard Beach.
The region and bur states are also com-
mitted to initiatives which bring to
minority and women owned business
12
-------
enterprises a fair share of the EPA con-
struction grant dollars. Minority and
women business enterprise participation
was 8.7%, up from the 7.8% level in FY 84.
OPERATION AND
MANAGEMENT
Regional staff performed 107 com-
pliance inspections of municipal
wastewater treatment plants during FY
85. Operations management evaluations
brought significant improvement in plant
management and performance. The
states, with EPA support, also provided ex-
tensive technical and management
assistance to 57 smaller communities in
the region to improve their operation and
maintenance of sewage treatment plants.
The region presented awards to six plant
managers, one from each state, for con-
sistently outstanding plant management.
This is the start of a new incentive plan.
The quantity of sludge produced has in-
creased dramatically with expansion of
older treatment plants and construction
of new ones. During the past year, we met
with each of the New England states to
review their existing sludge programs,
make recommendations for im-
provements, and participate in the
development of the state sludge manage-
ment and technical sludge regulations.
Charts
Construction Grants Obligations
October 1, 1984 to September 30, 1985
Region I Total: 212.8 Million
Millions of Dollars
Chart 10
Percentage of Water Systems in Compliance
With The Maximum Contaminant Level for
Coliform Bacteria
FY84
Connecticut 95
Massachusetts 88
Maine 94
FY85
....97
..92
New Hampshire 85
Rhode Island 96
Vermont 78
National Goal , 93
.86
.97
.79
.93
Percentage of Water Systems in Compliance
With The Maximum Contaminant Level for Turbidity
FY84
Connecticut 94
Massachusetts 97
Maine.............. , ........................97
New Hampshire 96
Rhode Island 100
Vermont 96
National Goal ................ ............. ..97
FY85
....93
....94
....98
....97
...100
....90
. .97
DRINKING WATER
QUALITY
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY
SUPERVISION
PROGRAM (PWSS)
The Safe Drinking Water Act was
enacted in 1974 to protect public health
by requiring public water supply systems
to meet minimum national standards set
by EPA. During the past year, Region I
provided approximately $1.8 million to
the New England states to regulate public
water supply systems.
An increase in compliance with max-
imum contaminant levels (MCL) for coli-
form bacteria is noted in the table below
for five of the six states. The other state
maintained identical compliance rates
during the last two years.
In monitoring and reporting, New
Hampshire stands out as having the
greatest percentage improvement, going
from only 41% coliform compliance in
1984 to 77% in 1985. Excepting Vermont,
with a compliance rate of 69%, and New
Hampshire all other states have greater
than 90% compliance for monitoring and
reporting of coliform.
Turbidity compliance levels continue to
remain high, all states reporting well over
90% of their systems in compliance The
remaining systems will now have to begin
planning whether to provide filtration of
their source of supply or switch to other
sources.
13
-------
UNDERGROUND WATER
SOURCE PROTECTION
PROGRAM
During the past year, Region I provided
a total of $308,400 in grants to support
state programs to regulate underground
injection and promote groundwater protec-
tion activities. All New England states
have assumed primary enforcement re-
sponsibility for the underground injection
control (UIC) program.
In addition to the PWSS and UIC pro-
grams, Region I continued efforts to iden-
tify and protect critical groundwater
aquifers under the sole source aquifer pro-
gram. A sole source aquifer is the sole or
principal drinking water source for an
area which, if contaminated, would create
a significant hazard to public health. Dur-
ing the past year, EPA continued to review
proposed federally funded projects over the
three sole source aquifers in Region I,
Cape Cod and Nantucket Island, MA, and
Block Island, RI. The region is also cur-
rently evaluating a petition to designate
a fourth area in central Massachusetts as
a sole source aquifer.
TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
Some 170 people attended a two-day
EPA-sponsored seminar on giardiasis, its
occurrence, treatment and laboratory
methods. The Water Supply Branch and
the Air Management Division prepared a
three-day seminar on radon in January,
1986.
Each year more than 100 requests for
assistance are received from the general
public, the most common regarding home
treatment devices to remove contami-
nants such as arsenic, iron manganese,
nitrates, organic solvents and radon.
Water has been analyzed for antimony,
lithium and tungsten in the course of
special studies. We continually review
health effects data and render opinions to
the Superfund office, the states and the
general public.
Reports on hazardous waste sites are
reviewed from a water supply perspective.
We review EISs for major federal projects
and provide technical comments on their
possible impacts on water supplies.
Several highway projects under review
may have significant impacts on sources
of drinking water.
GROUNDWATER
PROTECTION
Eighty percent of New England public
water supplies and over 95% of our rural
population rely upon groundwater, which
is vulnerable to man-made natural
sources of contamination. Sources of con-
tamination include: underground storage
tanks and piping systems, surface waste
impoundments, pesticides and herbicide
applications, and road salt storage and ap-
plication. Long before groundwater receiv-
ed national attention, the region en-
couraged the New England states to use
portions of state grants for groundwater
planning and management foundations.
These early "seed" efforts have made
Region I a leader in the national ground-
water protection effort. EPA maintains a
groundwater steering committee com-
posed of senior managers from all pro-
grams which relate to groundwater.
Regional Administrator Michael Deland
is one of seven members on the national
groundwater task force Paul Keough is
the lead Deputy Regional Administrator
in the country for groundwater program
issues, including the budget. The Cape
Cod aquifer management project will
serve as prototype of a comprehensive ap-
proach to groundwater management. (See
Case Study.)
14
-------
THE CAPE COD
AQUIFER MANAGEMENT
PROJECT
Most Cape Cod residents rely solely on
groundwater for domestic use Long con-
sidered a pristine source in abundant
supply, both public and private wells
recently reflected the need for increased
commitment to protect this precious
resource - the wells were found to be con-
taminated. Thus, EPA's New England
office and the Massachusetts Department
of Environmental Quality Engineering
(DEQE), together with the Cape Cod Plan-
ning and Economic Development Commis-
sion and the U.S. Geologic Survey, in-
itiated a two-year study to examine the
adequacy of existing groundwater protec-
tion programs and recommend improve-
ments. Current groundwater protection
programs at all levels of government are
focused narrowly and administered sepa-
rately. This study will be comprehensive,
focusing on the resource itself, and exam-
ining threats to groundwater from a varie-
ty of activities.
Barnstable and Eastham have been
chosen as the focus of this effort. Barn-
stable is a large town which has devoted
much attention to groundwater protection
and has developed expertise at the local
level. Eastham is a small, rural town,
totally dependent on private drinking
water supplies. It relies on septic systems
and has limited resources available for
groundwater management.
The final project recommendations will
be transferable to the rest of the Cape
and to the entire state EPA and DEQE
hope that this project will also serve as a
national prototype for groundwater
management.
This is a cooperative effort aimed at im-
proving coordination in groundwater
management between and among federal,
state and local levels of government. A
data management group will identify ex-
isting groundwater data bases, integrate
them and make them more accessible In
addition, these data bases will provide
background information for the other
working groups. The group will also ex-
plore geographic information systems and
computer graphics as a long-term
management tool.
An aquifer assessment group will
review the methods of determining the
zone of contribution (ZOC) for ground-
water supply wells and surface water
resources. It will recommend appropriate
methods for use in the study area. They
will also assess the threat of contamina-
tion from various sources within these
ZOCs and suggest acceptable land uses
within these zones.
Finally, an institutions group will
review existing programs, comparative
costs and current bureaucratic structure,
looking for gaps, inconsistencies and
duplications to streamline program coor-
dination and groundwater management.
OFFICE OF GROUND-
WATER PROTECTION
The region's Office of Groundwater Pro-
tection disbursed more than $650,000 in
groundwater grants to the New England
states in 1985. The financial assistance
has catalyzed the development of com-
prehensive statewide groundwater ac-
tivities or strengthened existing state per-
mit programs and classification systems.
The region also funded several ground-
water protection initiatives of the New
England Interstate Water Pollution Con-
trol Commission (NEIWPCC):
A standing committee on leaking
underground storage tanks. Several
meetings have been held with the
states to exchange information, success
stories, and problems encountered in
developing and implementing under-
ground storage tank regulations.
An educational brochure and slide tape
presentation on leaking underground
storage tanks.
