United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Public Awareness (A-107)
Washington. D.C. 20460
Volume 5
Number 2
February 1979
r/EPA JOURNAL
WASTE
-------
Defusing
Time
Bombs
In this issue, the Journal takes
a look at the complex prob-
lems of preventing damage from
buried hazardous wastes and
from fresh flows of these pol-
lutants being generated now
and in the future.
Part of the price of our ex-
traordinarily successful system
of producing goods is the cre-
ation of waste which must be
handled in a sensible fashion.
Failure to do this in the past has
ledto burial of substantial
amounts of hazardous wastes in
the ground where they are ready
like time bombs to erupt at
some future date.
Administrator Costle has
proposed extensive new regula-
tions to deal with hazardous
wastes. Yet he warns that
complete control of these dan-
gerous chemical byproducts
may take several years.
Sen. Jennings Randolph,
chairman of the Senate Environ-
ment and Public Works Com-
mittee, reviews various addi-
tional steps Congress may take
to tighten controls over hazard-
ous wastes.
Louisiana Gov. Edwin Ed-
wards, an official of the National
Governors' Conference, gives
his opinion on the rolethe
States can play in carrying out
the objectives of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
in cop ing with hazardous wastes
and other problems.
Thomas Jorh'ng, Assistant
Administrator for Water and
Waste Management, and Steffen
Plehn, Deputy Assistant Admin-
istrator for Solid Waste, dis-
cuss the EPA's role.
Other views on this subject
include one by Dr. Charles
Johnson of the National Soiid
Wastes Management Associa-
tion on why his industry favors
strong national hazardous waste
regulations, a report on launch-
ing a major information pro-
gram on hazardous wastes and
an article on how some major
industries dispose of their
chemical wastes by incineration.
Articles from five EPA Re-
gional Offices include a report
on steps taken to correct condi-
tions at a Louisiana site where
hazardous waste fumes killed a
young man, an account of a
major conference of govern-
ment officials to discuss finding
suitable disposal sites, a report
on action taken to remedy prob-
lems at a waste chemical dump-
ing site in Massachusetts, a
report from Kansas City about
how some industrial wastes can
be put to a constructive use,
and an article about promising
new uses of urban solid waste.
On other subjects, Deputy
Administrator Barbara Blum
caJIs for a global effort to reduce
release of ozone-destroying
materials into the upper at-
mosphere and Assistant Admin-
istrator William Drayton Jr.
reports on new steps being
taken to improve EPA's per-
formance, n
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Public Awareness (A-107)
Washington DC 20460
Volume 5
Number 2
February 1979
oEPA JOURNAL
Douglas M. Costle, Administrator
Joan Martin Nicholson, Director, Office of Public Awareness
Charles D. Pierce, Editor
Truman Temple, Associate Editor
John Heritage, Chris Perham, Assistant Editors
L'Tanya White, Staff Support
Articles
EPA is charged by Congress to
protect the Nation's land, air and
water systems. Under a mandate
of national environmental laws
focused on air and water quali-
ty, solid waste management and
the control of toxic substances,
pesticides, noise and radiation,
the Agency strives to formulate
and implement actions which
lead to a compatible balance be-
tween human activities and the
ability of natural systems to sup-
port and nurture life.
Taming
Chemical Wastes
Administrator Costle reviews
the status of hazardous waste
controls.
Hazardous Wastes
An article by Sen. Jennings
Randolph on what Congress
may do to help curb this
problem.
Costle Proposes
New Regulations
A report on rules to aid in
managing hazardous wastes.
Managing
Hazardous Wastes
An interview with Thomas C.
Jorling, EPA's Assistant Admin-
istrator for Water and Waste
Management.
A Hopeful Sign
Gov. Edwin Edwards of
Louisiana finds some encourag-
ing signs of progress.
A Look Ahead 10
An interview with Steffen W.
Plehn, Deputy Assistant Admin-
istrator for Solid Waste.
Departments
A Fact Sheet
Statistics about the hazardous
waste problem.
Waste Alert
A report by Carol Lawson on
launching of a major information
program on hazardous wastes.
A Death in
Louisiana 14
How a fatality at a dump site
helped spur remedial action.
Needed:
Strong Nationwide
Regulation
Dr. Charles Johnson explains
why industry favors national
hazardous waste rules.
Industrial
Incineration 21
A report by Chris Perham on
how some industries are solving
their waste chemical problem.
Turning a Problem
into a Profit
Darby Collins writes about the
exchanges of industrial waste in
the Midwest.
Mining Urban Ore
How to make money from solid
waste.
Siting Problem
Discussed
Government officials discuss
how to find sound disposal sites.
A New England
Hazard
Paul Keough reports on how
conditions at a waste chemical
dumping ground in Massachu-
setts are being corrected.
Blum Urges Global
Ozone Protection
EPA's Deputy Administrator
calls for global cooperation to
reduce discharge of ozone-
destroying materials.
Inside EPA
Assistant Administrator William
Drayton Jr rates the Agency's
performance and predicts its
future.
Update
People
Almanac 29;.
KJ
News Briefs 37
Nation - •
Front cover: Hazardous waste
cleanup contractors wearing pro-
tective clothing and masks pump
wastes from damaged barrels to a
holding tank at the SHresim site in
Lowell, Mass.
Opposite: Barrels of hazardous
wastes are buried at a dry site on
the West Coast.
Photo credits: Bill Brett, 3M Cor-
poration, Edward C. McHam, Nick
Karanikas, Jon Royer, Michigan
Department of Natural Resources.
Black Star, Arnold Bornstein.
Design Credits: Robert Flanagan,
Donna Kazaniwsky and Ron Farrah.
The EPA Journal is published
monthly, with combined issues
July-August and November-Decem-
ber, by the U S. Environmental
Protection Agency Use of funds for
,j this periodical has b
approved by the Du octor of the
;tient and Budget.
Views expressed by authors do not
necessarily reflect EPA policy Con-
tributions and inquiries should be
addressed to the Editor (A 107),
Waterside Mall, 401 M St., S.W..
Washington. DC 20460 No per-
mission necessary to reproduce
contents except copyrighted photos
and other materials Subscription:
SI 0.00 a year, SI .00 for single
copy, domestic: $12 50 if m,.
a foreign address No , •
employees Send check or m
order to Super interutent of Docu-
ments. U S Government P:
Office. Washington, D.C 20402,
Text punted on recycled papei
-------
Taming
Chemical
Wastes
By Douglas M. Costle
EPA Administrator
Create;
••••
.
I have yet to meet anyone—govern-
ment employee, businessman, mem-
ber of the general public—who is not dis-
mayed about environmental tragedies
involving improper disposal of hazardous
wastes at the Love Canal in New York
State and at other locations across the
country.
In Toone, Tenn., action has been re-
quired to correct pollution of drinking
water by chemical wastes. In Seymour,
Ind., a site containing thousands of leaking
barrels is under court order to be cleaned
up. In Akron, Ohio, operators of another
site have been ordered to remove, dispose,
or store all liquid waste in accordance with
a State-approved plan. In New Jersey,
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, North Caro-
lina, Louisiana, and Connecticut, a number
of serious cases of illicit or improper dump-
ing have been discovered. The press is
reporting new incidents almost daily.
One of EPA's regional administrators—
Chris Beck of Region 2—predicted in this
journal a year ago serious potential prob-
lems with chemical dumpsites. "Even
though some of these landfills have been
closed down," he said, "they may stand
like ticking time bombs." Just months later
Love Canal exploded in Region 2.
Eighty-two different compounds, 11 of
them suspected carcinogens, percolated
up through the soil after heavy rains. The
wastes leached into the backyards and
basements of a hundred homes—and of a
public school—built on the banks of an old
canal near Niagara Falls. The canal had
been used as an industrial dump until 25
years ago, and when Mr. Beck inspected
the site last August, his first-hand descrip-
tion was like a full-blown nightmare:
"Corroding waste-disposal drums could
be seen breaking up through the grounds
of backyards. Trees and gardens were turn-
ing black and dying. One entire swimming
pool had popped up from its foundation,
afloat now on a small sea of chemicals.
Puddles of noxious substances were
pointed out to me by the residents. . . . And
then there were the birth defects. . . . The
father of one of the children with birth de-
fects said, 'I heard someone from the press
saying that there were only five cases of
birth defects discovered here. When you
go back to your people at EPA, please don't
use the phrase "only five cases." People
must realize this is a tiny community. Five
birth-defect cases is terrifying.'
Terrifying indeed. As Congressman
Albert Gore has said, control of hazardous
lir D'J •'
Hazardous di
s
NOW
j- ?•(
A. fe,
w
'• '0 '
•
• -
'
,
,.'!;;!!. Tro
'•: i.Vw.
of i: : - I
...rn'.lifT ff drinkm:;
•r I'.T"' in irby
le Oil ;.;:r1
• : !::i
ivc-s the ciiom.cfils couid IIUTI
.•ilcr.
: • - •
- • : • : 1:1 i I1.".!. J-
<••: n f;or .::.; .
its . :.<--r. Dr. .Iu
1 > !.-y to turn ;T in!a
1 i)!;i(it.
In J •:>• 1:575. the rtate
n Corttnl
MlEN U) "potentiaUy dan-
T t giTous I'liomical duinii
/'\ siies" in Vi'nsliiiH'.Km State were
id'.MUififd by thi- I'i.ii'/iruniv.'MV
tal Pvot'.-c'.ion A,i.t'p,cy recently,
^u-uins <««>»» i-or.iureci up of a
i\ ^
<••>.
lied
potential for
were
Mrm
,1 a rVa::i;p p.
port, tt'licre r!:rniic;Us
' > /i j1!'.':''1''! arc^j. The co
• ' '. : .'.'id
Mi;ch (.! i: wont to t'u SCA (in-
;.ic., formerly Ci;nn-
Ifl Y. .,.- M Oiu::!y, \.Y.
. I1:.- b.'pgesl < ';-sto prc'j-
•-! ;s S:i:v^im. T!.?
Ji.-i.s N>t.i asi.cvi to ji:it
r „ ^ 1 1: — f
o.'t d on
a
5-:i;i]l;o;i fcr ;i
i. . J.'.;rt
. •
ry. T.'io Hail rcporl
•A::!to of s'udies
-------
wastes may be "the single most important
environmental health issue of this decade."
The problem of hazardous wastes is
really two problems:
The safe management of new wastes
being generated as a normal by-product of
America's manufacturing system.
Correction of problems such as the one
at Love Canal and other abandoned sites
where chemical wastes are already in the
ground, disposed of for decades without
adequate safeguards.
Under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, (RCRA), we have been de-
veloping a national hazardous waste man-
agement system. This system, described
elsewhere in this issue, is designed to
track the hazardous wastes being currently
produced, to control their use and to en-
sure that they are reused or treated or dis-
posed of in approved facilities. This system
should properly ensure safe management
of the more than 34.4 million metric tons
of hazardous wastes generated annually in
the United States.
Regarding the problem of old wastes,
EPA has made a preliminary survey that
indicates hundreds of potentially danger-
ous chemical dump sites may exist
throughout this country. But EPA's author-
ity to clean up inactive sites from the past
is quite limited. We can take enforcement
action against the owner of an inactive site
to require cleanup, if we can show the site
to be an imminent and substantial danger to
human health or the environment. Yet such
enforcement is only an effective tool where
there is a current owner with the funds to
remedy the problem. Cleanup costs can
sometimes be in the millions.
Despite the limitations of RCRA, we
have taken and will take enforcement ac-
tions. We are working closely with the
States, since many have more authority
than EPA to deal with abandoned waste
sites. We are analyzing legislative propos-
als that would create some mechanism
for cleaning up sites that are truly aban-
doned, and we will be making recommen-
dations to the Congress.
Our Nation is concerned about hazard-
ous wastes. Therefore, the public is con-
cerned about EPA's performance. So far we
have mixed reviews. We have been praised
by many involved in the Love Canal in-
cident for our technical assistance and
support. We have been criticized in Con-
gressional hearings for our limited data on
abandoned sites and for insufficient en-
forcement actions. Many—including those
responsible for the program at EPA—have
been distressed at our failure to meet the
deadline specified in the Act for proposing
the hazardous waste regulatory program.
However, we took only the time needed to
develop sound regulations.
We are seeking to gather data on aban-
doned sites and to give more clout to our
enforcement program. We have proposed
the key elements of the new regulatory
program and we will move forward with
our regulations as rapidly as we can.
But we cannot change waste manage-
ment practices overnight. We estimate that
it will take up to five years for EPA and the
States to issue permits for all known haz-
ardous waste treatment, storage, and dis-
posal facilities. As for wastes buried when
we did not know their hazards—they can-
not be regulated away. They are there. In
the ground, sometimes in the water. And
this problem also cannot be solved over-
night. As EPA tackles the problems of old
and new hazardous wastes, we will need
support to help us do our job, and the
scrutiny of the public to assure that we do
it well.D
mp sites
be attnbuia-
Is Upstate Issue
8
Emptied Niaga^Neighborhcod
a Disaster Area
2v DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.
_ NIAGARA FALLS, N.Y., Nov. 19 _
o "";^
Leaks Into the Basements Some families around :he site
In about 1971, rainwater began leakm- ! 'used !0 move from :heir h
through th- -av cap that had been shov.
v'"d 55-gaI!on drums of
to break
"•'l Into the
•Dree-
ing tnat they are too old :o move
they cannot find other permane
ing that satisfies them.