The EPA headquarters office has award-
ed NEIWPCC an additional grant of
$75,000 to provide all 50 states a channel
for regional input into national standard
setting and regulation development and
for information dissemination to the
states and the public.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
During 1985, the region has accom-
plished or made significant progress in
many of the highest priority water issues
in New England. In FY 86, the Water
Management Division will focus attention
and resources on:
continuing emphasis on marine pro-
grams (eg., Boston Harbor, estuaries,
301(h) waivers and ocean dumping of
dredged material);
implementing our new wetlands protec-
tion strategy;
strengthening the Clean Water Act per-
mit program and assuring that all point
source discharges have appropriate en-
forceable permits;
implementing the overall compliance
strategy for the permit program (in-
cluding the national municipal policy,
pretreatment compliance, and com-
pliance inspection policy);
managing the federal funds available
to maximize the benefits of the
municipal construction grants
program;
developing and implementing a strong
groundwater protection program;
increasing compliance with the na-
tional drinking water standards;
implementing a program of field
sanitary surveys of public water supply
systems to detect deficiencies in the
system's facilities and/or operation that
compromise its ability to continually
produce safe drinking water, and
continuing coordination with Super-
fund and other regional environmental
programs.
15
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES DIVISION
EDWARD J. CONLEY DIRECTOR
The Environmental Services Division
(ESD) in Lexington, MA, provides
laboratory and field support services to
the air, water and waste program offices
in Region I. These services include collec-
tion and analysis of samples and en-
vironmental data, oil spill response, and
emergency cleanup of hazardous waste.
The chemical and biological laboratory is
one of the best equipped of its kind in the
northeast, fitting legacy to former Divi-
sion Director Edward V. Fitzpatrick. Fitz
retired in May 1985, having served as lab
director in Region I since EPA's inception.
He chose the site for the lab, supervised
its design and construction and guided it
through the crucial early years with
characteristic wisdom and foresight.
ESD personnel work with state en-
vironmental agencies on the coordination
of environmental monitoring networks
which provide a continuous measurement
of air and water quality. The lab's quality
assurance services are available to the
state laboratories to help them maintain
accuracy and adequacy of sample analyses
and to keep pace with changing
technology and regulatory requirements.
SOIL GAS ANALYSIS - A
NEW TOOL FOR
GROUNDWATER
PROTECTION
Growing concern over groundwater con-
tamination with volatile organic
chemicals presented the need for new
technology to detect leaks in underground
storage tanks and to track plumes of con-
tamination from waste piles and spills.
This contamination is principally caused
by volatile organic chemicals. Measure-
ment of organic vapor in holes augured in
soil near the surface give useful informa-
tion in organic contamination in the
aquifer below. Soil gas is analyzed in the
field by means of a state-of-the-art por-
table gas chromatograph capable of de-
tecting 10-20 parts per billion of gasoline
or organic solvent in an aquifer 10-30 feet
below. This is done by testing at various
depths and recording the readings at each
level. The field chemist can identify gas-
oline, diesel fuel, fuel oil, or specific
solvents or mixtures present in the aqui-
fer. A plume can be delineated by auger-
ing holes to show the direction of the
plume's movement and the lateral concen-
tration gradient. In several field studies,
it has been possible to learn which of 3
buried tanks at a service station is leak-
ing and the type of gasoline. This tech-
nique has been described at 7 technical
meetings during the past year and more
than 200 requests for information on field
chromatography have been answered. We
have conducted 6 training courses on the
use of field chromatography for ground-
water and hazardous waste site investiga-
tion, one for each New England state. Per-
sonnel from other EPA regions have at-
tended several sessions. Widespread ap-
plication of this technique, and its contin-
uing refinement, are a high priority of the
regional laboratory.
The lab has served the Superfund teams
in the Waste Management Division in two
ways: with sampling and analysis of water
and soils at Superfund sites, and with
management of emergency cleanups
where hazardous waste has presented an
immediate threat to public health or the
environment. Our emergency response
team handled 18 cleanups at Superfund
and other hazardous waste sites and
helped thg states and local authorities in
35 instances of chemical releases during
the past year in New England. Prelim-
inary assessments were conducted at 38
sites. There were 23 federally funded oil
spill cleanups, and 50 oil spills at which
ESD assisted the states.
Field personnel conducted 129 compli-
ance inspections to determine whether
dischargers had complied with waste-
water permit limits or pretreatment
guidelines for industrial waste discharged
to municipal sewers. Most inspections in-
volved complex laboratory analysis.
Others consisted of thorough visual in-
spection and review of sampling and
analysis conducted by municipal or in-
dustrial dischargers.
During the past year ESD staff provid-
ed on-the-job training and formal courses
for state personnel in new technology and
new regulations applicable to field work
and laboratory analysis. The Air Section
conducted 10 workshops on visible emis-
sions and certified state and EPA inspec-
tors to cite emission sources for violation
of regulations governing total suspended
particulates. Training was also given on
field methods for detecting leaks in under-
ground storage tanks, including a tech-
nique refined by laboratory personnel in-
16
-------
volving the use of a portable gas chro-
matograph to analyze soil samples.
BSD personnel also 1) established a tox-
ics air monitoring site on a hill in Chelsea,
MA, overlooking an oil farm and chemical
industries; 2) processed, evaluated and
published the 1984 Annual Report on Air
Quality in New England; 3) worked with
the states and major industries in
conducting and observing emission tests
for particulates, sulfur oxides and volatile
organic chemicals; 4) conducted field per-
formance audits on all national air
monitoring sites and 50% of all state air
monitoring sites, completing a full audit
of each state's air monitoring program;
and 5) expanded ESD's capabilities for tox-
ic air monitoring, including significant
field studies at Raymark and American
Cyanamid plants in Connecticut, ambient
sampling for volatile organics at Deer
Island wastewater treatment plant in
Boston Harbor, and at many Superfund
sites in New England.
In October and November 1984, Region
I personnel took part in Phase I of a na-
tional lake survey. A total of 519 lakes in
New England were sampled from helicop-
ters, and data have provided a statistical
base for defining those lakes which are
potentially sensitive to acid deposition.
These data were used to group lakes hav-
ing similar chemical characteristics and
to select representative lakes for more in-
tensive sampling. During FY 86, EPA con-
tractors will follow up with more intensive
chemical and biological sampling of the
representative lakes.
The division took charge of launching
the agency's chemical emergency pre-
paredness program in New England late
in the year. The program is designed to
help states and local governments develop
emergency response and contingency
plans in case hazardous chemicals are ac-
cidentally released. The division distrib-
uted an acute hazards list of 402 chemi-
cals in general use in industry, chemical
profiles of each, and guidance on drawing
up contingency plans. The division con-
tinues to provide technical assistance
The biology section responded to an
epidemic of giardiasis, an intestinal
parasitic disease, in Pittsfield, MA. Work-
ing with personnel from the Lawrence,
MA experiment station, our people soon
recovered the causative organism and pin-
pointed the possible source of contamina-
tion. The biology lab is one of the very few
on the east coast which is capable of
isolating and analyzing for giardia.
The giardia episode brought the division
into close contact with state and local
public health departments, an ac-
celerating trend, as the interest in en-
vironmental protection shifts noticeably
toward health effects of environmental
degradation, especially the impact of
chemical contamination of air, water and
soil.
A PRELIMINARY
CHECKLIST OF THE
AQUATIC MACRO-
INVERTEBRATES
OF THE NEW ENGLAND
REGION
New England's streams and lakes have
a rich and diverse macroinvertebrate
fauna and records of these aquatic popula-
tions are being documented in the course
of state biological water quality monitor-
ing. A checklist of the aquatic macro-
invertebrates in New England and New
York State was begun in 1982, using lists
of animals collected as part of the 7 states'
water quality monitoring, and supple-
mented with lists contributed by selected
taxonomists and private collectors. This
is a working list, not based on extensive
searches of literature and historical rec-
ords. This list will be useful to the state
and federal aquatic biologists in determin-
ing the impact of pollution on streams and
water bodies as well as indicating recovers'
from pollution after toxic discharges have
been eliminated.
The presence of certain species, especial-
ly stoneflies, mayflies and caddisflies, and
most molluscs indicates good water quali-
ty. Poor water quality is indicated by the
presence of aquatic earthworms and
midge flies. Molluscs, or freshwater shell-
fish, are generally sensitive to acidic con-
ditions. Macroinvertebrate taxonomy is
one of the most useful biological tools for
the assessment of water quality.
The list will be updated periodically,
prompting a continuing exchange of speci-
mens and distribution records among the
states. So far, it contains more than 1.500
taxa covering the Phyla Porifera through
Mollusca.
Publication of the list is expected early
in 1986. We plan to establish a central ref-
erence collection at the ESD laboratory for
use in specimen verification and in con-
ducting workshops on macroinvertebrate
taxonomv.
17
-------
OFFICE OF REGIONAL COUNSEL
PATRICK A. PARENTEAU, REGIONAL COUNSEL
This office provides the legal muscle for
the region's enforcement program, prepar-
ing lawsuits, negotiating settlements, col-
lecting penalties and helping to prosecute
criminal violations of the nation's environ-
mental laws. It also defends the region
against a variety of legal challenges,
especially suits designed to block enforce-
ment efforts or to stall cleanup operations.
Finally, the office serves as a trouble-
shooter, trying to clear legal obstacles
from the path of EPA's complex regulatory
mission, and to keep the construction
grants program from bogging down with
bid protests and grant appeals.
Here are some highlights from last year:
CLEANING UP
HAZARDOUS WASTE
SITES-
A COOPERATIVE
EFFORT WITH THE
WASTE MANAGEMENT
DIVISION
The Ottati & Goss case, the nation's
longest running environmental lawsuit,
ended last summer after 113 days of trial.
When the dust had cleared, the federal
government had won the most comprehen-
sive decision to date establishing strict
liability against hazardous waste gener-
ators as well as the owners and operators
of hazardous waste sites which contami-
nated ground and surface water near
Kingston, NH. The case demonstrates
that EPA is not only committed to hazar-
dous waste cleanup but is willing and able
to litigate against multiple defendants
when necessary. EPA has spent about $1.7
million on removal of some 4,400 drums
of waste from the 28-acre site occupied by
Ottati & Goss and Kingston Steel Drum.
The site was used for waste disposal and
drum cleaning in the 1960s and 1970s.
The removal took place between the
autumn of 1981 and the summer of 1982.
EPA has spent an additional $850,000 on
groundwater and related studies and in
the preparation of a preliminary engineer-
ing plan for permanent cleanup.
Another New Hampshire case, only a
few miles down the road from the Ottati
& Goss site, provides an even better il-
lustration of how EPA would like to deal
with Superfund cleanups. That case in-
volves a site near Epping, NH operated by
Keefe Environmental Services as a hazar-
dous waste treatment, disposal and stor-
age facility between May 1978 and Janu-
ary 1981. The seven acre site consisted of
a lined waste lagoon with a capacity for
600,000 gallons of liquid waste, four 5,000
gallon above-ground storage tanks, seven
dumpsters containing sludges and soils,
and as many as 6,000 fifty-five gallon
drums. EPA, the State of New Hampshire
and the Tbwn of Epping spent approx-
imately $3 million to cleanup and secure
the site EPA pumped the lagoon to pre-
vent overflows during rain and snowmelt,
stabilized deteriorating surface condi-
tions, staged, grouped and overpacked
deteriorating drums and removed ultra-
hazardous materials. New Hampshire re-
moved more than 4,000 drums under a
cooperative agreement with EPA. Near-
ly two years of painstaking negotiations
finally paid off with the signing of a com-
prehensive cleanup agreement by 117 re-
sponsible parties last fall. The settlement,
valued at close to $6 million, has been
hailed on all sides as a model agreement.
Its key feature is a risk premium payment
designed to cover unexpected cleanup
costs while allowing responsible parties to
"cash out" their liability. This new ap-
proach is expected to speed settlement
of Superfund cases in New England and
throughout the country, resulting in more
cleanups and less time spent in costly
litigation.
CLEANING UP BOSTON
HARBOR
Forty-three cities and towns discharge
sewage into Boston Harbor through two
obsolete primary treatment plants former-
ly operated by the Metropolitan District
Commission (MDC) but now under the jur-
isdiction of the Massachusetts Water
Resources Authority (MWRA). More than
100 combined sewer overflows (CSO) also
discharge to the harbor. The combined
effect of these discharges creates the most
serious water pollution problem in New
England by regularly causing beach clos-
ings, and diseases in fish and other organ-
isms and threatening public health.
lb date, $210 million in EPA grants
have been made to projects related to
Boston Harbor, mainly to repair and
rehabilitate portions of Boston and
member community sewer systems and to
correct some CSO and chronic treatment
plant problems. In addition, some $40
million in federal grants are scheduled
during FY 86 for immediate improve-
ments to the Nut Island and Deer Island
treatment plants and to correct additional
CSO and sewer system problems.
As part of the region's multi-pronged
effort to restore water quality in Boston
Harbor, the MDC's application for a
waiver of secondary treatment was de-
18
-------
nied, requiring construction and operation
of secondary treatment facilities. En-
vironmental impact studies have been
completed for facilities siting: The studies
narrowed the choice for the treatment
works from 22 sites to a single preferred
site, Deer Island. Public hearings of the
final environmental impact statement
were held in January 1986 with the final
record of decision issued in February.
A lawsuit was filed in January 1985 to
obtain a firm cleanup schedule under the
direction of the Federal District Court in
Massachusetts which has the broad
authority needed to oversee the multitude
of parties and issues involved in solving
this problem. Despite opposition by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts and by
the MWRA, Federal Judge David Maz-
zone entered judgment last summer
against both the authority and the com-
monwealth finding them liable for
numerous violations of the Clean Water
Act. Following negotiations among the
parties, which also included the Conser-
vation Law Foundation of New England,
the City of Quincy and the Tbwn of Win-
throp, Judge Mazzone issued the first
remedial order in late December, contain-
ing an interim, three year schedule of ac-
tivities, including immediate improve-
ments to the existing primary treatment
plant on Deer Island. With this interim
schedule the court-administered cleanup
of Boston Harbor has officially begun.
More orders will follow, but it is hoped
that the parties will continue negotiating
their differences to arrive at mutually
agreed upon schedules and timetables for
the actual construction of necessary
facilities for secondary treatment, sludge
disposal and combined sewer overflows
a massive construction project estimated
to cost more than $2 billion and take more
than 10 years to complete.
GETTING TOUGH ON
ASBESTOS VIOLATIONS
Asbestos, a known human carcinogen,
presents one of the most pervasive health
risks in New England. Having been used
for so many years as insulation in homes,
businesses and factories, it is literally all
around us. Although usually safely con-
cealed behind walls, ceiling tiles and other
structures, it can become dangerous when
released as dust into the air.
Region I has been a leader in the vigor-
ous enforcement of two different programs
designed to regulate asbestos. One is the
asbestos-in-schools program, in which
hundreds of enforcement actions have
been taken under the Ibxic Substances
Control Act, and thousands of dollars have
been spent on safe removal of asbestos
from schools around New England. Equal-
ly important, the highly visible enforce-
ment effort has helped make parents,
teachers, administrators and school
boards much more aware of the asbestos
problem, prompting corrective actions
beyond those stimulated by the enforce-
ment actions themselves.
The other major asbestos program,
under the hazardous«emissions provision
of the Clean Air act, regulates the demoli-
tion or renovation of buildings containing
asbestos. The usual approach is to assess
a fairly stiff penalty for violations and to
order future compliance However, given
the gravity of the threat posed by im-
proper handling and disposal of large
amounts of asbestos frequently exposed
during building demolitions and renova-
tions, and the slow response of the reg-
ulated community both contractors and
building owners to following prescribed
procedures, Region I has decided to raise
the ante for serious violations by bring-
ing criminal prosecutions against delib-
erate or repeat offenders. In December
1985, a Federal District Judge in Connec-
ticut found two men guilty of knowing
' violations of federal regulations and hand-
ed down stiff sentences that included 30
days in jail for one person, a one-year
suspended sentence for the other, and a
$25,000 fine for each. In addition, each
was placed on five years probation and
was ordered to perform 1,000 hours of
community service Sentences like these
will serve as a powerful deterrent to other
violations of the asbestos rules.
This past year Region I initiated its first
action under section 404(c) of the Clean
Water Act, which provides EPA with the
authority to prohibit or restrict the filling
of wetlands (and other waters of the U.S. i
when there would be unacceptable ad-
verse effects from a proposed development
on certain environmental resource values.
This section of the Act has been used in-
frequently in the past, and only four 404(ci
actions have been completed nationwide.
The case has captured widespread atten-
tion in the local and national media.
Pyramid Companies of New York pro-
posed to fill 30 acres of primarily forested
wetlands in order to build a shopping mall
in an area known as Sweedens Swamp in
Attleboro, MA. If permitted, this would be
the largest loss of wetlands in Massachu-
setts in at least 5 years. Pyramid claims
that the destruction of wetlands is justi-
fied because it proposes a wetland mitiga-
tion plan which would "improve" the re-
maining wetlands onsite and create new
wetlands offsite.