Air in Basement Monltoret
Families more than one block (
canal are trying to prove that the
v spread far enough to affec
••»nd that they be boiu;!it o
oresuJent of the Lu\
• •iciation. who
of
o.- .**ltS
Sitillii^
(
.*«/
'•..•
v>yK;^.
%^%M.eWK*/*
• •;
r%^>*?^««
,^^^v
.',
nlool:ol If,
,.cnrliont.
(lie1 uni'1,1 n,.
[S°*
wSW?
*v>
r*-
>4>,
'ft* ?° c; ^^
•^?§
^^i&.
«**
nt
if
*&^s
<>>£*>
-------
-------
By Senator Jennings Randolph
Chairman, Senate Environment and
Public Works Committee
Recent incidents have brought our
attention forcefully to the public
health risk of many current and past prac-
tices for managing or disposing of hazard-
ous and toxic substances. The experience
with Love Canal in Niagara Falls, N.Y.,
stands as a warning that many such dan-
gerous relics of our industrial past may
exist.
Hazardous chemicals from a poorly
operated recent disposal operation appar-
ently migrated into the drinking water of
several homes in Toone, Tenn. Such occur-
rences remind us of the urgent need for
regulation of disposal practices, as well as
for emergency responses. Even with an
effective regulatory program in place for
industrial discharges into the navigable
waters, there recently was another sizable
discharge of carbon tetrachloride into the
Kanawha River, threatening the water sup-
ply of Huntington, W.Va.
The Congress, and particularly the
Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works, is greatly concerned with
how to respond to the release of toxic and
hazardous substances into the environ-
ment. How can the public health and safety
best be protected from such materials?
How should liabilities associated with
potential release of such substances be
managed, and how should victims of such
releases be compensated and adequate
cleanup resources be assured? How can
we provide adequate capacity to accept-
ably transport, treat, store, or dispose of
such materials?
A high legislative priority for the Com-
mittee on Environment and Public Works
in the 96th Congress will be toxic and
hazardous substances in the environment.
Some of the work is obvious: the extension
of authorizations and oversight for the
Toxic Substances Control Act and subtitle
C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. But
there will be important additional legisla-
tive activity in this area.
Committee members will explore a leg-
islative framework for a comprehensive
policy on regulating toxic and hazardous
substances in the environment. In a related
area, the Nuclear Regulation subcommit-
tee will put considerable effort into stand-
ards and licensing for nuclear wastes.
In 1978 the Senate-passed version of
the "superfund", or comprehensive oil
spill compensation bill, provided for lia-
bility and compensation for discharges
into the navigable waters of hazardous sub-
stances designated under Section 311 of
the Clean Water Act. While that measure
did not become law, the subject continues
to be of great interest to our Committee.
Coinciding with that were efforts by the
Environmental Protection Agency and the
National Solid Waste Management Associ-
ation to develop schemes for managing the
liabilities associated with hazardous waste
disposal facilities permitted under subtitle
C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
The Committee will be active in both
of these areas next year. In fact, bills deal-
ing with toxic and hazardous substances
are likely to take precedence over any pro-
posal dealing with oil. The Committee
expects to consider legislation dealing
with any release of a toxic or hazardous
material into the environment and with the
consequences of any activity for the man-
agement or use of such materials. This
would not be limited to discharges into
surface waters, or to single lists of desig-
nated substances, or to activities or mate-
rials with limiting labels such as "waste".
The pattern in the Senate-passed "super-
fund" bill will be helpful in predicting what
that legislation may be like. Such a liability
and compensation bill would seek to intern-
alize the risks associated with the manage-
ment of hazardous substances by fixing lia-
bility on dischargers and by requiring con-
tributions to a compensation fund by pro-
ducers and handlers of such materials. The
bill would provide ready compensation for
out-of-pocket and other economic losses
for damaged parties, and perhaps for per-
sonal injury as well.
Devices to promote rapid, full recovery
also may be considered. One such proposal
would allow liability to be established or
damages to be proven where the alleged
injury has simply happened with greater
frequency or severity that would be statis-
tically probable without the complained-of
event. This would facilitate recovery by
weakening the causal link which is often
so difficult to establish. Such a modifica-
tion of traditional rules of tort liability may
be more appropriate for determining when
a compensation fund will pay than for fix-
ing a discharger's liability.
The compensation fund legislation
would assure adequate funds to clean up
or mitigate releases of such substances
into the environment. A major issue, of
course, will be the degree to which current
contributions to a clean-up and compensa-
tion fund, or general Federal revenues,
should be used to mitigate the problem of
inactive or abandoned sites. We have a
precedent in the Surface Mining Act where
a portion of the fee on active mines goes to
a fund for reclaiming abandoned mines.
But the costs of dealing with inactive sites
can be tremendous and it is very difficult to
apportion those costs. The Carter Admin-
istration reportedly will propose that the
clean-up of nuclear wastes at West Valley,
N.Y., be paid in the amount of $400 million
by the Federal government, to be matched
by $400 million from the State. Five per-
cent of the total to be contributed by the
corporation originally responsible for the
private sector activities at that site.
The abandoned or inactive site problem
must be addressed in next year's hazard-
ous materials clean-up and compensation
legislation. It is probably impractical, how-
ever, to seek out and completely neutralize
each such site.
I expect that inactive sites will have to
be treated selectively, on a worst-first,
emerging problem basis. The responsible
entity, if it can be located and if it has
assets, will have to be the first source of
funds for cleanup or compensation. Beyond
that, contributions from current activities
through the new compensation fund and
general revenues will have to share in the
costs, perhaps even for compensation for
personal injury.
Inactive sites where the original disposal
operator or similar party is still in control
should be subject to regulatory require-
ments. Perhaps the same performance
standards as new or currently operating
sites would not be appropriate, but mini-
mal technological requirements can be
imposed. These might include ground
water monitoring, pumping and treatment
of leachate, cover requirements, access
limitations and similar approaches.
A comprehensive hazardous substance
liability scheme considered by our Com-
mittee will almost certainly not supersede
State liability laws, though separate State
funds and duplicative State fees may no
longer be needed.
Another area Committee members must
address is the siting of hazardous waste
disposal activities. The SCA facility at
Wilsonville, III., is an example of how sen-
sitive most communities have become to
the nearby location of even well-managed
hazardous waste management facilities.
But we must have adequate capacity to
receive these hazardous wastes. The regu-
lation of such wastes under subtitle C can-
not be allowed to squeeze out that capacity,
or worst of all, to push those wastes into
illicit disposal.
The Committee will search for a mech-
anism to site this needed waste disposal
capacity. I am continually impressed by
the ability of State and local officials to
find ways to accommodate such needs, if
they are persuaded the job must be done
and that it is theirs to do. It is not politically
practical to have a Federal override of the
siting of hazardous waste disposal facil-
ities. We must depend on incentives to
States to locate this capacity.
Perhaps we should consider prohibiting
the generation or transport in interstate
commerce of hazardous wastes, or even
the products associated with those wastes,
for any State that has not provided ade-
quate waste management capacity either
within its borders or by agreement with
another State. Exceptions to this policy
Continued to page 32
FEBRUARY 1979
-------
Costlc Proposes New Regulations
by Truman Temple
EPA Administrator Douglas M.
Costle has proposed far-reach-
ing new regulations to manage
hazardous wastes in the United
States.
Citing a series of recent epi-
sodes where such wastes were
handled in a dangerous manner,
the Administrator announced
three major proposed regula-
tions in December. They would
define hazardous waste, fix re-
sponsibilities of those produc-
ing it, and set standards for
its storage, treatment, and
disposal.
Two additional regulations
are scheduled to be proposed
this month dealing with permits
for various aspects of managing
hazardous waste and with
guidelines for State programs.
Two others were proposed ear-
lier last year on standards for
transporters of such waste and
a system for notifying author-
ities of hazardous waste
activities.
"For years we've paid very
little attention to where these
wastes have gone, in part be-
cause we weren't aware, and in
Truman Temple is Associate
Editor of EPA Journal.
some instances out of igno-
rance, and in some instances
out of sheer carelessness,"
Costle declared at a press
conference.
"We've seen examples in
very recent months of the po-
tentially tragic consequences
of this neglect," he added.
The Administrator said the
Nation had been shocked at the
way wastes had been handled
in such places as the Love
Canal in Niagara Falls, where
200 families had to leave their
homes because of seeping
chemicals, and in North Caro-
lina where liquids containing
PCB's were sprayed along a
roadway at night.
"These cases—and many
others—demonstrate the criti-
cal need for the national hazard-
ous waste management system
being developed by EPA under
the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976,"
he noted.
The impact of the proposals
will fall on an estimated 1 7 in-
dustry groupings at a total
annual cost of roughly $750
million once the system is fully
phased in and operational. The
Administrator said the figure
represents half of one percent
of the annual value of the pro-
duction of these industries. The
industries now spend $155 mil-
lion annually for hazardous
waste management.
The regulations set stand-
ards that disposal sites should
adhere to, and establish a track-
ing system for the wastes from
the point where they are gen-
erated to the point of disposal.
Thomas C. Jorling, Assistant
Administrator for Water and
Waste Management, explained
at the press conference that one
premise of the statute is that the
private sector "will be able to
move in and adequately respond
to this system." Given good
leadership, he said, the Nation
can protect public health with-
out relying on a system like the
high-level radioactive waste
case, which requires a Fed-
erally-conducted program.
Public hearings on the pro-
posed regulations have been
announced for February and
March in various cities. In addi-
tion, the Administrator said he
would meet with Governors
early this year to discuss vari-
ous issues "and see if there
isn't a way we can responsibly
begin to get adequate landfills
around the country to handle
this problem."
Costle explained that it is
now proving almost impossible
to locate new hazardous waste
facilities.
"One of the reasons is just
public fear of having these any-
where nearby," he said. "The
fact of the matter is that you
can design one of these facil-
ities that will adequately handle
these kinds of wastes, that if
you're smart about what wastes
you put there and how you deal
with them, it is eminently do-
able. The public has got to be
persuaded of that, because if
you shut down a facility that is
adequately designed to handle
this stuff, where do you suppose
it's going to go?"
The Administrator said haz-
ardous wastes cannot be
shrugged off by one State as
the problem of other States.
"That just won't work," he
emphasized. "You can't just
keep shipping this around like
Charley on the MTA. It's got to
come to rest somewhere, and
public officials are going to
have to be responsible about
Continued to page 32
The Hazardous Waste Regulations
These are the seven hazardous
waste regulations EPA has proposed
or was preparing to propose at press
time under the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act:
• Definition of a hazardous waste
and a listing of 1 58 specific wastes.
• Responsibilities of generators
of hazardous wastes.
• Standards for transporters of
hazardous waste.
• Standards for treatment, stor-
age, and disposal facilities.
• Permits for treatment, storage,
or disposal of hazardous waste.
• Guidelines for development of
State hazardous waste programs.
• Rules on notifying EPA or
authorized States of hazardous waste
management activities.
EPAJOURNAL
-------
Managing
Hazardous
Wastes
An Interview with
Thomas C. Jorling
Assistant Administrator
for Water and
Waste Management
In view of the Agency's
recent survey estimating
that there may be thou-
sands of dangerous
chemical dump sites, is
EPA seeking authority or
proposing legislation to
address the problem?
There are several concerns
regarding abandoned sites. The
program of regulation that was
created under the 1976 statute
is directed at existing and fu-
ture hazardous waste manage-
ment activities. It did not antici-
pate or address very effectively
the question of abandoned
sites.
But as we review the circum-
stances as they are now being
revealed, we find that the ques-
tion is not so much one of
authority, legislative or other-
wise. The States have suffi-
cient authority under their
police powers to address the
situation.
Instead, the question is find-
ing the resources to provide a
remedy. Let me use Love Canal
in New York as an example.
When the Agency studied that
situation, through contract, we
spent approximately $100,000.
The report gave a factual basis
for the concern that many have
come to express regarding Love
Canal. As a result of this
widespread concern, the Presi-
dent and the New York Gov-
ernor declared an emergency
and resources were made avail-
able on an ad hoc basis. This
included $2 million in Federal
disaster assistance, $4 million
in EPA assistance, and $4 mil-
lion from the State of New York
to remedy this problem.
But that $10 million may be
less than a quarter of the re-
sources necessary to provide a
real remedy for the Love Canal
situation. This shows how great
the financial needs are in such
cases either at the Federal or
State level.
There is just not enough
money. So we are looking at
various proposals to generate
sufficient funds, much more
than we are looking for new
program authority.
Will you ask Congress
to authorize such
resources?
Yes. In the past there have been
proposals to create contractual
funds to deal with such prob-
lems as toxic spills and oil
spills. Such funds would be
managed more than likely at
the Federal level or through
some quasi-private type organi-
zation. We expect to make some
similar proposals, asking Con-
gress to create some pooling
arrangements for funds to cover
not only remedies and liabilities
for abandoned sites, but some
of the other costs that occur in
managing hazardous and toxic
materials.
How is the President's
new economic policy rel-
ative to reduced spending
by the Federal Govern-
ment going to affect the
various hazardous waste
schedules?
Our expectation now is that the
President's economic policy
will not influence, to any great
degree, the regulatory program
we are creating. I say this be-
cause our regulatory concept
does not require direct Federal
contribution of dollars. It is
premised on putting in place
standards and norms. In turn,
the private sector would fill in
the market created by the EPA
program. The private sector
would provide such resources
as facilities to receive hazard-
ous wastes for transport, proc-
essing, or disposal. If we are
right, there wouldn't be a need
for Federal or other resources.
There is still a question as to
whether the private sector can
respond to provide adequate
facilities to receive and manage
hazardous waste. But the prem-
ise of our program and of the
law is that the private sector
can fill this need.
In another aspect, there will
be economic effects from these
regulations and requirements.
Such impacts will fall unevenly
in the manufacturing sector.
There are cerain types of facil-
ities, certain types of waste
sources, on whom the burden
falls much more heavily than
others. It is not so much due to
discrimination by the regula-
tions; it is simply a function of a
firm's own economic situation.
So there will be some impact
and it will be considerable in
some sectors. We need to re-
view comments and informa-
tion during our current rule-
making period very carefully to
identify where that economic
impact is going to be greatest
and whether or not certain ad-
justments can be made to mini-
mize any unnecessary impacts.
It's been charged that
EPA knew for years of
chemical contamination
leaching from an industry
dump site in Toone, Tenn.
Would you comment on
EPA's role in this case?
Yes. We were witnesses at a
recent hearing by a subcom-
mittee of the House Interstate
and Foreign Commerce Com-
mittee. Many charges were
made about EPA's performance
in the area of protection of
public health and welfare from
the results of various types of
hazardous waste dumping. As
I pointed out during these hear-
ings, the Agency has not been
This interview was conducted
by John Heritage. Assistant
Editor, EPA Journal.
Assistant Administrator
Thomas C. Jorling makes a
point at the press conference
announcing the proposed haz-
ardous wnste regulations, while
Administrator Costle looks on.
FEBRUARY 1979
-------
as aggressive as it should
be in certain situations. But
against that statement, we also
have to balance the fact that
we have very few resources to
do anything and we certainly
have been focusing our program
and its performance on getting
a regulatory structure in place.
In the Tennessee case spe-
cifically, imputing knowledge
to the Agency is always a hard
thing to assess. There were
many Federal agencies such as
the U.S. Geological Survey and
EPA, as well as officials of State
and local governments, who
beginning in the early 1 970's
were aware of the dimensions
of the disposal practices of the
Velsicol Chemical Corp. at
Toone.
There were very serious
questions as to whether or not
the dumping of Velsicol's pes-
ticide residuals was causing
any contamination of ground-
water. The first scientic report,
by the Geological Survey, indi-
cated that it was not and that
if it were, the slope of the
groundwater movement was
away from the areas where
people were drawing their
water.
Subsequently, families draw-
ing water out of private wells
in the area began to complain
of the quality or taste and noti-
fied Tennessee officials. (Those
wells aren't under the regula-
tory influence of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act administered by
EPA.) Tennessee performed
tests on that water and con-
cluded that it was safe. In
retrospect, the reason that they
did was that they sampled the
water for pathogens, not for
organic chemicals.
When the water was sampled
last summer and fall for organic
composition, it had extremely
high levels of many synthetic,
organic compounds, many of
which are known carcinogens
and acutely toxic.
In the end, while EPA's per-
formance was not as good as
we would like, it was better than
any of the other agencies in-
volved. Federal, State, or local.
The thing that was distressing
to me is that the levels of gov-
ernment which had clear au-
thority, levels closest to the
people, local and State govern-
ments, were the most unre-
sponsive
The EPA has acted as a
catalyst to solve the problem
in Toone and I think after the
passage of some time, and as
people reflect on the situation,
EPA will be the only Agency to
which credit is due.
Are any parts of the haz-
ardous waste problem
entirely out of EPA's con-
trol? For example, do
States have the authority
in some key areas?
Under our Federal system, the
States have the residual police
power. Whenever the Federal
Government acts, it is under
authority granted by Congress
and that authority is circum-
scribed by the Constitution. The
police powers of the States are
much more readily available
than the authority under Federal
legislation.
But the question is not so
much the authority, as I men-
tioned earlier. It is in the ability
of the government to provide
enough resources to create safe
situations, which prevent the
release of these dangerous
materials into the environment,
whatever pathway they are
taking.
The greatest difficulty that
we have to face as government.
State and Federal, is to deal
with sites that were once owned
by a manufacturer or someone
engaged in the business of
chemical disposal. Such a site
has now changed hands and
may either be owned by an
innocent person, such as a
farmer, or a public body, such
as a town government or chari-
table organization. Such owners
don't have the resources to
remedy the problem.
Ultimately, such sites can
only be dealt with if we develop
a mechanism to create a pool
of funds, perhaps with some
pay-back provisions, so that
the communities. States, and
Federal Government have re-
sources to provide responses.
Would you say that be-
cause of lack of at-
tention, the management
of hazardous wastes is
now at the crisis point in
terms of public dangers
they pose and society's
ability to deal with them?
I would rather choose a differ-
ent word than crisis. I would
say that it is compelling that we
act regarding both present and
future activities, but also to
remedy some of the problems
from the past.
We are seeing here another
manifestation of the chemical
revolution that began at the end
of World War II. If you look
at chemical production around
that time, and compare it to
the present, you see exponen-
tial growth. Those chemicals
are moving through the com-
mercial system and they are
winding up in various places
and are often improperly man-
aged. As a result, we have
releases in the air and water
and onto the land.
It is necessary to implement
our regulatory programs to
close the cycle and stop the
releases into the environment.
It is a very urgent problem. It is
not a crisis in the sense that
unless singular action is taken
today, very serious results will
occur. We do have very serious
problems but they are more
chronic than acute.
But to show the tremendous
growth in the production of
chemicals (and I'm sure the
Journal has reported on this), *
just consider chlorobenzene.
' See EPA Journal, Sept. 1978,
"Toxics."
One half to one billion pounds
a year of this compound are
now manufactured. It is a base
chemical for many different in-
dustrial processes and prod-
ucts. It moves very widely
through the society and then
winds up either disposed of in
landfills or released in air or
water emissions. Because of
this and other comparable
chemicals, we have a very sub-
stantial management and
regulatory job in front of us.
Does this explain why the
U.S. is seemingly deluged
with dangerous wastes?
Is it partly due to some
long run trends in con-
sumer demands and in-
dustry practices?
Certainly the use of chemicals
in our society is a marketplace
phenomenon. The chemical in-
dustry over the last several
years has been the most inno-
vative sector in our economy
and therefore it is generating
new and larger amounts of
chemicals each year. So the
industry is responding. The fact
that we must deal with is that
these chemicals are being pro-
duced in large volumes and
being used in large volumes and
they have a tendency to be
released into the environment
in large volumes.
There is a trend I would like
to see regarding the Nation's
wastes. I would like to see us
move away from the archaic
notion that you can take a re-
source out of the earth, use it,
and replace it or store it back
into the environment in what-
ever form it happens to occur
after use. That is a fundamen-
tally unsound idea.
We hope our regulatory
program in clean air, clean
water, ard hazardous waste
management will lead to a
different notion of the use of
chemicals in our society and
ultimately in all societies.
Namely, we need carefully
managed use so chemicals are
not lost from custody. We need
production methods that re-
cycle the chemical, or contain
EPA JOURNAL
-------
A Hopeful Sign
State/Federal
Consultation
In Solid and Hazardous
Waste Regulatory
Development
By Edwin Edwards
Governor, State of
Louisiana, and Chair-
man, National Gover-
nors' Association Sub-
committee on Waste
Management
The enactment of the Re-
source Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) may have
established a new trend in the
implementation and adminis-
tration of Federal environmental
legislation. Previously, the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control
Act and the Clean Air Act set
forth national standards to con-
trol water effluents and air
emission levels. From the
States' perspective, RCRA is a
landmark in that the statute
• establishes a Federal/
State partnership in developing
rules, regulations and guide-
lines in a consultative versus
advisory role;
• emphasizes the States'
continuing primacy in solid
waste management, while al-
lowing a State's solid waste
management program to be
based on minimum Federal
criteria for solid waste disposal
facilities, yet maintains the in-
tegrity of the State's permit and
enforcement programs; and
• provides for authorization
of the State's hazardous waste
management program in lieu of
the Federal program if it is con-
sistent and equivalent to Fed-
erally established standards—
a distinctly different approach
than State assumption of the
Federal program.
In these respects, RCRA is
consistent with long-standing
policy positions of the National
Governors' Association. Shortly
after RCRA's enactment, there-
fore, Governor Julian M. Carroll
as chairman of the Associa-
tion's Committee on Natural
Resources and Environmental
Management, called for the es-
tablishment of the Subcom-
mittee on Waste Management
to facilitate consultation by the
States in RCRA's implementa-
tion, as well as the exchange
of technical assistance and
information among the States.
The Subcommittee under-
took a two-year effort to accom-
plish this program. As a
functioning arm of the associa-
tion, it is perhaps unique in two
respects: its membership and
responsibilities. The Subcom-
mittee is presently comprised
of twenty-three governors, and
is served by four technical task
forces composed of over sixty
State technical and administra-
tive officials involved with
RCRA's implementation. In
addition, several work groups
were established to focus on
specific technical questions
related to Subtitle C and D
programs under RCRA.
We believe that the States
possess great resources of
technical and administrative
expertise in the fields of solid
and hazardous waste manage-
ment. The principal charges of
the Subcommittee on Waste
Management have been (1) to
analyze and bring to the atten-
tion of the governors policy
issues concerned with RCRA's
appropriate implementation;
(2) to respond to and comment
upon Federal initiatives in de-
velopment of rules, regulations
and guidelines; and (3) to ini-
tiate recommendations to EPA
and other interested Federal
agencies.
We have also recognized the
diversities among the States,
which call for considerable flex-
ibility in the implementation of
RCRA. We have consistently
recommended the establish-
ment of performance standards
as necessary to meet the dif-
ferences in climate, geology.
population density, and other
variables among the States.
EPA's response to and sup-
port of the consultative process
is commendable and should be
continued. I believe that the
degree of open communications
between the States and EPA in
the critical period of RCRA's
regulatory implementation far
exceeds any similar efforts in
the past. This does not mean
that the States and EPA are al-
ways in agreement. On the con-
trary, there has been a free and
healthy debate about many
issues which, if it has not al-
ways led to agreement, serves
to clarify issues in particular
need of further study.
Under Subtitle D, EPA is
charged with publishing a list
of open dumps, as defined un-
der the law. We believe that
existing State regulatory pro-
grams provide a solid founda-
tion for necessary compliance
and enforcement activities.
Through the State consultative
process, a method to develop
the list was outlined. A State
can agree to conduct the open
dump inventory and evaluate
the sites in accordance with
the criteria for classification of
solid waste facilities. Section
4004. The Subcommittee con-
curs with the Federal assistance
plan whereby conduct of the
inventory would be Federally
funded.
We emphasize, however, that
State follow-up to the inventory
will require significant State
commitment of fiscal and tech-
nical resources in addition to
the on-going State solid waste
program costs. Based on the
difference between authorized
funding levels for Subtitle D
and the actual FY 78 and FY 79
appropriations, the States can
clearly discern the impacts on
State allocations for this effort.
The reason is simple: major
costs relate, not to the inven-
tory per se. but to the follow-
on responsibilities of the States
for upgrading or closing un-
satisfactory disposal facilities.
In response to this point
EPA has, with the States' sup-
port, established a process
through which the State will
"prioritize" the class of facil-
ities to be inventoried. Aban-
doned sites may or may not
be included, based upon the
State's priorities and recogni-
tion by the State that, if the site
is listed, the State must assure
its closing or upgrading in ac-
cordance with Federal criteria
in order to achieve approval
of the State solid waste plan
under Section 4002. In phasing
the inventory and the regula-
tory follow-up activities, the
State will be attentive to the
needs of communities and in-
dustries for available and ac-
ceptable disposal alternatives.
This is an example of how a
complex issue, involving con-
sideration of procedures man-
dated by the Act in the context
of our need to allocate limited
resources most effectively, can
benefit from mutual analysis at
an early stage.
The Subcommittee has advo-
cated maximum use of State
standards to the degree that
they are substantially equiva-
lent to the Federal criteria to
be set forth under Section
FEBRUARY 1979
9
-------
4004. However, the develop-
ment of a procedure for the
application of each criterion
and each step in the regulatory
process is critical. Our work
group on the application of the
criteria, the agency, and its
contractors are working closely
toward the development of
these procedures. In addition,
we must work closely to deter-
mine technical assistance and
training program needs. All of
this, we agree, must result in
an approach that is cost-effec-
tive and is technically and
administratively sound.
As chairman of the Subcom-
mittee and governor of a State
in which hazardous waste leg-
islation has recently been en-
acted, I am acutely aware of
the constraints placed on those
States attempting to initiate
hazardous waste programs and
move toward authorization un-
der Section 3006 that have
been caused by EPA's failure
to meet Congressionally man-
dated deadlines.
We understand the complex-
ity of EPA's responsibilities and
feel that the delay may have
been helpful to the overall de-
velopment of regulations under
Subtitle C, especially the 3001
regulations. If the only alterna-
tive is between hasty but bad
regulations, or late but sound
regulations, we must support
the latter.
But I must urge the Agency
to meet its own proposed dead-
lines with appropriate and
workable regulations, so that
we can all get about our busi-
ness. In the meantime, my own
State, like others, is moving
forward. We hope to implement
our own Act 334, the Louisiana
Hazardous Waste Act of 1 978,
in a useful and effective way
during this year, and feel that
we can make considerable
progress even without the
Federal regulations.