Region I became involved with the mall
proposal since it requires a permit under
section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which
regulates the discharge of dredged or fill
material into waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. The 404 program is jointly ad-
ministered by the Corps of Engineers and
EPA. EPA has authority under §404(ct
(commonly known as the"veto" provision)
to override a Corps decision to issue a per-
mit whenever EPA determines that there
would be unacceptable impacts to munici-
pal water supplies, fisheries, shellfish, rec-
reation and/or wildlife.
Since October 1984, Region I has ob-
jected to issuance of the Corps permit
because of the impacts on the wetland and
a belief that at least one less environmen-
tally damaging site exists where a mall
could be built. The local Corps Division
had decided to deny the 404 permit, but
the Corps headquarters office interceded
in the case and directed the New England
Division to issue the permit to Pyramid.
The Corps" Washington position involved
a legal and policy interpretation of EPA's
regulations which, if applied in other
cases as well, could substantially weaken
the 404 program.
In late July, Region I initiated the for-
mal 404(ct administrative process. Our
August 21. 1985 public notice states that
Pyramid's proposal may result in unaccep-
table adverse impacts on the wetland, and
sought public comment on numerous is-
sues. Pyramid filed suit against EPA seek-
ing to stop the 404(ci process. The federal
district court for the District of Columbia
dismissed Pyramid's action, ruling that
the court lacked jurisdiction over the case
since EPA has yet to take final agency ac-
tion. The court also held that EPA retains
broad discretion to initiate section 404ici
actions, and that EPA's action in this case
was within discretion. This was the first
written decision construing section 404ic>
of the Act. Pyramid has appealed the
decision.
The next step in the 404(c) process is for
Region I to complete its evaluation of the
record (including approximately 1,200
comments) and make a recommendation
to EPA headquarters. The regional admin-
istrator has three options: withdraw EPA's
objections and allow the project to proceed
subject to the requirements of the Corps
permit; restrict use of the site or place con-
ditions on the project which must be satis-
fied before the mall could be built; or pro-
hibit filling of Sweedens Swamp thereby
vetoing the Corps permit and preventing
construction of the mall. This decision will
depend primarily upon how the region re-
solves two key questions: 11 must an alter-
nate site(s) which would fulfill the basic
project purpose be available to the permit
applicant to be considered feasible, and 2i
may mitigation, if initiated successfully
in advance of a project, substitute for
avoiding the impacts in the first place by
use of an alternate site? The final EPA de-
cision will be made by Joy Manson. the
Assistant Administrator for External
Affairs.
19
-------
PLANNING AND
MANAGEMENT DIVISION
The Planning and Management Divi-
sion provides a variety of services to sup-
port regional program activities, in-
cluding space, equipment, support for our
employees, financial management and
budgeting, and information processing
and communications.
Activities with greater external impact
include the administration of federal
priority setting and program coordination.
The activities highlighted below are ex-
amples of the work of the Division.
HARLEY F LAING, DIRECTOR
The Division serves as the production
manager for Region I's Environmental
Management Report (EMR), the na-
tional "state of the environment" repor-
ting and planning effort undertaken
every year in each of the 10 EPA
regions.
State and environmental group
representatives work with the region to
identify New England's most important
environmental issues. The report outlines
action plans at the national, regional and
state levels to solve these critical en-
vironmental problems.
The region's work planning and accoun-
tability systems track program and en-
forcement activities against
commitments developed in conjunction
with EPA headquarters at the beginn-
ing of the fiscal year.
The region is now in the process of
automating the planning, management,
tracking and accountability systems. This
effort will aid program managers by con-
tinuous reporting of progress in regional
program, enforcement, special initiative
and grant-related activities.
STAFF INCREASES
The Region I organization continued to
grow during FY 85. The number of per-
manent employees increased by nearly
15%, from 401 to 459. The greatest in-
creases were in waste management with
all programs benefitting from the addition
of technical staff, attorneys and clerical,
administrative and support personnel.
Consistent with the Agency's equal em-
ployment policy, half of the new profes-
sional and administrative employees are
women, and nearly 20% of the profession-
al and administrative new hires are
minority group members.
HUMAN RESOURCES
INITIATIVES
In keeping with EPA's increasingly
strong commitment to improving its effec-
tiveness and productivity through devel-
opment of its employees, Region I has
undertaken a number of human resource
initiatives.
20
-------
EPA REGION I BUDGET -
FISCAL YEAR 1985
The budget we managed for FY 85 was
comprised of 459 staff years and $20
million to support Agency operations. The
budget also included $77 million for
grants for wastewater treatment plant
construction and $26 million for grants to
support state environmental program
operations.
The region's resources increased signifi-
cantly from FY 84 to FY 85.
In addition to Superfund, other EPA
program funding for protection of the
environment from hazardous waste and
toxic pollutants (pesticides, radiation
and toxic substances) increased
operating dollars by $451,600 or 20tf
over FY 84.
Financial operating funds increased by
$3.3 million or 20% over FY 84.
Superfund's financial operating
resources increased by $1,228,000 or
42%.
Stability of funding levels is the high-
light of Region I's financial assistance to
states. These grants support air, water,
construction grants management, water
quality, public water supply, underground
injection control, hazardous waste and
pesticides enforcement and certification
programs. For FY 85, the New England
states received EPA funds as follows:
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Total
$5,813,000
$3,019,000
$9,655,000
$2,879,000
$2,722,000
$3,031,000
$26,119,000
Chart 11
Regional Programs Financial Resources
Regional
Operation
04 85
84 85
84 85
84 85
21
-------
We began a supervisory training pro-
gram for all managers and supervisors.
Recently, this program was extended to
our senior professionals through a year
long human relations training program
designed to help them improve a variety
of job-related skills.
We established a human resources ad-
visory committee representing all
segments of our workforce Six priority
areas were selected for further develop-
ment by the committee (1) upward
mobility, (2) increasing the number of
women and minority managers and super-
visors, (3) secretarial/clerical recruitment
and retention, (4) rotational assignments,
(5) senior level non-supervisory positions,
and (6) communications. Workgroups have
been formed to make recommendations in
each of these areas in the near future.
We expect this committee to develop and
communicate a wide variety of human re-
source initiatives.
In FY 85 the region awarded 54 en-
vironmental program grants along with
numerous special purpose assistance
grants worth $26 million to state en-
vironmental and public health agencies.
The Division provided administrative
and financial technical assistance to EPA
program managers and to state recipients
of EPA grant assistance
In addition, cooperative agreement
awards under the Superfund program
were distributed to the New England
states to help them with hazardous waste
cleanup. The Division worked with pro-
gram officials to explain the accounting
requirements mandated by Congress and
to develop administrative procedures
necessary to assure proper, effective and
efficient state financial management
systems. Other new grant-related in-
itiatives in the hazardous waste and tox-
ic materials area were the small quanti-
ty generators and the underground
storage tank programs and grants under
the Asbestos School Hazards Abatement
Act.
The Division planned and implemented
EPA's new performance-based grant policy,
a national initiative to improve the pro-
ductivity of EPA funded state programs
effort through a process of negotiated
commitments and close monitoring of
performance
The Division investigated groundwater
manuals and automated information
sources and researched automated data
processing tools and system support for in-
tegrating or evaluation of groundwater
information.
Support was provided to the Cape Cod
(MA) aquifer management project by help-
ing to identify groundwater data needs
and select information systems. Informa-
tion systems that could be useful in ad-
dressing technical and management
issues in the Barnstable-Eastham (MA)
study area were identified. An automated
information resource assessment system
will permit all the participants in the
Cape Cod project to use this compendium
of information.
22
-------
OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS &
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This small office has four big jobs. It
enlists the support of senior public officials
to help EPA carry out its mission. It re-
iews the major actions and permits issued
by other federal agencies to minimize en-
vironmental damage. It ensures that fed-
eral agencies comply with all environmen-
tal laws. And lastly, the office director is
senior policy advisor to the Regional Ad-
ministrator (RA) and his Deputy; serves
as Acting Regional Administrator in their
absence; and is the RA's representative in
the preparation of the landmark environ-
mental impact statement (EIS) for the
siting of wastewater treatment facilities
for Boston Harbor. Below are some ex-
amples of what we do.
GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS
New England's congressional delegation
has traditionally played a leading role in
shaping environmental statutes. Members
actively support EPA's mission and our
office is responsible for sustaining that
backup.
We respond to inquiries from members
of Congress, governors, mayors and other
senior officials. Assistance is provided on
the impact in New England of EPA ac-
tions and policies as well as on problem
situations affecting a particular communi-
ty or an individual.