The States' interests and
initiatives were evident during
the International Conference on
Hazardous Materials Manage-
ment co-sponsored by the Na-
tional Governors' Association
and the State of Michigan. De-
cember 4-5. 1978. Iconcurwith
my colleague, Governor Wil-
liam G. Milliken, that the States
must address the issues of sit-
ing hazardous waste and solid
waste disposal facilities, and
develop interstate cooperation
in tracking and managing haz-
ardous wastes. Further, I can
affirm the States' responsibil-
ities to support and work
toward appropriate and effec-
tive implementation of Sub-
title C and D. The States,
through the National Gover-
nors' Association, will con-
tinue to propose to the agency
initiatives, policies, and pro-
grams for this purpose.
In closing, I note that the
upcoming fiscal year will cer-
tainly require all governmental
agencies to scrutinize regula-
tory programs—and, probably,
especially environmental re-
quirements—to evaluate spe-
cific and combined impacts
placed upon the business and
industrial communities, and to
look for problem-solving man-
agement approaches based on
well-defined priorities and
allocations of resources.
These steps should encour-
age and lend support to Fed-
eral/State cooperation and
consultation processes not
unlike, I believe, the processes
the States and EPA have been
mutually exploring in the
implementation of RCRA. D
A Look
Ahead
Interview with Stetfen
W. Plehn, Deputy
Assistant Adminis-
trator for Solid Waste
How soon will the haz-
ardous waste regulatory
program be in operation?
The regulatory program in-
cludes seven separate regula-
tions. Five of these regulations
have now been proposed and
the other two will be proposed
very shortly. We have ahead of
us a process of receiving com-
ments from the public on these
regulations, analyzing those
comments, and coming to final
decisions about shaping the
program for final promulgation.
Our best estimate as to when
we might promulgate this pro-
gram is December, 1979. The
law provides that the program
take full effect six months after
promulgation. That would mean
that the program will take
effect in May or June, 1980.
I've heard that the regu-
lations are extremely vol-
uminous. Is that correct?
That's correct.
Is there no way around
that?
It's an extremely complicated
and complex program. We must
provide rules for industries and
others producing wastes. We
have to establish rules and
standards for storage, treat-
ment, and disposal facilities.
We have to determine how per-
mits will be issued and how to
establish rules under which
States will seek assumption of
the program. Given the fact that
this is a new policy area, I think
that it's likely the regulations
will be rather involved and
complex.
What do you anticipate
will be the economic im-
pact of these regulations?
We have studied 1 7 manufac-
turing sectors quite intensively.
Our best estimate of the cost for
those industries is approximate-
ly $750 million a year. To put
that into perspective, that
amount represents about a third
of one percent of the gross sales
of those industrial sectors.
What is happening now
at Love Canal?
With State and Federal money,
the State is constructing drain-
age ditches on both sides of the
disposal site so as to lower the
10
EPAJOURNAL
-------
water table and draw off many
of the chemicals that had in-
vaded the basements of the
houses on each side of the
canal.
In your opinion, are there
any other Love Canals
around the country?
We have no hard data on that
question, but all evidence indi-
cates that there probably are
several hundred other sites
where chemicals and other
hazardous wastes have been
disposed of improperly.
What can be done to pre-
vent environmental and
public health disasters
over the period until new
regulations become final?
Several things. First, EPA will
be pursuing, with the States, an
aggressive enforcement posture
over this period to prevent cases
of imminent hazard to public
health and the environment.
Second, a number of States
have operational hazardous
waste programs, which will be
in effect over that period. Third,
we think that the existence of
our proposed standards for
storage, treatment, and disposal
facilities will provide a measur-
ing rod against which existing
hazardous waste facilities can
be evaluated.
What is EPA doing now
about abandoned sites?
The problem of abandoned sites
was not really anticipated in the
enactment of the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act.
The only tool that the Act pro-
vides us is the imminent hazard
authority, and that tool can only
be used if there is a third party,
which is responsible for the site,
and that third party is solvent.
We are working on legislative
proposals to the Congress that
can provide us with additional
tools and resources to deal with
the abandoned site problem.
Is EPA doing an inventory
of abandoned sites?
There are three activities under
way by EPA and the States,
which together should move us
in the direction of developing
an inventory of abandoned
sites. First, we have encouraged
the States to use a portion of
our hazardous waste grants,
and a number of States are con-
ducting inventories with those
funds. Second, we expect that
the inventory of open dumps
under Section 4004 of the Act
will identify additional aban-
doned sites. Finally, under the
Safe Water Drinking Act, the
States are conducting a $5
million assessment of indus-
trial pits, ponds, and lagoons.
What can citizens do
about hazardous wastes?
As with other environmental
problems, citizens can become
most effective by becoming in-
volved. First, they can learn
more about the hazardous waste
problem. Second, they can join
with environmental groups or
other organizations that are
concerned about the problem.
Third, they can actively insist
on safe management of these
wastes.
When a proposal is made
to locate a chemical waste
landfill in a community,
and the residents don't
like it, what can they do?
Under the Act there is a very
strong requirement for public
participation in all activities.
That will help ensure that citi-
zens have an opportunity to
make their views known. Ob-
viously, if we are to be suc-
cessful in managing hazard-
ous wastes, we will need sites
to store or treat these wastes
safely. Our goal is to earn the
confidence of the public that our
standards and our enforcement
program will ensure that such
facilities can be sited and
operated safely.
Are there other methods
of disposing of these
wastes that are safer
or better?
Oh yes. We believe that land
disposal of hazardous wastes is
the last resort. We prefer—and
believe our program will encour-
age—process changes so that
wastes are not created in the
first instance; reuse and re-
covery of waste, so that wastes
are used as a raw material;
and treatment approaches, such
as incineration or detoxification.
to remove the hazardous quality
of the wastes.
So in some respect, there
might be a direct link be-
tween hazardous waste
regulations and increased
resource recovery.
That's correct. Once industry is
faced with the full costs of
adequately disposing of these
wastes, we believe that a va-
riety of opportunities for reuse
and/or recovery will open up.
Can you predict the num-
ber of States which will
be running their own haz-
ardous waste program
when EPA regulations
become effective?
Our best current estimate is that
41 States will assume respon-
sibility for this program.
What is the procedure for
making input to the pro-
posed regulations?
We have scheduled hearings in
all parts of the country on all
regulations. Citizens can learn
of the dates and times by con-
tacting the Office of Solid Waste
or one of our Regional Offices.
We welcome citizen participa-
tion in these hearings.
These sources will also
have copies of the pro-
posed regulations?
Yes, they will.
What do you see as the
most difficult problem
for controlling hazardous
wastes?
We believe the most difficult
long-term problem will be ob-
taining sites for the proper man-
agement of these wastes. Most
individuals in this country carry
two ideas in their minds simul-
taneously; on the one hand,
they are insistent that these
wastes be managed safely; on
the other hand, they tend to be
opposed to the siting of hazard-
ous wastes in their communi-
ties. If the new Act is to be a
success, citizens will have to
accept the fact that since we all
benefit from the production of
our economy, we must accept
the need for sites at which
wastes can be managed safely.
What is EPA's position
on State-approved dis-
posal sites that are closed
by local jurisdictions?
Such as the site at Wil-
sonville. III?
EPA intervened in that partic-
uar case. We analyzed the site
with reference to our polychlor-
inated biphenyls (PCB's) dis-
posal regulations. We found it
was a safe and satisfactory dis-
posal site. We believe hazard-
ous wastes can be handled
safely at carefully designed and
managed facilities, and we can-
not let our fears blind us to the
need for such sites.
How is regulation of haz-
ardous wastes related to
EPA's other pollution
control programs?
Our programs in air pollution
and water pollution are con-
cerned with removing toxic
materials before they enter the
environment. Once these mate-
rials are removed, we must find
safe ways of containing or
destroying them, and that is
EPA's responsibility, under the
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act.
Is there any further mes-
sage that you would like
to give the public on the
hazardous waste program?
I think one important point is to
recognize that we will not be
able to change hazardous waste
management practices over-
night. The problem is large—
some 275,000 generators of
hazardous wastes will be in-
volved. Some 30,000 per-
mits will have to be issued for
storage, treatment, and disposal
facilities. A national hazardous
waste regulatory program, as
required by the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act, is
an extremely complicated, com-
plex, and crucial environmental
and health matter, which deals
with 10 to 1 5 percent of our
annual production of 344 mil-
lion tons of industrial wastes.
The public is coming to under-
stand the critical need for safely
managing these wastes. That's
essential for success. D
This interview was conducted
by Charles Pierce, Editor,
EPA Journal.
FEBRUARY 1979
11
-------
Hazardous Waste Fact Sheet
Quantities of Hazardous Wastes
EPA estimates that 10 to 15 percent of the
annual production of about 344 million
metric tons (wet) of industrial waste is
hazardous. Quantities of hazardous waste
are expected to increase by 3 percent
annually.
EPA estimates that 90 percent of hazardous
waste is managed by practices that will not
meet new Federal standards.
Major hazardous waste generators, among
17 industries EPA has studied in detail, are:
Million Metric Tons (Wet Basis)
(1977 Estimates)
Organic Chemicals 11.7
Primary Metals 9.0
Electroplating 4.1
Inorganic Chemicals 4.0
Textiles 1.9
Petroleum Refining 1.8
Rubber & Plastics 1.0
Misc. (7 Sectors) 1.0
Federal Regulations
Seven sets of regulations and guidelines
have been proposed and/or are being de-
veloped by EPA under Subtitle C of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act:
Total 34.5
70 to 80 percent of these industries' haz-
ardous waste is disposed of on the genera-
tor's property:
• 80 percent is disposed of in nonsecure
ponds, lagoons, or landfills
• 10 percent is incinerated without
proper controls
• 10 percent is managed acceptably as
compared to proposed Federal stand-
ards, i.e., by controlled incineration,
secure landfills, and recovery
About 60 percent of hazardous waste is in
the form of liquid or sludge.
Ten States generate 65 percent of all haz-
ardous waste. The States are: Texas, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Michigan,
Indiana, Illinois. Tennessee, West Virginia,
California.
Subtitle Title of
Section Regulation
3001 Identification and
Listing of Hazard-
ous Waste
3002 Standards Appli-
cable to Generators
of Hazardous
Waste1
3003 Standards Appli-
cable to Transport-
ers of Hazardous
Waste1
3004 Standards Appli-
cable to Hazardous
Waste Facilities
3005 Permits for Treat-
ment, Storage or
Disposal of Hazard-
ous Waste2
3006 Guidelines for De-
velopment of State
Hazardous Waste
Programs-
3010 Notification System
Federal
Register
December
1978
December
1978
April
1978
December
1978
February
1979
(tentative)
February
1978 (to
be repro-
posed in
February
1979
(tentative)
July 1978
Control via manifests and reporting is the
keystone of the program; only sites with
permits may treat, store, or dispose of
hazardous waste.
The 17 industries EPA has studied in detail
now spend $ 155 million annually for haz-
ardous waste management; this will in-
crease to an estimated $750 million a year
under proposed regulations, according to
EPA estimates. Cost of proper hazardous
waste management will be about 0.28 per-
cent of annual value of production (approx-
imately $267 billion) for the 17 industries.
1 The Department of Transportation also
proposed regulations pursuant to the Haz-
ardous Materials Transportation Act per-
taining to transportation of hazardous
waste, which were published in the Fed-
eral Register. May 25. 1978.
- Sections 3005 and 3006 will be inte-
grated with proposed rules under the Clean
Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act.
State Programs
• EPA anticipates that 41 States will apply
for "interim authorization," which allows
States to operate the program for a
period of 2 years after promulgation
while upgrading their programs.
• Within 2 years of promulgation. States
must apply for and secure "full authori-
zation." The three criteria for "full au-
thorization" are: (1) equivalence to
Federal program; (2) consistency with
other State and Federal programs; and
(3) adequacy of enforcement.
• EPA must operate a program in any State
that does not choose to develop its own
hazardous waste program or does not
gain authorization for an existing
program.
• FY 79 grants specifically for hazardous
waste program development total $15
million. The President's FY 80 budget
for this program requests $18.4
million. Q
How Damage Occurs
Major routes for damage are:
(1) direct contact with toxic wastes
(2) fire and explosions
(3) groundwater contamination via
leachate
(4) surface water contamination via runoff
or overflow
(5) air pollution via open burning, evapora-
tion, and wind erosion
(6) poison via the food chain
(bioaccumulation)
EPA has documented over 400 cases of
damage to health or the environment due to
improper hazardous waste management.
12
EPAJOURNAL
-------
WASTE
ALERT!
By Carol S. Lawson
A major program to inform the public
about solid and hazardous wastes
and to involve citizens in planning and
decision-making at the local and State
levels has been launched by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
The program, titled Waste A /erf/, will
extend over the next several years and will
involve citizens in all 50 Stales.
EPA is being helped in the task by four
nationally known organizations: The Amer-
ican Public Health Association, the Envi-
ronmental Action Foundation, the League
of Women Voters Education Fund, and the
National Wildlife Federation. Under grants
from the Agency, they will be holding con-
ferences, workshops, and training sessions
across the country to help achieve the ob-
jectives of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA).
Organized Effort
From the time of the original so lid waste
legislation in 1965, EPA's Office of Solid
Waste and its predecessors have devoted
substantial effort and resources to informa-
tion programs directed to technical audi-
ences and the genera I public. Since 1972
these efforts have included grants to organ-
izations such as civic, scientific, environ-
mental, and consumer groups and labor
unions for educational activities suited to
their own constituencies and solid waste
problems. The objective is to help citizens
develop understanding of the issues in-
volved in implementing the solid waste
legislation and thereby participate in local,
State, and Federal decision-making.
To support the work technically as well
as financially, the Office of Solid Waste
(OSW)has provided grantees with data,
references to research resources, EPA
publications, and other information on solid
and hazardous waste problems facing
States and communities.
Needed: A Broader Program
But there are not enough people yet who
understand the issues and care enough to
become active in deciding them. Increasing
incidents of environmental damage and
imminent public health hazards, resulting
from decades of careless or ignorant dis-
posal of wastes, have alarmed many citi-
zens and heightened their fears of proxim-
ity to any waste facilities. The public's fear
reflects a need for more public education
work by OSW grantees. People must have
reliable information on how to manage
wastes better in their regions, counties,
cities, and industries. They need to know
how the provisions of RCRA are intended
to deal with the problems of solid and haz-
ardous wastes. The public also needs to be
engaged in supporting the new hazardous
waste and land disposal regulations on a
national basis. They need to see and sup-
port the opportunities in the regulatory
programs for resource reuse or recycling.
As OSW was planning for the next several
years, its question was: How could we
make the strongest contribution to the pub-
lic's need for information, making the best
use of our budget for information activ-
ities?
Fortunately, EPA has the support of a
number of national organizations that have
become highly knowledgeable about the
problems, key issues, and legislation affect-
ing hazardous and solid waste management
at all levels. This knowledge is the result of
their work as grantees carrying out the pub-
lic education programs described above.
The experienced staff members of the
various organizations have the leverage of
many volunteer members and interested
citizens to disseminate technical and pub-
lic information on a national scale. They
can also feed back information on what the
local and regional problems are. Many
solid and hazardous problems are related;
one community that is solving its problems
can help another with similar difficulties
when it joins forces with the technical
specialists.
Waste Alert!
Faced with OSW's needs under the law to
reach audiences on a national scale, a
group of these organizations, representing
as broad a spectrum of the public as can be
reached within resource limits, have joined
in concerted action.
With the American Public Health Asso-
ciation as coordinator, the Environmental
Action Foundation and the National Wild-
life Federation will be conducting three-
day conferences across the country on
issues related to the problems of aban-
doned waste sites, siting of new facilities,
implementing the RCRA regulations and
other provisions, and interrelated waste
management information and data. The
three organizations' efforts will be sup-
ported by communications activities to be
carried out by the League of Women Voters
Education Fund. (The Izaac Walton League
of America and the Technical Information
Project will serve as advisors). Ten re-
gional conferences in two years will focus
on identifying and training citizen leaders
and reaching appropriate communications
media; developing work plans for imple-
menting RCRA at the State level; planning
for State conferences; and identifying State
action groups and assisting them, if they
wish, in holding State conferences. Local
community workshops are planned for the
third and fourth years.
Goals for this program—Waste A /erf/-
are to: (a) develop a base of informed citi-
zens who understand solid and hazardous
waste issues as related to the objectives of
RCRA; (b) encourage citizen involvement
in State planning for implementation of
RCRA; (c) recruit citizen involvement in
decision making for municipal and hazard-
ous waste management at the local levels.
These goals are to be pursued in as many
States and communities as possible over a
four-year period.
Waste A lert is a key activity in an
Agency-wide hazardous waste information
program, headed by Administrator Costle,
who has asked the EPA Regional Adminis-
trators and the Office of Public Awareness
to focus on this effort. OPA is giving us
the full support of its Headquarters and
Regional programs, as witnessed by this
special issue of the EPA Journal. OPA is
also enlisting the network of State environ-
mental officers in this cooperative effort.
Steffen Plehn, EPA's Deputy Assistant
Administrator for solid waste has said,
"The public must understand what hazard-
ous waste is, and how much is produced in
this country. They must accept that there's
going to be continued production of haz-
ardous wastes. They must accept the idea
that something must be done with wastes."
We hope that all public participation lead-
ers can become involved early in this pro-
gram. We will be helping citizens to en-
courage State and local planning for the
new hazardous waste regulatory programs,
the new land disposal guidelines, and for
the inventory of dumps required by RCRA.
Join the WASTE ALERT program! We need
your help in broadening the public's under-
standing of the problems related to waste
management, and the opportunities therein
for resource reuse. Please contact the
American Public Health Association (Mark
Murray), the Environmental Action Foun-
dation (Liz Tennant), the League of Women
Voters Education Fund (Scott Nessa), the
National Wildlife Federation (Sandy Jera-
beck), or the Environmental Protection
Agency (Charles Rogers or Carol Lawson).
Help us make this a truly national public
information program on these important
issues. D
Carol Lawson is the public information
officer for the Office of Solid Waste.
FEBRUARY 1979
13
-------
A Death in
Louisiana
By Peyton Davis
Diinnn;f!(l drums were dumped into this
open I,-in(Ifill.
Repairs being made to the bridge at Lou-
isiana death Rite after angry citizens burned
it to prevent trucks front entering the haz-
ardous waste dumping ground.
The dangers of hazardous waste disposal
were tragically dramatized when an
accident occurred on July 25, 1978, at a
site in Iberville Parish, Louisiana, operated
by a private concern.
In the early hours of the morning, Kirtley
Jackson, a 1 9-year-old truck driver, died
while he was discharging waste from his
truck into an open pit. The coroner's report
showed he died from inhaling toxic fumes
caused by a reaction of mixing liquid
wastes in the open pit.
The problem arose because toxic wastes
from dozens of industries in Louisiana,
Texas, and elsewhere were being dumped
indiscriminately with neither safety equip-
ment, nor orderly procedures in effect at
the facility. Two eyewitnesses, in the
closed cab of another truck several yards
away, were able to furnish details of the
death.
No one is likely to wander accidentally
into this swampy rural area of south
Louisiana where the facility was located.
Until the tragedy occurred, little attention
was paid to the fact that the site was open
24 hours a day with a minimum staff—or
thai the area was surrounded by a river,
bayou, canal, and fishing lake and had a
history of flooding. In fact, high water
marks on trees were at or above the tops
of the open pits.
Davis is a Region 6 Public Information
Specialist
The State of Louisiana had issued a per-
mit for disposal of toxic wastes, but the
permit was for injection well disposal, not
dumping into open pits. The Louisiana
Department of Health and Natural Re-
sources has a small understaffed solid
waste section, and it had become impos-
sible for them to track and control the
dozens of waste sites throughout the State.
They were therefore unaware that this
facility had developed four huge open pits
for dumping of hazardous wastes.
After the death was reported by the news
media, the reaction of the citizens of Iber-
ville Parish was intense and emotional.
They wanted a speedy response to the
incident, and became enraged when State
environmental officials reported at a public
meeting that they could exercise little or
no effective jurisdiction in the matter.
Dissatisfied with what the officials pro-
posed to do, the local citizens took things
into their own hands by burning the bridge
that led to the site. Destroying the only
entrance to the facility proved an effective,
though illegal, way to stop the hazardous
waste dumping.
The situation had reached explosive
proportions by Aug. 1 when the Deputy
Sheriff, Ralph Stassi, contacted EPA's
Region 6 Enforcement attorney, Pat Hud-
son, with information on the death and a
request for EPA assistance.
An emergency planning meeting was
called for members of the Region 6 En-
forcement, Surveillance and Analysis
(S & A), and Air and Hazardous Materials
(A & H) Division. As a result, Myron
Knudson, Director of S&A, sent Inspector
Ed McHam to the site that same day. A
member of the Iberville Parish Sheriff's
department has credited Region 6's quick
response with helping avoid violence and
possible bloodshed in the community.
McHam began his inspection August 1,
and soon was joined by Michael Talmount
of OSHA's Baton Rouge Office and Jim
Sales of the Region 6 A&H Division. On
August 4, local officials and McHam were
denied entrance to the facility. A State
court refused to issue a search warrant as
requested by local officials to continue
their investigation of the death.
With this double setback, EPA decided
to obtain a Federal search warrant from the
U.S. Magistrate in Baton Rouge. After
three days (and long nights) of work by
the Region 6 legal-technical team of Hud-
son, McHam, and Albert Hebert, as well as
assistant U.S. Attorney Stan Lamelle, a
warrant of entry and inspection was
obtained.
Because of the uncertainty of the situa-
tion, the U.S. Marshall's office accom-
panied Region 6 inspectors each day until
EPAJOURNAL
-------
E PA employee A Iben Hebert takes a sam-
ple from fin open waste pit for laboratory
analysis.
This is the waste pit where a young truck
driver was asphyxiated by chemical fumes
while dumping hazardous wastes.
the inspection was completed. Records
were copied, photographs and samples of
the toxic wastes were taken and sent to the
Region 6 laboratory in Houston, Texas.
Dr. William Langley and his laboratory
staff responded quickly and worked in-
tensively to complete the analysis and
reports.
On August 1 0, a coroner's inquest into
the death was held in Plaquernine. At the
inquest, the coroner was unable to obtain
two important log books from the site
officials. The EPA inspector and sheriff's
department also were unable to get the
logs. The logs contained such things as
records of the hazardous wastes, contrib-
uting industries, times of disposal etc., and
specifically a record of disposal activities
at the time of the youth's death at the site.
They were important not only legally but
also technically. After negotiations with
the legal representatives of the site, the
logs were released to Region 6.
Also on August 10, Hudson contacted
an official of the Louisiana Health and
Human Resources Department in New
Orleans, expressing EPA's desire to assist
the State in settling the situation. Hudson
explained that EPA would act under
the imminent hazard provisions of the
Resource, Conservation and Recovery Act,
as well as provisions of other statutes, but
that the Region 6 Enforcement Division
would prefer to support a State legal action.
Later, the State technical staff con-
sulted with their Office of General Counsel,
and as a result, the State decided to take
immediate Courtaction. Region 6 sup-
ported the State's decision by providing
both witnesses, and evidence. Assistant
District Attorney Houston Gascon, III, of
Plaquernine filed suit for the State.
On August 25, the 1 8th Judicial District
Court in Plaquernine ordered the site oper-
ators "to remove, clean, and eliminate all
existing health hazards . , . under the super-
vision and guidelines and regulations of
the Department of Health and Human Re-
sources . .. within 60 days." The Court
declined the State's request to require a
bond be posted and interim dates of prog-
ress were not set out in the Court Order.
As the 60-day period was passing, it be-
came apparent to the Region 6 staff that
very little progress was being made at the
siteandthatthe final date for "clean up"
would be missed.
The slow progress was discussed with
State officials in Baton Rouge on October
1 6, and immediate remedial action was
urged. The two agencies remained united
in dealing with the problem and at a subse-
quent meeting with the site operators in
Baton Rouge that same day, a commitment
was obtained from the company to clean
up "without further delay."
Simultaneously, Governor Edwin Ed-
wards issued a temporary ban on ali new
waste facilities in Louisiana and put his
personal support behind a comprehensive
plan to address hazardous waste prob-
lems in the State.
A coroner's jury determined that Jack-
son died of asphyxiation from hydrogen
sulfide poisoning, but many have worked
to see that his death was not in vain. The
situation now appears to be under control,
and there has been a dramatic change in
the attitude of Louisiana citizens towards
the dumping of hazardous wastes in their
state. What was apathetic acceptance has
turned to determination that these hazard-
ous materials will be handled as carefully
and safely as the state of the art allows.
Nevertheless, the question remains to
plague not only the citizens of Louisiana,
but also every citizen of this country. As
long as Americans enjoy the hazardous
products of an industrial age, we must
come to terms with how we are going to
dispose of them. D
FEBRUARY 1979
15
-------
STRONG NATIONWIDE REGULATION
By Dr. Charles Johnson
Technical Director
National Solid Wastes
Management Association
I—I azardous wastes have been produced
in America since the beginning of the
industrial era. They are being generated
today and will continue to be in the future.
Producers of these wastes include not
only industry but also individuals, hospi-
tals, schools, retail business establish-
ments, and even restaurants and gas
stations. Hazardous wastes are produced
by people in their day-to-day lives as they
provide the product and services needed
and expected by contemporary society.
To paraphrase Walt Kelly's well-known
comic strip character Pogo, "We have
found the source of the hazardous waste
and it is us." Every person in this country
should recognize his or her responsibility
for the existence of such wastes.
The intent of this article is to present
some thoughts on the subject from one seg-
ment of the private firms that specialize in
management of waste, particularly those
that we have come to know as hazardous.
Our member companies handle them
every day and have long recognized the
potential for harm through the improper
management of this type of material. That
is why the National Solid Wastes Manage-
ment Association labored vigorously in the
mid-Seventies for an effective national
regulatory program for hazardous wastes
control. That crusade led to enactment of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), particularly the Subtitle C
hazardous waste program. Our industry
remains committed to a strong program to
assure the environmentally safe disposal
of hazardous wastes.
Only in recent years has the full scope
and magnitude of hazardous wastes be-
come known. The most recent estimates by
EPA indicate that more than 35 million
tons are produced in the United States
every year, mostly by firms in the chemical,
petroleum, metals, or related industries.
Many of these industries have disposed of
their own wastes either on-site or at other
16
EPAJOURNAL
-------
captive facilities. Some industries rely in
total or in part on independent waste man-
agement service companies for disposal of
their wastes. Only recently did we learn,
thanks to the work of EPA, that over 75 per-
cent of the hazardous wastes are managed
at on-site or captive facilities.