We responded to more than 220 official
letters this year; telephone calls from
government officials presented a
multitude of new issues every week.
Hazardous waste management and water
pollution control issues are areas of most
frequent concern. Recognizing the strong
bipartisan support for environmental pro-
tection programs, Regional Administrator
Mike Deland has met at least once this
year with 23 members of the New Eng-
land congressional delegation or their
senior staff and with all of the governors.
STEPHEN F ELLS, DIRECTOR
NATIONAL EN-
VIRONMENTAL POLICY
ACT (NEPA) REVIEWS
We review and comment on all actions
proposed by the federal government in
New England that could have a signi-
ficant impact on the environment. The ob-
jective is to insure that the federal
establishment protects the environment
as much as possible in its construction,
grant awarding, permitting and other ac-
tivities. We do this by consulting with the
proposing agency early in the process, by
reviewing other agencies' environmental
impact statement (EIS) assessments, by
requesting that an EIS be prepared for
major projects that have not had adequate
environmental review and by encouraging
selection of environmentally preferable
alternative.
This year we were involved in projects
throughout New England, such as
Boston's third harbor tunnel/central
artery; traffic impacts on drinking water
in Providence, RI; proposed dredging of
Lake Champlain, VT, and the "Big A"
hydroelectric dam on the Penobscot River,
ME. Of the 14 draft and final impact
statements we reviewed, EPA expressed
environmental objections to two and
raised environmental concerns about
another six. In many cases the projects
were either modified as the result of our
concerns or additional information was
provided to our satisfaction. In addition,
the office reviewed and commented on 80
environmental assessments and scoping
requests and 265 hydroelectric projects.
FEDERAL FACILITY
COMPLIANCE
The Executive Branch of the federal
government owns 1,344 installations in
New England on approximately 1.3
23
million acres of land. It owns hundreds of
motor vehicles, major ships and large air-
craft. It operates hospitals, laboratories,
manufacturing plants and technical
facilities. With operations on such a large
scale, it should come as no surprise that
many of the facilities have been sources
of pollution in the past and remain poten-
tial sources of pollution in the future This
year, through the federal facility com-
pliance coordinator EPA provided
technical advice and timely compliance
with state and federal environmental
laws. We now conduct reviews and inspec-
tions to ensure compliance by federal
facilities.
We assist federal agencies and the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)in de-
veloping budgetary plans for controlling
pollution from federal facilities. During
FY 85, over $46 million has been budget-
ed for pollution abatement at federal
facilities in this region.
STATE/EPA
AGREEMENTS
This office developed management
agreements that were signed this year
with state environmental agencies in
Region I. These multi-purpose documents
focus top management attention of the
state and EPA on the evaluation and ac-
complishment of major environmental
and programmatic issues. The agreements
serve as a vehicle to identify new or
emerging items of interest, as a composite
of the related environmental management
grants awarded to the states ($25 million
annually) and as a mechanism to develop
special strategies. .
-------
OFFICE OF PUBLIC
AFFAIRS
BROOKE CHAMBERLAIN-COOK, DIRECTOR
The Office of Public Affairs (OPA) saw
a sharp rise in news media coverage, an
increase in outreach efforts to new publics
and expansion of the Superfund communi-
ty relations program in 1985. A sampling
of the stories managed through OPA in-
clude the first challenge of a U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers wetlands permit (the
Attleboro Mall case), the first comprehen-
sive court ruling on industry's liability for
Superfund cleanups (the Ottati & Goss
case), and a unique $5.7 million "cash-out"
settlement in the Keefe Environmental
Services case in Epping, NH. This case set
a new national pattern for Superfund set-
tlements. And finally, the nation's first
criminal conviction under the current as-
bestos removal regulations - the Water-
bury (CT) House Wrecking case
With a greater number of Superfund
sites, each with complex cleanup issues,
the Office added two professionals to the
Superfund community relations staff of
one In addition, an increase in Region I
news led to the addition of one more press
officer for a total of three
To expand the Region's outreach to busi-
ness and industry, the Office developed a
mailing list of business firms broken down
into eight categories, according to their
fields of interest. This will help us keep
them apprised of new or changing regula-
tions and other actions which might affect
them.
The Boston Harbor cleanup case domi-
nated this year's news, starting with the
creation of the Massachusetts Water Re-
sources Authority to manage water sup-
ply and sewerage for metropolitan Boston
and continuing through a favorable rul-
ing on EPA's suit to compel Harbor clean-
up, the Agency's rejection of the state's ap-
plication for waiving secondary treatment
requirements and the regional office's com-
bined effort with the state to select Deer
Island in Winthrop as the site for a new
secondary wastewater treatment plant,
necessary for the successful cleanup of the
Harbor.
A page one story from July, 1985 to the
end of the year was Michael Deland's
challenge of the U.S. Army Corps of En-
gineers' permit to allow Pyramid Corpora-
tion of Syracuse, NT to fill Sweeden's
Swamp in Attleboro, MA for the purpose
of constructing a shopping mall. Environ-
mental groups strongly supported the
challenge, while Pyramid organized a ma-
jor lobbying and public relations cam-
paign in favor of the project.
The year brought a big victory for the
region's legal and technical personnel
when a federal judge in Concord, NH
handed down the nation's first comprehen-
sive decision confirming the liability of
waste generators, transporters and facili-
ty owners and operators for the cost of
Superfund cleanups. The decision came
after 113 trial days, the nation's longest
environmental trial, in EPA's suit against
15 responsible parties at the Ottati &
Goss Superfund site in Kingston, NH.
Another landmark Superfund case that
drew attention from news media across
the country was a $5.7 million cash-out
settlement of past and future Superfund
costs at the Keefe Environmental Services
site in Epping, NH. Also a first for the
news media and legal profession was the
criminal conviction of a building owner
and his wrecking contractor in Waterbury,
CT, for violation of regulations on the safe
removal of asbestos. The owner was given
a 30-day jail sentence and other heavy
penalties were imposed in the first test of
EPA's revised asbestos regulations.
Most press releases go to the daily,
weekly and electronic broadcast media.
Last year we added mailings to trade
papers and trade associations as well.
Such releases alerted these editors to the
agency's revised asbestos removal regula-
tions, the imminent closing of certain
hazardous waste land disposal facilities
and called attention to new regulations
affecting small quantity generators of
hazardous waste
In 1985, we began transmitting news
via a public relations newswire which
allowed OPA to electronically send news
to scores of papers and television stations
in the region and beyond. The service has
proved especially useful for short-notice
releases to inform the media immediate-
ly of breaking news stories.
Region I made substantial contributions
to EPA Journal with full length, il-
lustrated articles on hazardous waste
tracking in New England and on strict,
new permits to clean up the effluent-
dominated Ten Mile River in southeastern
Massachusetts. In addition, Michael
Deland authored an historical retrospec-
tive piece for EPA's 15th Anniversary
issue in that magazine
OPA compiled a new business list,
broken down according to field of interest:
wastewater permits, industrial pretreat-
ment, air emissions permits, PCB man-
agement, asbestos management, hazar-
dous waste management, auto emission
controls, and radiation. Most businesses
asked to be kept informed in at least four
24
-------
categories. The list will prove useful in
1986 and beyond with new statues and
regulations.
Traditional outreach to elementary
schools had another banner year. Again,
more than 10,000 entries were submitted
for the Elementary Education Ecology
Poem and Poster Program. Paul Keough,
Deputy Regional Administrator and the
program's originator, and Michael Deland
awarded prizes at ceremonies in all New
England states. EPA staff offices continue
to be adorned with imaginative, often
heart-rending, posters and poems in de-
fense of clean air, clean water and pro-
tected wildlife And, at the annual Citi-
zen's Briefing in December, a dozen citi-
zens received awards for their contribu-
tion to environmental protection.
Our periodical "New England Environ-
ment" grew in both circulation and com-
prehensive coverage Requests to be in-
cluded on the mailing list came in from
all corners of the region. Circulation has
now reached 1,000 and a new compressed
format is under consideration for 1986.
OPA continued to field about 1,500 let-
ters from citizens, at least 10,000
telephone calls (about 70 per day),
unheralded visits by inquiring citizens,
and 503 formal requests for information
invoking the Freedom of Information Act
(up from 350 in 1984). The regional ad-
ministrator and his senior staff were in
frequent contact with environmental and
business groups. At least one meeting
with each occurred every quarter.