However, there is clear evidence that the
independent waste management service
industry dealing with hazardous materials
is growing rapidly. According to a 1976
study done under contract for EPA, be-
tween 1971 and 1975 the number of haz-
ardous waste management service com-
panies increased from 76 to 95 and total
revenues for the industry more than
doubled from $46 million to $107 million.
The study, performed by Foster D. Snell,
Inc., estimated that with regulation, rev-
enues by the year 1983 would increase to
a range of $335 million to $350 mjllion
annually for the industry.
The basis for proper hazardous waste
management is strong nationwide regula-
tions. The need for careful hazardous
waste management has been documented
by a number of incidents of improper man-
agemejit. Wastes have been poured at
times into sewers, or streams, sprayed
along country roads, or abandoned in ware-
houses. Some of the cases of environmen-
tal insult, however, can be traced to per-
sons acting with the best intentions, such
as the solvent reprocessor whose market
disappears leaving him bankrupt with an
inventory of wastes.
Assuring proper management of hazard-
ous wastes is not simply a matter of sorting
out the bad guys from the good. This na-
tional problem will be resolved only by
strong and equitable regulations applicable
to all persons involved in the generation,
transportation, storage, treatment, and dis-
posal of these wastes.
Heretofore, regulations have been left to
the individual States. Some have elected to
promulgate regulations, while others have
ignored the problem. However, there is a
strong positive correlation between the
enactment of regulations and the establish-
ment of hazardous waste management fa-
cilities. The States that have good facilities
generally are those with good regulations.
Hazardous wastes can be managed with-
out damage to the environment. Evidence
that proper management of these wastes
will protect the environment is provided by
the facilities being operated today in com-
pliance with State regulations. Members of
the National Solid Wastes Management
Association operate more than 30 facilities
capable of disposing of hazardous wastes,
most of which are in States with strict regu-
lations. There is no history of environmen-
tal damage from any of these facilities.
Proper hazardous waste management is
a national concern requiring a nationwide
solution. The potential for environmental
damage from improper management of haz-
ardous wastes does not end at political
boundaries. There is no justification for reg-
ulations that would a How a waste to become
unregulated merely because it is or is not
transported across a State line. Likewise,
the performance criteria for facilities that
store, treat, or dispose of hazardous wastes
should be consistent from State to State.
RCRA does permit the States to admin-
ister their own hazardous wastes manage-
ment program provided the program is
"equfvalent" to the Federal program. EPA
is encouraging the States to administer
their own programs. Industry agrees with
this position for at least two reasons. First,
some States have developed effective pro-
grams. And second, individual States will
thus have the means to adopt operating
regulations to meet their peculiar needs,
for example, in regard to local geology and
climate. These should be designed to meet
uniform Federal performance requirements.
Interstate movements of hazardous
wastes should not be impeded. The waste
service industry has taken a very strong
position opposing waste import bans. Bans
make for bad wastes management. It is
economically and environmentally unsound
for every State to attempt to provide com-
plete self-sufficiency within its own bor-
ders. And yet this is what bans would en-
courage since it would be politically diffi-
cult for a State to continue to export its
wastes while refusing to accept others. Our
industry believes that free movement of
wastes across State lines must be allowed.
Each State in which hazardous wastes are
produced (and that includes all 50) must
be willing to accept within its borders facil-
ities to manage hazardous wastes. Most
such facilities serve a region beyond the
borders of the State in which they are
located. Thus, States will find that some of
the wastes produced within their borders
are exported for disposal while other
wastes are imported, the decisions being
based on economic and environmental
considerations. Off-site hazardous waste
management is an essential part of the
national program.
Many industries rely very heavily on
waste service facilities for disposal facil-
ities. The availability of this service indus-
try is especially important to smaller firms
that cannot afford to operate individual
waste disposal systems in compliance with
environmental requirements. Many of the
Nation's largest hazardous waste gener-
ators also use the service industry exten-
sively, including some that also have their
own in-house capabilities. They may use
the service facilities for wastes generated
in smaller quantities for which they cannot
justify on-site disposal. Also, more impor-
tantly, industrial plant sites are seldom
chosen on the basis of characteristics
needed for good waste disposal practices,
such as geology, hydrology, and local
climate. Therefore, industrial plants are
not always able to conduct sound waste
disposal operations on their own site.
Public awareness of and confidence in
sound hazardous waste management is
essential. The public is solidly behind the
concept of sound hazardous waste manage-
ment practices but the reaction by citizens
is one of nearly universal fear bordering on
hysteria whenever a facility is proposed in
their particular area. This fear is under-
standable if not justified. The general press,
EPA and others have seen the incidents of
unsound management practices as under-
scoring the critical need for a hazardous
waste regulatory program. But, in our
opinion, they also need to publicize the
successful facilities, which are part of the
solution, not the problem. Adverse public
reaction toward waste service companies
is especially perplexing since these facil-
ities have a history of good performance.
Adverse public reaction toward these firms
is often amplified because, in contrast with
manufacturers who dispose of wastes on-
site, this is the only business of the waste
service firm. Waste disposal often goes un-
noticed if performed by the manufacturer
on his own property.
The very name "hazardous wastes" does
little to inspire confidence or create sym-
pathy for facilities handling these special
wastes. And many of these wastes present
a persistent threat to the environment un-
less they are properly managed. Since the
alternatives for society are to accept facil-
ities where these wastes will be properly
managed or to endure the continued envi-
ronmental insults of indiscriminate or in-
adequate disposal, society owes a special
responsibility to protect those living in
proximity to disposal facilities. A tough
regulatory program is the first line of pro-
tection. Hopefully it alone will provide
adequate protection.
The waste management industry, how-
ever, thinks another measure is needed.
For more than a year, the National Solid
Wastes Management Association has been
developing the concept of a national liabil-
ity fund which would be available to pay
clean-up costs or compensate personal or
property damages caused by an unantici-
pated problem at a facility which had been
properly licensed and operated, following
closure of the site. The fund would be cre-
ated through a surcharge on disposal site
operators, with no cost to the government.
The public benefits from the products
whose production generates the wastes.
The public likewise must accept the need
for the existence of the facilities needed to
dispose of the wastes. But the public can
and should insist that every precaution be
taken to assure that these facilities are
safe.D
FEBRUARY 1979
17
-------
Update
A review of recent major
EPA activities and devel-
opments in the pollution
control program areas.
AIR
$50 Million for
Air Cleanup Plans
EPA Administrator
Douglas M. Costle and
Secretary of Transporta-
tion Brock Adams re-
cently announced that
$50 million is being re-
leased to urban areas to
aid them in developing
plans to control air pollu-
tion.
The funds will be used by
local agencies for plan-
ning strategies that in-
clude such measures as
mass transit improve-
ments, bus lanes, car
pools, staggered work
hours, and van pool pro-
grams. The planning
money was authorized in
the 1977 Clean Air Act
Amendments and in-
cluded in EPA's appro-
priations for fiscal year
1979.
Car Test
Methods
Changed
EPA has revised proce-
dures used to test proto-
type and assembly line
automobiles for compli-
ance withair pollution
emission standards.
The amended test proce-
dures, originally proposed
on October 21, 1977,
mean EPA could test
vehicles with certain tune-
up settings anywhere
within their adjustable
range. Currently, new
cars are certified as meet-
ing air pollution standards
with their tune-up adjust-
ments set according to
the manufacturers' speci-
fications.
"In revising the test pro-
cedures," said David
Hawkins, Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Air, Noise,
and Radiation, "we
should be able to reduce
the number of cars on
the road that are out-of-
tune or misadjusted and
therefore not meeting air
pollution standards."
The new procedures will
be phased in gradually in
1981 and 1982.
ENFORCEMB
EPA Team Formed
for Negotiations
EPA Deputy Administra-
tor Barbara Blum recently
announced the formation
of an EPA Negotiation
Team to work with Ohio
utilities in developing
alternative compliance
agreements. These agree-
ments would beaimed at
reducing the local eco-
nomic disruption and
unemployment that may
occur if Ohio utilities buy
coal outside the State to
meet air pollution stand-
ards.
In December, EPA an-
nounced a proposed de-
termination that signifi-
cant job losses among
coal miners and economic
disruption in their com-
munities will occur if cer-
tain Ohio utilities carry
out their plans to switch
to out-of-State low-suifur
coal for their fuel. After
public hearings and corn-
men t.thiscou Id leadto
action under the law re-
quiring utilities to use
locally or regionally avail-
able coal, together with
appropriate pollution con-
trols.
"However," Blum said,
"we would rather nego-
tiate alternative compli-
ance agreements with the
utilities and save mining
jobs through cooperation
rather than issuing or-
ders. That's why we have
formed the EPA Negotia-
tion Team."
Additive Sale
Turned Down
EPA said recently it must
deny Petro-Tex Chemical
Corp.'s request to sell a
new gasoline octane
booster due to insufficient
information. The com-
pound is Methyl Tertiary
Butyl Ether.
But EPA says it might be
able to approve a similar
request by Atlantic Rich-
field Company if addi-
tional information is pro-
vided. Both Atlantic Rich-
field and Petro-Tex have
requested a waiver under
the Clean Air Act to allow
marketing of the chemical
as a gasoline additive.
The current lack of data
on the Petro-Tex request
prevents EPA from asses-
sing the impact of the
chemical on auto emis-
sions, said Marvin Durn-
ing, EPA's Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Enforce-
ment.
PESTICIDES
Child Safety
Packaging
EPA plans to issue new
rules requiring special
child-resistant packaging
for the most toxic house-
hold pesticide products,
said Steven D. Jellinek,
Assistant Administrator
for Toxic Substances.
Pesticide manufacturers
will have up to two years
to change to the new
packaging.
Jellinek said the packag-
ing requirements will af-
fect the pesticide prod-
ucts that pose the greatest
hazard to children when
swallowed, inhaled, or
spilled in their eyes or on
their skin.
The EPA official also an-
nounced that 14 pesticide
ingredients used in about
1,000 mostly agricultural
products are being re-
stricted for use only by
trained and certified ap-
plicators. The ingredients
are carbofuran, chlorfen-
vinphos, clonitralid, diox-
athion, disulfoton, endo-
sulfan, ethoprop, fenami-
phos, fensulfothion, fon-
ofos, monocrotophos,
phorate, phosacetim, and
phosphamidon.
Jellinek also noted that
EPA is supporting a num-
ber of special investiga-
tions aimed at increasing
the Agency's ability to
predict and evaluate pes-
ticide risks to farmers,
farmworkers, and others
". . . who for a variety of
social and economic rea-
sons are among the least
likely to seek hospital or
emergency room treat-
ment following a pesti-
cide poisoning."
EPA JOURNAL
-------
SOLID WASTE TOXICS
WATER
AGENCYWIDE
Municipal
Solid Waste
EPA and the University
of Central Florida's Divi-
sion of Continuing Educa-
tion are sponsoring a
national research sympo-
sium on municipal solid
waste. The symposium
will be March 26-28 at
the Marriott Inn, Sand
Lake Road, Orlando, Fla.
Key concerns will be land
disposal and resource
recovery of municipal
solid waste. For further
information contact the
Division of Continuing
Education, University of
Central Florida, P.O. Box
25000, Orlando, Fla.
32816. Phone: 305-275-
2123.
Voluntary Standard
EPA and two other gov-
ernment agencies recently
seta voluntary standard
to control toxic lead and
cadmium metals leaching
from the lip and rim of
decorated drinking
glasses. The other agen-
cies were the Food and
Drug Administration and
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
The Standard says that
lead leached from car-
toons, drawings, or other
decorations on the lip
and rim of the glasses
can't exceed 50 parts per
miliion (ppm) and that
cadmium leached from
these decorations can't
exceed 3.5 ppm.
If industry does not com-
ply with the new standard
on a voluntary basis, the
agencies will consider the
need for further action.
Agency spokesmen saw
no evidence now that a
mandatory standard is
needed.
Small Business Aid
EPA has announced that
small businesses can now
apply for special loans at
the nearest Small Busi-
ness Administration office
to help ease any financial
impact to comply with the
Toxic Substances Control
Act.
"Small businessmen and
women should know that
financial aid is available
to meet Government regu-
lations," said Administra-
tor Douglas Costle, who
also heads the new Fed-
eral Regulatory Council to
help improve the process
of dealing with regula-
tions.
Small businesses can
apply directly to SBA for
these loans, rather than
through the local bank.
Long term repayment
loans are available at
6% percent interest. The
amount of money in the
program through Sept. 30,
1978, totals $100 mil-
lion.
Water Cleanup Guide
EPA recently published
the first guide for the lay
person on the 1977
Amendments to the Clean
Water Act. The legisla-
tion provides adjustments
—commonly referred to
as "mid-course correc-
tions"—to EPA's water
cleanup program.
The 19-page guide in-
cludes explanations of
technology-related
amendments, and other
changes. Copies can be
gotten by writing Public
Information Center (PM-
21 5), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Wash-
ington, D.C.20460.
Drinking Water
Conference
EPA's Offices of Drinking
Water and of Research
and Development recently
announced an interna-
tional conference on Prac-
tical Application of Ad-
sorption Techniques in
Drinking Water. The con-
ference will be April 30-
May 2 at the Sheraton
International Inn in
Reston, Va., a Washing-
ton, D.C., suburb.
A primary goal is to pro-
vide a survey of the pres-
ent application of adsorp-
tion technology in drink-
ing water treatment, em-
phasizing control of trace
organic contaminants.
Another key aim is to
report on the latest results
of research and antici-
pated future develop-
ments in adsorption tech-
niques such as granular
activated carbon and pow
dered activated carbon.