The Superfund community relations
staff supports the Superfund office in plan-
ning and implementing community rela-
tions outreach and public information
efforts. The professionals that were add-
ed to the one-person staff during 1985
worked on the growing number of sites
moving toward final cleanup. The trend
was toward informal briefings, site tours
and individual interviews with continued
emphasis on public meetings and hear-
ings. For example, in Gray, ME, the
McKin site manager met informally every
few weeks with the town council over
cleanup techniques for that site Key
citizens also attended. At the residents' re-
quest, EPA installed a telephone hotline
which daily reported the site's status
through recorded questions and com-
ments. Even early drafts of the cleanup
plan were reviewed by local officials and
key citizens.
The community relations staff stressed
education of local officials and residents,
allowing them a more active role in deci-
sions. A blizzard of fact sheets presented
complex technical and legal issues in
plain English. At the Silresim Superfund
site in Lowell, MA responsible parties
agreed to do a remedial study, with
citizens participating in monthly over-
sight meetings.
"We're Number One," the Office's inter-
nal newsletter, gained further employee
acceptance as a news and information
outlet. In addition, the Office sponsored an
internal training session on community
relations at Superfund enforcement sites
- those where EPA must juggle the right
to know with the right to privacy during
negotiations with potentially responsible
parties. In August, the OPA hosted the na-
tional conference of headquarters and
regional public affairs directors. Finally,
the Office organized the annual meeting
at which Michael Deland conferred merit
awards on outstanding employees.
25
-------
CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
STANLEY J. PAC, COMMISSIONER
In 1985, Connecticut continued its his-
torical role as a national leader in the
comprehensive protection of the environ-
ment and natural resources.
The state's air pollution control pro-
gram, created in response to the federal
Clean Air Act, has far exceeded the federal
requirements in the stringency of its pol-
icy. Its commitment to reducing air pollu-
tion continues to serve as a model for
other states. Connecticut has established
stricter standards, such as the lowest
sulfur-in-fuel requirement in the nation,
has applied stringent permit application
review criteria such as best available con-
trol technology to require acid gas scrub-
bers on all resource recovery facilities, and
has developed innovative air pollution
control programs such as the program to
control hazardous and toxic air pollutants.
The state's air monitoring network is the
largest in New England and is recognized
as one of the best in the nation.
New programs in 1985 included vapor
loss testing of gasoline tank trucks to at-
tain ozone standards, the toxic air pro-
gram which lists over 850 toxic com-
pounds and proposes to control such
pollutants from over 10,000 sources, and
the permitting of four resources recovery
plants, more than any other state utiliz-
ing resource recovery as a solution to solid
waste management problems. Connecti-
cut's automobile emissions inspection and
maintenance program has decreased tail-
pipe levels of hydrocarbons and carbon
monoxide by thousands of tons since its
inception in 1983,
The hazardous materials management
unit responded to 1,997 reported spills for
the calender year ending December 1985
One hundred twenty six inspections of
major facilities, and 38 inspections of
minor facilities were conducted. A total of
147 new enforcement actions were initi-
ated in 1985, 36 referrals to the attorney
general for civil actions were made and 15
referrals to the state's attorney for crimi-
nal actions resulted in forfeitures totalling
$145,000. Approximately $2 million was
spent in 1985 for removal of contaminated
soils at three separate sites. During FY
85, an exten sive state-wide inventory to
locate historical hazardous waste disposal
sites was completed which involved over
3,500 inspections. During the 1985 legis-
lative session, $250,000 was allocated to
the DEP to conduct a program for the col-
lection of household hazardous wastes.
The state's local assistance and program
coordination unit was one of four states
in the nation to participate in the develop-
ment of a national program to regulate
the nonresidential underground storage of
oil and petroleum liquids. This unit also
began the first training and certification
classes for 104 wastewater treatment
plant operators in the spring of 1985.
Clean water goals continue to be met
26
-------
with strong, successful programs. Ninety
three percent of the state's surface waters
meet their designated use classification
and the majority of groundwater is
suitable for drinking without treatment.
A major revision to the state's water quali-
ty standards was undertaken in 1985. The
proposed standards include concerns
which address toxic substances, biological
parameters, flow regulations, provisions
for the expansion of seasonal disinfection
zones, bioconcentrations, nutrient effluent
limitations and eutrophication on major
rivers.
In June 1985, the Department obtained
a new mobile toxicity laboratory which is
being used to test aquatic toxicity at
various river sites throughout the state
Also in June, a toxicity conference with
over 260 participants examined recent
aquatic toxicological studies conducted by
DEP and EPA. The department began in
1985 its participation with EPA in a study
of Long Island Sound's water quality
which will help protect the Sound against
further environmental stresses and
degradation.
A new potable water program enacted
in 1985 provided $7 million for potable
water in cases of well contamination. Vic-
tims of well contamination are provided
with bottled water immediately on iden-
tification by the state or by responsible
parties. Four hundred families are cur-
rently being provided with bottled water
by DEP, and projects for long term water
supply extensions or filter systems are
underway in towns where no responsible
parties exist.
Since 1967, over $1 billion in state and
federal grants have assisted municipali-
ties in meeting their water pollution con-
trol needs through the construction of
treatment facilities. A program initiated
in 1985 identified an additional $1.1 bil-
lion in needs and proposed a revolving
loan program with $756 million in state
monies over the next 20 years. Governor
O'Neill's innovative proposal is designed
to ensure the successful implementation
of our clean water goals into the next
century.
In the area of water resources, 400 of the
state's 2,300 registered dams were in-
spected in the last fiscal year. $2 million
in low-interest loans have been authorized
for dam repair and high hazard dams have
been identified as having priority for the
loans. During FY 85, the DEP was in-
volved in 30 flood control projects, 26 dam
repair projects and three beach and shore
erosion projects. Two of the flood control
projects were completed, five are under
design, and three are under preliminary
investigations. Seven dam repair projects
were completed, seven are under design,
and 12 are under preliminary investiga-
tions. Two of the three beach and shore
erosion projects were completed.
As a review of 1985 suggests, many of
our environmental goals have been and
continue to be met. But it is inherent in
the nature of protection and preservation
that new needs and new goals will arise
With the successes and accomplishments
of 1985 marked and noted, our vital signs
are strong indeed. We look forward to our
continuing challenge
27
-------
MAINE
DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
HENRY B. WARREN, COMMISSIONER
Early in 1985, Maine identified the pro-
tection of its groundwater resources as its
top environmental goal for the year. Be-
fore 1985 .ended Maine had planned,
financed and launched a strategy to ac-
complish that goal without neglecting its
other environmental responsibilities.
Maine's 112th legislature responded to
the Department of Environmental Protec-
tion's call for action by enacting three key
bills.
An underground storage tank law gave
the DEP broad authority over both old
and new installations of underground
petroleum storage facilities - a prime
source of groundwater contamination.
A wetlands law gave the DEP control
of many development activities in the
state's freshwater wetlands, major
recharge areas for groundwater
resources. Maine has identified 3,000
wetlands each of which is of ten acres
or more in size.
The legislature also required owners of
salt and sand-salt storage areas to
register the location of their storage
areas with the DEP so that the latter
could investigate and prioritize their
potential threats to groundwater. The
same law authorized the DEP to reim-
burse municipalities for up to 50 per-
cent of the cost of building non-
polluting facilities.
The public affirmed its support for
groundwater protection by overwhelming-
ly approving a $3 million bond issue in
November to finance the underground
storage tank law.
On June 10, 1985, Governor Joseph E.
Brennan issued an executive order
establishing a Maine groundwater policy
and ordering the Maine Land and Water
Resources Council to establish a standing
groundwater committee to oversee im-
plementation of the policy.
Among other things, the policy calls for
making groundwater policies responsive
to changing conditions and related health
risks, ensuring that waste disposal and
other land use decisions are made only
after full consideration of their likely im-
pacts on groundwater, giving highest
priority to protection of significant
aquifers, assisting municipalities and
water companies in protecting water sup-
plies, and fostering greater public
awareness of the importance of
groundwater.
Groundwater was not the only course on
Maine's 1985 environmental menu, yet it
seemed to play an important role in
almost all DEP endeavors for the year.
Threats to groundwater lent an ever pres-
ent sense of urgency to the need for bring-
ing solid waste management practice in-
to compliance with accepted standards.
The groundwater connection hung heavy
over operations in the DEPs Bureau of Oil
and Hazardous Materials Control partic-
ularly as they pertained to uncontrolled
hazardous waste sites and plans for their
cleanup and/or roles in the consideration
of hundreds of development applications
processed during the year by the DBFs
Bureau of Land Quality Control.
While much public attention in Maine
in 1985 was focused on groundwater and
related problems, groundwater by no
means monopolized media attention. Acid
rain continued to be a major source of en-
vironmental frustration in Maine in 1985
as cries of protest and mounting documen-
tation of damage failed to elicit anything
from Washington other than promises for
more studies. The DBFs Bureau of Air
Quality Control also concentrated re-
sources on another airborne but seasonal
pollution problem, ozone. Studies indicate
the problem is increasing in coastal
Maine, particularly in the south-central
area.
While all evidence indicates that most
of Maine's acid rain and ozone are the
result of activities in the more in-
dustrialized areas to the south and west,
the department is fully aware that Maine
must continue to ask its citizens and
businesses to observe the same environ-
mental diligence and responsibility that
must be enforced elsewhere in the nation
if clean air is to become a reality.
This year the DEP is asking the
legislature for the authority to adopt and
implement regulations to reduce sulfur
dioxide emissions similar to laws being
drawn up by the other New England
states.
28
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
JAMES S. HOYTE, SECRETARY
As I look back over the past year, I feel
very proud of the environmental ac-
complishments we have carved out in
Massachusetts.
Two things are very clear: that it has
been a strong year for significant en-
vironmental legislation and that we have
done something that no one else has been
able to do - we have begun the real task
of cleaning up Boston Harbor and have
made progress that can be measured up
against anyone's yard stick. I want to note
that one of the reasons we've been able to
launch such a comprehensive and focused
effort is because of the willingness of the
EPA Region I office to place major empha-
sis on the recovery of this great resource
At the close of 1984 Governor Dukakis
signed into law the legislation that
created the Massachusetts Water Re-
sources Authority - the independent
authority fashioned by us to take over the
job of running the sewage collection and
disposal system for the metropolitan
Boston Area.
During 1985 we administratively and
politically established this new entity
which is a publicly appointed board of 11
of which I serve as chairman.
In this past year, the MWRA board has
grappled with several important issues
and in a short period of time has made
significant decisions including:
Location for a preferred site for a new
sewage treatment plant.
Reaching consensus to back the EPA
decision that secondary treatment be
required for the new plant.
Deciding what to do with the sludge
project on an interim basis while the
long-term solution is considered.
Breaking ground in the fall at Constitu-
tion Beach in East Boston to begin
work to upgrade the first CSO (Com-
bined Sewer Overflow) as a tangible
step towards improved harbor water
quality.
Initiating a $40 million capital im-
provement program for the present
plants on Nut and Deer Islands.
Setting new water and sewer rates for
the metropolitan district.
While in fact the issues of pollution in
Boston Harbor are specific for that area,
we have documented in 1985 that there
is great cause for concern of our marine
environment in general. A special paper
prepared by our Department of Fisheries,
Wildlife and Environmental Law Enforce-
ment, Division of Marine Fisheries, in
conjunction with Coastal Zone Manage-
ment and the Department of Environmen-
tal Quality Engineering, indicates pro-
blems have surfaced despite all of our
substantial ongoing efforts to preserve,
protect and enhance our marine life and
coastal areas, and these problems are ac-
celerating at a faster rate than anyone
could have anticipated even five years ago.
It is clear to us that we have come up
against the limits of our environment and
that unless we take immediate remedial
action we will face a serious environmen-
tal and economic loss.
lb address these problems, I have form-
ed a special interdisciplinary marine
resources coordinating group and am
holding public meetings to help us focus
and manage our efforts to implement an
action plan as quickly as possible.
The report indicates that problems stem
from:
Polluted waters that contaminate fish
and shellfish and cause areas to be
closed to harvesting, resulting in both
economic and environmental losses.
Population and development growth
which put stress on the natural
resources.
Inadequate shoreside facilities and
public access to the coast that makes it
more difficult for the fishing industry
to conduct its business.
Excessive fishing that neglects conser-
vation and fish management.
A need for better coordination among
agencies with overlapping jurisdictions.
We will focus on solutions to these issues
raised by our special paper in 1986.
Some of the largest gains we have made
environmentally in Massachusetts in
1985 were through placing significant en-
vironmental legislation into law. That
record includes:
Administrative "polluters" penalties
law that gives the state department of
environmental quality engineering the
power to levy fines without the delay of
court process of up to $25,000 per day
against people or industries who are
damaging the environment.
$21 million added to the state super-
fund coffers for toxic waste site
cleanup.
State acid rain control law that caps
sulfur dioxide emissions in Massachu-
setts and establishes a state emissions
reduction program if either a federal or
regional program is not in place by the
end of 1989.
29
-------
Air pollution penalties law that in-
creases the current fines the state
department of environmental quality
engineering assesses to violators of air
quality regulations.
$427 million water and sewer construc-
tion bond that allows more
Massachusetts cities and towns to begin
vital repairs to their water and sewer
systems to ultimately improve ground-
water quality, conserve water and to
build much needed new wastewater
treatment facilities. The bond is a
creative approach to stretching federal
aid dollars over more programs and is
a state commitment to the environment
and to our basic infrastructure.
Water management act that will im-
prove how we manage and protect our
water resources across political boun-
daries. Water now becomes a public
resource instead of a private or local one
which will be especially important for
areas that have water shortage or water
quality problems.
In 1985 we have made progress im-
plementing our landmark $162 million
open space bond that has 25 separate pro-
grams designed to protect and preserve or
rehabilitate environmentally sensitive
land around the state. In the past year, we
have added 10,000 new acres to publicly
preserved land in the commonwealth;
have set in motion programs to rehabili-
tate 22 city and town commons across the
state as well as 12 historic Olmsted parks;
have authorized 45 grants to 28 cities and
towns to acquire or rehabilitate conserva-
tion or park lands; and have awarded 18
grants to 17 coastal towns to improve their
coastal facilities.
In short in 1985 we have continued to
initiate and implement significant pro-
grams in our five environmental priority
areas:
Tb clean up Boston Harbor.
Tb develop an acid rain control strategy.
Tb closely protect and manage our
valuable water resources.
Tb better manage our waste
*Ib preserve and protect our open space
For 1986 we will:
Continue to focus on water resources
protection, most particularly as it
affects our groundwater.
Emphasize pesticide reform essential to
groundwater protection with a goal of
reducing our overall pesticide use by 25
percent by 1990 and an additional 15-20
percent by 1995. Pilot programs under-
taken in 1985 already show this is a
realistic goal for large Massachusetts
crops such as cranberries and apples.
Continue to focus on waste stream
issues which will include creating a
plan legislatively mandated for dispos-
ing of our solid waste; implementing a
household hazardous waste program;
enacting a low level radioactive waste
management process based on a special
commission's draft plan; carefully
reviewing our present hazardous waste
siting process and increasing state
Superfund resources.
Continue to press for a national acid
rain control strategy.
Continue our emphasis on land preser-
vation and protection particularly in
areas potentially stressed by devel-
opment.
Maintain our substantial efforts that
focus our energies and resources
towards cleaning up Boston Harbor.
Our achievements of 1985, especially
our legislative achievements, could not
have been accomplished without the sup-
port and cooperation of everyone working
together - environmentalists, legislators
and public officials. I look forward to what
we can achieve together in 1986.
30
-------
NEW HAMPSHIRE - A
STATE OF ENVIRONMENT
GOVERNOR JOHN SUNUNU
In New Hampshire most environmental
activities are the responsibility of in-
dependent boards and commissions which
report directly to the Governor. It is both
a significant obligation and unique oppor-
tunity for a Governor to be directly in-
volved with environmental programs. I
am pleased to submit this report on behalf
of our environmental agencies and our
citizens.
Last year and in recent years, New
Hampshire has faced a continuing
challenge to preserve the unique
character of the natural environment
while serving all the other needs of a
growing population and a booming econ-
omy. In this situation there is a complex
relationship between natural resource
policy, land use decisions and the en-
vironmental programs administered by
the EPA. Hard decisions must be made
every day.
Probably the best example of the results
of this effort is our groundwater program.
We have initiated a statewide effort of
detailed aquifer mapping (in cooperation
with the U.S. Geologic Survey office) to
supplement the general information
which is now available Clearly, the key
element of groundwater protection is wise
land-use decisions, made on a daily basis
by local governments and almost as often
by the state in public facilities and
highway construction, will be of even
greater weight than permit conditions
will in assuring groundwater protection.
Our water supply and pollution control
program remains strong. Last year saw
considerable improvement in the public
water supply program and continued ac-
tivity on the pollution control side. New
Hampshire pays 20% of the eligible cost
of federally funded water pollution control
facilities and regulates such diverse pollu-
tion sources as subsurface disposal
systems and non-point sources such as log-
ging operations and land disturbance due
to construction.