The conference will be
under the auspices of the
NATO Committee on the
Challenges of Modern So-
ciety. Further information
is available from Dr.
Joseph Cotruvo {WH-
550), 401 M St., S.W.,
Washington, D.C., 20460,
or 202-472-5016.
EPA Proposes
Cost-Cutting
Approach
EPA Administrator Doug-
las M. Costle has recom-
mended a new cost-cut-
ting policy that would
allow industry to propose
the best way to clean up
air pollution at individual
plants, provided that over-
all clean air requirements
are met.
EPA will hold a series of
workshops in the near fu-
ture to help the States
make their decisions on
carrying out the approach.
Currently, EPA and the
States specify the emis-
sion rate for each smoke-
stack, vent, or other air
pollution source at a
plant. The new approach
would allow plants to pro-
pose innovative and more
cost-effective plant-wide
mixes of pollution con-
trols than regulations now
allow, as long as total
environmental benefits
are not reduced.
"This policy would mean
less expensive pollution
control," Costle said, not
less pollution control.
There's no point in mak-
ing a company spend
$1.00 to control a pound
of pollution if the same
job can be done differ-
ently for $.50 a pound.
We're proposing to let in-
dustry concentrate their
cleanup dollars where
they will do the most
good."
"For example," Costle
explained, "under the
new approach, if the own-
ers of an auto paint shop
decide that it's more cost-
effective to control hydro-
carbon air pollution from
the grease removal rather
than the painting opera-
tions, they could apply
for State approval to re-
duce controls at the paint-
ing end in exchange for
an equal increase in con-
trol at the degreasing end.
The key consideration is
that total emissions do
not increase."
$8 Million Contract
with Black Firm
A black-owned business
that started in 1970 with
a $20,000 computer-cod-
ing contract has signed an
$8 million computer serv-
ice contract with the EPA.
It is one of the largest ever
awarded under the Small
Business Administration's
8-A program to aid minor-
ity firms.
Under the two-year con-
tract, Raven Systems and
Research Inc. will provide
data processing services
for EPA's Office of Pesti-
cide Programs. To do the
job, Raven will double its
work force to 300 people.
Regulation Need
Do not look to the new
Federal Regulatory Coun-
cil as the vehicle for un-
dercutting basic social
goals of the American
people, said its new chair-
man Douglas Costle, in a
speech to the Interagency
Forum in Dallas, Tex.
Regulation to clean up the
environment, protect
health, and further social
justice "is not an instru-
ment of economic policy,
but of social policy," said
Costle. "And the basic
test of such regulation is
not how does it affect the
economy, but rather, what
does it do for the country.
"So, yes, there is a need
to streamline and ration-
alize Federal regulation.
. . . And yes, there is a
need to give coherence
to the Federal regulatory
structure. That is the job
of the Council. But there
is also a need for some
regulation, and there will
always be such a need."
D
FEBRUARY 1979
19
-------
People
Joan Boilen
She is an attorney in EPA's
Atlanta Regional Office, who
has been named one of Ten
Outstanding Working Women
in America by Glamour maga-
zine. Boilen was cited for her
work in a case in Memphis,
Tenn., in which the Agency
sued the city for water pollution
violations. The case resulted in
a settlement of $25,000, the
fine imposed on the municipal-
ity, and in a limited industrial
moratorium until the violations
were corrected.
Boilen graduated from the Uni-
versity of Miami in 1970, one of
the first women to get a B.S. in
civil engineering there. She
attended law school at night
while working as a sanitary
engineer for a private company
in Atlanta. After passing the bar
in 1974, shejoined the Region
4 Enforcement Division. She is
currently enrolled in the gradu-
ate engineering program at the
Georgia Instituteof Technology.
Dennis Carney
He is the first recipient of the
newly-instituted Witmer Award
for outstanding performance in
Region 3. Carney, an environ-
mental engineer, is a Team
Leader in the West Virginia
section of the Water Division,
where he administers construc-
tion grant applications. He has
been with EPA since 1974 and
previously has received two out-
standing performance awards.
Carney earned a BS degree in
1974from Drexel University.
The Witmer Award is a trib-
ute by Region 3 employees to
the memory of Glen F. Witmer,
an outstanding regional em-
ployee who died of cancer in
June, 1977, at the age of 27.
Coworkers recognized his su-
perior technical ability but were
equally impressed by his ap-
proach to the importance of
environmental protection. The
Witmer Award, a plaque and a
letter from the Regional Admin-
istrator, will be given annually
and winners will be listed on a
plaque displayed in the Regional
Office.
Edward J. Hanley
He is the new Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Management
and Agency Services in the
Office of Planning and Manage-
ment. Since 1976 Hanley has
been self-employed as a public
policy consultant in the fields
of health regulation and child
development. From 1970 to
1976 he worked with Lew in &
Associates, Inc. in positions
ranging from senior consultant
to Vice President. As a con-
sultant for this firm he helped
organize the Office of Child
Development at the Department
of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare; directed an effort to im-
prove and innovate the Head
Start Program; and helped eval-
uate the Emergency Petroleum
Allocation Act. Handley was a
staff consultant at Fry Con-
sultants from 1968 to 1970,
working on projects for the
Office of Economic Opportunity
and the Agency for International
Development. His previous gov-
ernment experience includes
service from 1965 to 1968 with
what was then the U.S. Post
Office Department, where he
started as a management intern
and was promoted to the post of
Assistant Administrative Assist-
ant to the Postmaster General.
Hanley earned a BA from Col-
gate University in 1963. He is
the author of several articles
on administrative topics.
1
Benjamin R. Jackson
He has been named Deputy
Assistant Administrator for Mo-
bile Source and Noise Enforce-
ment, replacing Norman D.
Shutler, who has returned to
private industry. In his new
position he will be responsible
for providing policy direction to
Agency enforcement activities
in the mobile source air, and
noise program areas. Jackson
formerly served as the Director
of the Mobile Source Enforce-
ment Division, where he was
responsible for policy and pro-
gram development and imple-
mentation concerning enforce-
ment of compliance with the
provisions of the Clean Air Act
relating to automobiles. Before
joining the Agency in 1971,
Jackson was employed by
Humble Oil and Refining Co.,
from 1967 to 1971. He served
in the U.S. Army as a Second
Lieutenant from 1964-67 in-
cluding one year in the Republic
of Viet Nam as a Company
Commander. Jackson earned a
BS in mechanical engineering
from Texas A&M University in
1964, and a master's degree
from the University of Texas at
Austin in 1 968. He is a regis-
tered professional engineer in
Texas.
20
EPAJOURNAL
-------
Industrial
Incineration
Some major industries dispose of
dangerous industrial wastes from
their manufacturing processes by high-
temperature incineration. Dow Chemical
Company, 3M Corporation, and Eastman
Kodak Company all use this system.
Most use a combination of rotary kilns
and secondary combustion chambers to
oxidize materials. Rotary kilns are hori-
zontal brick-lined furnaces that turn slowly
as heat is applied to the materials intro-
duced into them. These incinerators burn
both solid and liquid chemical wastes at
temperatures ranging from 1100-2200°F.
The materials being treated remain in the
kilns for varying periods of time depending
on their composition and the level of heat.
The resulting ash is chemically inert, and
can be considered harmless if properly
managed.
Dow Chemical Co. has been incinerating
manufacturing wastes for about 40 years.
The major changes in burning technology
over the years, according to John Gledhill,
section manager for environmental serv-
ices at Dow, have been the addition of
pollution control hardware, better temper-
ature control, and increased analytical
capabilities. Scrubbers and wastewater
treatment facilities now prevent the escape
of unwanted materials into air and water
during the incineration process. The addi-
tion of supplementary fuels into inciner-
ators improves the ability of operators to
control the temperature, and this prevents
unwanted chemical changes from taking
place. Now that scientists are able to detect
substances as minute as parts per billion,
operators are better able to ensure chem-
ical breakdown.
Dow's now has two incinerators: a rotary
kiln and a tar-burner situated at the com-
pany's Midland, Mich., plant. The facilities
primarily handle waste from Dow's opera-
tions there, though they occasionally take
materials from the company's other plants
or from the State.
Chris Perham is an A ssistant Editor of
EPA Journal
The rotary kiln, which was upgraded in
1974, burns solid wastes or sludges fed
into the kiln on a semiautomatic system.
Auxiliary fuel for the kiln comes from the
1 5,000-20,000 cubic yards of garbage
per month that the Midland complex
produces. This enters the kiln separately
from the chemical waste. The company
uses natural gas to maintain a constant
temperature in the kiln when the chemical
waste is of poor burning quality. Ash from
the facility is placed in landfills.
According to Gledhill, the poor burning
quality of some liquid chemical wastes is
becoming more of a concern to the oper-
ators of Dow's tar-burning facility. As
resource recovery within the production
processes improves and removes more of
the useful substances from wastes, the
remaining liquid waste is of lower quality
and requires more fuel to burn properly.
The tar-burner, which incinerates only
liquids, was a pioneer facility when built
in 1968. Scrubbers filter residues from
incineration fumes and water from the
scrubbers is processed through a water
treatment plant before it is discharged.
Eastman Kodak Co. built its $11.3
million thermal oxidation facility at Kodak
Park in Rochester, N.Y. The system, which
began operation in 1976, gets much of its
heat from the combustion ability of some
6-7 million gallons of liquid waste solvents,
oils, and watery wastes that are byproducts
of Kodak's daily operations. Modified in-
dustrial oil burners feed the waste into the
kiln and a secondary combustion cham-
ber. To even out the fluctuating heat
values of the chemical loads, operators
use Number 6 fuel oil for auxiliary firing.
The kiln also burns, at a temperature of
1800°F, 3.4 to 4.5 million pounds of solid
waste sludges, solvent-soaked filter media,
and laboratory wastes that result from the
manufacture of industrial chemicals, com-
mercial reagents, and photographic film
and paper.
John L. Sherman, assistant superintend-
ent of utilities for Kodak Park, explains,
"The system has been designed to operate
more as a chemical process than as an
Continued to page 40
By Chris Perham
FEBRUARY 1979
21
-------
Turning a
Problem into
a Profit
By Darby Collins
-------
After making 100.000 gallons of nail
polish, a chemical company finds that
it has an excess of 17,000 gallons it cannot
sell.
What can you do with 17,000 gallons of
leftover nail polish? You can't burn it be-
cause that would pollute the air. You can't
just dump itln the river because that would
pollute the water. There are certain chemi-
cals in it that could make it hazardous to
people's health if it gets into the environ-
ment. To have it transformed chemically
into something easily disposable is very
expensive.
What if you could sell that nail polish to
someone who could use it? A lamp com-
pany needs enamel for some of its prod-
ucts. Nail polish with suitable pigments
added could be used on the lamps.
These are the types of situations where
an exchange organization could help. Many
chemical companies have large amounts
of industrial and hazardous wastes. They
need a way to turn expensive waste dis-
posal problems into profit-makers.
!n Europe, waste "bourses" or ex-
changes have been doing this yor years.
Company A has a certain kind of industrial
waste which Company B can use. Acting as
a broker, the bourse brings the two to-
gether. Money is made, raw materials are
saved and less waste is fed into the
environment.
Such a program was started in the
United States by the St. Louis Waste
Exchange in 1975. The exchange emerged
from a conference sponsored by the Mis-
souri Department of Natural Resources on
hazardous waste management methods.
After studying the European waste bourses,
the St. Louis Regional Commerce and
Growth Association (RCGA) initiated the
St. Louis Waste Exchange as a possible
solution to the disposal of industrial
wastes. The program was modeled after
the waste exchanges which have operated
successfully in Germany, Italy, Switzer-
land, Belgium, Great Britain and the Scan-
dinavian countries for about a decade. Chet
McLaughlin, Sanitary Engineer in the
Waste Management Section, Region 7,
served on the task force that developed this
pilot project.
The St. Louis Exchange was the first
United States clearinghouse for materials
which might pose difficult environmental
disposal problems. The operation also
served to reduce the volume of hazardous
and other waste material which must either
Darby Collins is a Region 7 Public
Information Specialist
be disposed of in local landfills or trans-
ported to destruction or treatment facilities.
The purpose of a waste exchange is to
bring buyer and seller together. When com-
panies find buyers for their waste products
they provide cheaper sources of raw ma-
terials for the buyers. Wastes that might be
a liability because of high disposal costs or
possible damage to the environment can
give the seller additional income.
The Iowa Industrial Waste Information
Exchange began operating in January
1976, the second U.S. clearinghouse. It
was sponsored by the Center for Industrial
Research and Service at the Iowa State
University Extension Service in Ames.
Patterned after the St. Louis Exchange,
they list approximately 150 waste products
from over 110 companies in Iowa and pub-
lish a listing four times a year.
The St. Louis Exchange mailing list has
expanded to over 1,000 firms from coast to
coast and receives inquiries from organiza-
tions throughout the country interested in
forming a waste exchange.
"Because of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, more and more people
are becoming interested in waste ex-
change," Roland Marquart, Transportation
Services Manager for RCGA, who was in-
strumental in the founding of the St. Louis
Waste Exchange, said.
"More people are aware of the problem
of waste disposal. We have had more in-
quiries from our last listing than any of the
others. We are getting some 20 to 25 calls
every week."
As a result of this increased interest in
waste exchanges, the first National Indus-
trial Waste Exchange Seminar was held in
St. Louis in June, 1977. The seminar drew
on the expertise of RCGA, Iowa State
University, EPA's Office of Solid Waste,
the Missouri Department of Natural Re-
sources, industrial waste generators and
treatment facility operators and Arthur D.