Wetlands disturbance and dock loca-
tions are regulated by the Water Re-
sources and Wetlands Boards. When it
became apparent that our stringent
review of dock permits was having its
desired effect, the number of moorings on
our lager lakes increased dramatically. To
control this, I imposed a moratorium on
moorings last July.
We have introduced legislation which
will create innovative cooperative
state/local programs on docks and moor-
ings. We also hope to have in place soon,
legislation encouraging and permitting
towns which share the same lake to de-
velop uniform land use and site develop-
ment plans.
Towns around three of our major lakes
have already begun work in anticipation
of this legislation. The density of lake
development and the manner in which it
is regulated could have a far greater
negative effect on water quality than
after-the-fact and costly abatement pro-
jects can repair.
Solid and hazardous waste continues to
pose a significant challenge. We have
seven resource recovery plants either in
operation or on the drawing boards and
continue an aggressive hazardous waste
site cleanup program under both the
federal Superfund and our own hazardous
waste cleanup fund. Probably the most
notable success story was played out at the
Tibbetts Road site where exemplary
cooperation between our state agencies,
the EPA, the Barrington town officials and
the affected citizens has led to a solution
to a serious hazardous waste situation (in-
cluding the late discovery of dioxin) in
record time.
Air pollution, particularly long-range
transport, remains a major concern. New
Hampshire enacted a stringent acid rain
control law as well as legislation requir-
ing annual performance checks of pollu-
tion control equipment in the densely
populated southern tier and anti-
tampering inspections statewide I will
continue to work on the regional and na-
tional scenes to develop solutions to long
range transport of both oxidants and
sulfur.
Throughout the year, we were supported
by excellent cooperation from the EPA
regional office, our legislature, our in-
dustrial community and our citizens. The
key to long-term sustained progress is
frank and honest communications bet-
ween these groups. I signed our Acid Rain
Bill last June We enjoyed broad-based
support on this issue and on many others
during the year. Some states have
legislated more extreme programs but few
have enacted more effective programs.
That's the New Hampshire way.
31
-------
RHODE ISLAND
DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT
ROBERT L BENDICK, DIRECTOR
Traditional measurements of the quali-
ty of Rhode Island's environment show
1985 as a year of progress. Background
levels of traditional pollutants in Nar-
ragansett Bay and its tributaries were
down. Air quality showed continued
improvements.
Among the factors contributing to en-
vironmental improvement were continued
upgrading of major sewage treatment
facilities; increased enforcement directed
at air and water pollution violations; im-
plementation of strict underground
petroleum and hazardous materials
storage tank regulations; and the con-
sistency of day to day monitoring and
inspection.
Other specific highlights include open-
ing upper Narragansett Bay to shellfishng
on a regular basis for the first time in
years; closing the state's last private
landfill; reducing by 50% permit renewals
backlogs for major municipal and in-
dustrial wastewater treatment facilities in
the 14 months since the state took over
responsibility of the program from EPA;
and installing a computer system that can
flag pollution standard violations quick-
ly, spot trends, and provide data for future
studies.
However, as development continues in
the rural and suburban areas of the state,
and sources of pollution become more
dispersed, it is apparent that traditional
methods of measuring the health of Rhode
Island's environment are not enough.
Major relationships have been estab-
lished with the University of Rhode Island
and, to a lesser extent, with Brown Uni-
versity, to provide technical support to
DEM staff. Stronger ties were developed
with the state health department to joint-
ly assess human risks from environmen-
tal threats. New technical staff reflecting
a diversity of scientific skills were hired.
Long range studies of the bay and ground-
water began, including a study of how cer-
tain land uses may impact drinking water
wells.
The Narragansett Bay Project, admini-
stered by DEM and established in 1984
to gather data which will help manage
estuaries more effectively and efficiently
had completed by the end of 1985 its first
six months of field research. Project scien-
tists from the University of Rhode Island
have collected data to establish the inter-
relationships between sewage treatment,
water quality, and quahogs with the aim
of improving water quality management
and fisheries management for the bay.
Public education about household toxic
wastes and oil spills has increased, and en-
forcement actions against industrial
polluters have been well publicized.
Still, there are major problems. Wide-
spread illegal application of the pesticide
Chlordane, abandoning hazardous wastes
at industrial plants, unearthing PCB-
contaminated oil in a farmyard, received
much attention. Thus, the criminal in-
vestigative unit has been extremely active
and must be expanded.
There remains a need for more compre-
hensive water supply planning and more
detailed understanding of the relationship
between water use and effluent levels. The
studies and data-gathering started in
1985 should begin to provide policy
guidance in 1986 for more effective pro-
tection of surface and groundwater
supplies.
In addition, programs begun in 1985
will continue in 1986 to improve and
preserve the health and quality of the
state's environment. These include im-
plementing regulations for alternative
fuel burning; requiring regulations for
new sources of air pollution to apply best
available control technology; cradle-to-
grave tracking of hazardous wastes; and
starting the work on a new inventory, in-
spection, and monitoring program for air
toxics.
Finally, DEM is now well into a joint
project with the University of Rhode
Island's College of Resource Development
to establish a comprehensive geographic
information system which will record and
track all environmental data in Rhode
Island.We hope this system will be the cor-
nerstone of future environmental pro-
grams in the state.
32
-------
VERMONT AGENCY OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION
LEONARD U. WILSON, SECRETARY
Vermont reinforced its commitment to
a clean and healthy environment in 1985
with a legislative session which gave the
Agency of Environmental Conservation
(AEC) far-reaching powers to control ac-
tivities which pose a risk to groundwater
quality. An underground storage tank pro-
gram was established, a mini-Superfund
created and a groundwater correlative
rights bill adopted. The mechanics for the
protection of groundwater quality were
put into place.
The legislative program reflected the
importance placed on environmental
quality by Governor Madeleine M. Kunin
in her inaugural address and the subse-
quent policy statements that set the direc-
tion of her administration in January.
Jonathan Lash was appointed commis-
sioner of water resources and environmen-
tal engineering in February to give strong
leadership to the agency's key environ-
mental protection department. Within the
Agency, we have emphasized the coordina-
tion of the programs between the fish and
wildlife department, the forests, parks and
recreation department and those of water
resources to assure that environmental
quality is the dominant natural resource
management priority.
During 1985, Vermont continued to up-
grade waste management practices affect-
ing the quality of air, land and waters of
the state. Development of air toxic control
strategies and visibility standards domi-
nated the air pollution control programs.
Acceleration of hazardous waste site
cleanup, creation of an underground
storage tank program, and recertification
of landfills were priorities of the waste
management program. In the surface
water area, work continued on the few re-
maining unsatisfactory discharges to
waters of the state while advance waste
treatment was established in several
areas to control nutrient discharges. Com-
missioner Lash made organizational and
management changes within the depart-
ment to give enhanced status to the air
and solid waste programs.
Our research priority in 1985 was
measuring the consequences of acid
deposition and transported air pollutants.
Visibility studies as well as aquatic and
forest impact monitoring added to the
evidence that sulfates and other out-of-
state air pollutants were increasing
damage to Vermont's ecosystems and its
economy. EPA Administrator Lee Thomas
visited Vermont in August to accompany
Governor Kunin and United States
Senator Patrick Leahy on an inspection
of forest devastation on Camel's Hump
mountain which scientists attribute to air
pollution.
In 1986 our top priority will be ggaminn-
tion and modernization of our surface
water pollution control statutes to provide
greater protection for the fragile upland
waters of the state, to provide acceptable
and environmentally sound waste man-
agement procedures for the rapidly expan-
ding recreation industry and to create a
non-point source water pollution control
program to manage diffuse contami-
nation.
During 1986, we will intensify our solid
waste management efforts, with emphasis
on determining the most cost effective and
environmentally sound strategy for the
management of solid wastes. Increased
efforts in recycling and resource recovery
will be considered as well as landfill
disposal options for sludge management.
To support all of our management and
control activities, we will be planning for
a new and improved laboratory and ex-
panding the use of risk analysis-risk
management procedures in decision
making.
We see as a major management chal-
lenge the continuation of our sound en-
vironmental protection programs as
federal fiscal resources are diminished by
federal budget balancing efforts. We are
particularly concerned over reductions of
federal assistance grants to municipalities
for water pollution control facility con-
struction. In addition, we are apprehen-
sive about the consequences of diminish-
ing federal funds for environmental pro-
grams both at the national level and
through grants to states.
33
------- |