Little, Inc. (a contractor for EPA investigat-
ing waste exchanges and clearinghouses).
The'Success of the St. Louis Exchange
generated interest in the possibility of other
waste exchange operations across the
country. Waste exchanges emerged in
California, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Georgia,
Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio,
Oregon, Tennessee, Texas and Washington.
In 1976, the Mid American Regional
Council (MARC) in Kansas City became
interested in the possibility of forming a
waste exchange. A survey of the hazardous
waste situation in Kansas City (funded by
the EPA Solid Waste Management Pro-
gram) showed significant interest in an
exchange operation.
Following the seminar on waste ex-
changes, Kansas City became very inter-
ested in starting an exchange. The Kansas
City Chamber of Commerce and RCGA
looked into the possibility of an Exchange
that could serve both Kansas City and St.
Louis and, eventually, additional areas.
Negotiations began in 1977. Early in 1979,
the St. Louis Waste Exchange will merge
with Kansas City interests to become the
Mid-West Industrial Waste Exchange.
The St. Louis Exchange has already
changed its name to the Mid-West Indus-
trial Waste Exchange to avoid possible con-
fusion. It operates on a non-profit basis
charging only $10 a listing. The name of
the company offering wastes is not pub-
lished, assuring anonymity. Previously,
companies have been afraid to advertise
their waste products or raw materials for
fear of giving other firms a competitive
advantage.
Two listings are published. Type A for
available waste items and Type W for those
items that are wanted. Each listing includes
a description of the item, composition,
quantity, packaging and geographic origin.
The lists include only materials for which
no well-established market exists.
Inquiries to the Exchange are referred to
the listing firm, which then determines
whether or not it will negotiate. The Ex-
change asks no questions concerning the
dollar volume or exchanges or with whom
the company has done business. Federal
and State agencies have agreed to respect
the anonymity of the competitors in order
to encourage resource recovery and de-
crease the volume of industrial waste.
EPA estimates that the U. S. generates
about 344 million metric tons (wet)
of industrial waste each year. If only 10
percent of this waste could be utilized or
recycled, the waste exchange would prove
its worth.
The interest in waste exchange con-
tinues and so does the search for new and
better ways to operate an exchange. EPA is
currently considering the grant application
of the St. Louis RCGA and the St. Louis
East-West Gateway Coordinating Council
to further explore possible cooperation
between exchanges and the best ways to
reach small and medium sized industries.
These efforts point the way to future
development and cooperation between in-
dustrial waste exchanges. Although these
organizations will probably never be profit-
able as business enterprises, they will
provide a needed service to industry and
definitely help to protect the environment. Q
FEBRUARY 1979
23
-------
Mining Urban Ore
By Thomas Nathan
The vague talk and wishful theory from en-
vironmentalists and government officials
about the energy and raw material value of
garbage has caught the ear of private in-
vestors. It has sent them to the bank for
loans. This spring, with the official opening
in Hempstead, Long Island, of America's
largest resource recovery facility, squeez-
ing dollars from garbage will become a big
business reality.
This is an extraordinary and sorely
needed turnabout. As a Nation we generate
approximately 1 30 million metric tons of
garbage a year, enough to fill the New
Orleans Superdome from floor to ceiling
twice a day, 365 days a year. Each of us is
responsible for producing about 1,300
pounds of it a year.
Traditionally the collection handling,
and disposing of garbage, like fighting fires
and combating crime, has been one of the
nasty, necessary chores performed by local
governments. Historically, there has been
little incentive to deal with our wastes in an
environmentally sound or energy-efficient
manner. But since the offensive stuff we
throw away daily is becoming regarded as
a viable, valuable energy and material re-
source, people in the business no longer
to refer to il as garbage. It's becoming
"urban ore" and it's finally going to be
mined in America.
Five refuse-to-energy plants processing
more than 500 tons daily are currently in
operation. Industry experts expect that
within eight years about 1 7 percent of the
Nation's garbage will be recovered in 20
large plants and 50 small ones (treating
less than 500 tons daily).
Thomas Nathan is the editor of the Federal
Regional Council Newsletter in Region 2.
The present value of garbage is reflected
in the fact that the new Hempstead facility
was built, financed and presently operates
without the backing of a penny of the tax-
payers' money. The town subsidizes the
facility only by paying a standard fee for
every ton of its garbage dumped at the
facility.
Similar arrangements have been made in
Saugus, Mass., where Wheelabrator-Frye,
Inc. has constructed and operates a refuse-
to-energy plant that converts 1,000 tons
per day of garbage from 13 neighboring
towns into steam for a nearby General
Electric Co. plant. The Americology Divi-
sion of the American Can Co. has assumed
responsibility for Milwaukee's 250,000
tons a year of garbage, processing the
waste to produce a refuse-derived fuel sold
to the Wisconsin Electric Power Co., where
it is mixed with powdered coal to fii 3 boil-
ers and generate electricity.
One of New York's largest users of
power is tapping a new power source by
constructing near their chemical complex
in Niagara Falls a 2,200 ton per day re-
source recovery facility to provide elec-
tricity for plant operations.
Hempstead's $73 million facility is
owned and operated by Parsons & Whitte-
more, Inc., a company largely involved in
the design, construction and management
of pulp and paper mills. The facility can
process 2,000 tons per day of unsorted
garbage by mechanically separating fprrous
metals, aluminum and color-sorted glass,
leaving an organic fuel which is burned to
generate steam and electricity. In devour-
ing all garbage from the town's 850,000
residents, the plant recovers 90 percent of
the ferrous metals (40,000 tons of iron and
steel), 80 percent of the aluminum (4,600
tons), 48 percent of the glass (20,000
tons), and generates 250 million kilowatt-
hours of electrical power per year. This is
enough salable electricity to meet 20 per-
cent of Hempstead's electrical needs,
Arctis like this in the South Bronx fire being
considered for resource recovery plants
such us the one at Hempstead.
EPA JOURNAL
-------
FEBRUARY 1979
-------
roughly the equivalent of saving 450,000
barrels of oil per year.
The recovery process begins when
Hnmpstead's unsorted municipal garbage
is delivered to the plant, weighed and re-
corded at a truck scale, then dumped, and
bulldozed into a conveyor pit. The conveyor
automatically meters the refuse into a giant
blender (called a hydrapulper) where it is
mixed with water and chopped into small
pieces by steel rotor blades. Pieces of
metal, tin cans and other large solid objects
are ejected through an opening on the side.
The tin cans and ferrous metals are re-
moved by a magnetic separation device.
The smaller solids and finely chopped
waste continuously drain through a per-
forated plate at the bottom of the hydra-
pulper into a liquid cyclone where heavier
materials are removed by centrifugal ac-
tion. About 80 percent of this heavy mate-
rial is glass.
From the liquid cyclone, the slurry is
treated in a process that floats organic and
sinks inorganic materials. Further separa-
tion of the inorganics provides an aluminum
product sold for reuse in high grade alumi-
num products, and heavy non-ferrous
metals are sold to scrap metal dealers.
The organic material floating on top is
removed separately, pressed, fluffed and
finally discharged into two high-efficiency
boilers where it is completely and effi-
ciently burned to generate steam. The ex-
haust gases are cleaned of paniculate
matter in a scrubber and discharged as a
clean, non-polluting, non-odorous white
plume. Steam from the boiler powers two
turbines to generate electricity sold directly
to the Long Island Lighting Company.
These processes reduce the amount of
waste 97 percent by volume and 85 percent
by weight. The remaining ash residue from
the boilers is delivered to a cement company
for use in their mixing process. All the gar-
bage is thus effectively "recovered."
The facility not only recycles materials
and recovers energy, but also offers a return
on investment. Of the $73 million invest-
ment, $46 million was financed through
bonds purchased by such investors as
Equitable Life Insurance, Aetna, and Con-
necticut Mutual. The remaining $27 million
came from Parsons & Whittemore.
A series of long-term contractual ar-
rangements with Reynolds Aluminum,
ALCOA, Long Island Lighting Company, and
the Glass Container Corporation for the
purchase of recovered materials provided
collateral for the loans. Hempstead is free
of liability, and Parsons & Whittemore has
only to meet plant efficiency standards to
supply the proper amount of materials. Im-
provements in technology, more stringent
environmental controls on traditional dis-
posal methods, and the high cost of energy
combined to create a market situation that
made resource recovery economically
feasible for Hempstead and cost-effective
for Parsons & Whittemore.
Although this new technology is still in
its early stage in America and without the
support of forthcoming Governmental pro-
grams designed to create an economic bias
for its success, Carl C. Landegger, Parsons
& Whittemore's Chairman of the Board,
says his company is ready to move ahead
and build resource recovery plants wher-
ever anyone might want one. The company
is already under contract to build an even
larger facility ($102 million, 3000 tons per
day) for Dade County, Florida.
"If there's one message I want to get
across loud, clear and precisely," Landeg-
ger says, "it's that my company is prepared
to own and operate any solid waste plant
that anybody wants to build. I don't want a
penny of municipal money, of State money,
of Federal money. I don't need anything
from the municipality except a site because
I'm not capable of overcoming the political
difficulties involved in deciding where one
can be built. And they must give me a
twenty-year contract to supply me with
garbage at whatever the competitive dump
fee is in that region. Given these, I will
arrange all my financing. I'll do the whole
thing. The proof of the pudding is that in
Hempstead we put up every penny and the
town has not put up a dime."
• • •; • g :,nge is
nee energy nnci re;-
Hempstead was experiencing a problem
which is plaguing more and more urban
communities throughout the United States.
The town was faced with vanishing landfill
cavities, rising volumes of solid waste, and
climbing energy costs. The solution was to
supply Parsons & Whittemore with the site
they requested and the twenty-year con-
tract for garbage.
In return the town not only alleviated its
disposal problems, but got a piece of the
action as well: 1 5 percent of the proceeds
from the sale of recovered glass and metal,
and about 40 percent of the proceeds from
the sale of electricity. The town had been
paying $18to$19a ton for disposal. It now
pays $1 5 a ton to dump at the resource
recovery facility. After receipt of its share
of the proceeds (estimated at $4 per ton),
Hempstead's net disposal costs drop to
$11 per ton.
The success of the Hempstead plant and
others like it demonstrates the mutual
benefits for both the public and private
sector from the growth of pollution control
industries. Eckardt C. Beck, EPA's Region
2 Administrator, said he foresees a
future for private enterprise initiatives in
this field.
"The Hempstead plant represents an im-
portant partnership between private indus-
try and local government, and it is not an
isolated event," said Beck. "EPA along
with New York City is exploring the possi-
bility of using a resource recovery plant as
a method to aid the White House in its plan
to revive the South Bronx. Current initia-
tives are directed toward development of
a resource recovery industrial park in which
energy and materials from refuse will feed
new manufacturing industries to provide
new jobs.
"This is a key reason for the renewal in
environmental enthusiasm which I foresee.
The myth that business cannot endure the
restriction of environmental controls is
being dispelled. And on top of that, we are
finding that environmental programs are
creating jobs by the hundreds of thousands.
as well as entire new industries. The Hemp-
stead plant is a perfect example of this, and
we are likely to see a lot more of it."
More of it is likely to happen in Beck's
own Region under the auspices of the Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey, a
public bi-State agency dedicated to the
promotion and protection of commerce and
transportation in the New York metropoli-
tan area. Since the Authority does not re-
ceive tax support, it must seek financially
sound investments. The Port Authority has
recently received authorization from the
States of New York and New Jersey to un-
dertake the development of industrial
parks, which will attract industries by cre-
ating advantageous conditions within the
inner cities.
"Central cities are simply not attractive
locations for industry," explained Neal R.
Montanus, the Port Authority's Director of
Industrial Development. "There is very
little anyone can do to make Brooklyn, the
South Bronx, or Newark attractive to indus-
trial firms if all one has is, in essence, an
industrial location that is like other indus-
trial locations. We're looking to assist the
marketing of these central city industrial
locations, and without some kind of sub-
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Siting Problem Discussed
By Nancy McKinney
The difficulty of finding a site
for chemical landfills is
becoming a major concern of
officials involved in hazardous
waste management, according
to speakers at the recent Inter-
national Conference on Hazard-
ous Materials Management.
The spokesmen emphasized
at the meeting in Detroit, Mich.,
that recent incidents in Michi-
gan, New York, Louisiana, and
North Carolina have increased
the intensity of public feeling
about hazardous waste,
"In the public's mind, the
notion of a secure chemical
landfill is elusive. They just
don't believe in it," said Sandra
Gardebring, Executive Director
of the Minnesota Pollution Con-
trol Agency. She was one of
many representatives from 30
States and 4 Canadian Prov-
inces who attended the Confer-
ence, which was sponsored by
the State of Michigan and the
National Governors'Associa-
tion. Participants came from
local. State, and the Federal
Government as well as industry.
Chemical wastes, which were
buried years ago at Love Canal
in Niagara Falls, N.Y., caused
groundwater contamination, air
contamination in basements,
and eventually, evacuation of
the area. Over 200 homes are
now boarded up as cleanup
efforts are underway to contain
or remove the chemicals".
The residents are being
studied for health effects. Some
of those results are already in—
increased rates of birth defects,
miscarriages, and liver abnor-
malities over the general popu-
lation. Stories like this have
scared many people.
"Love Canal is so much in the
public mind right now. They
have been given the feeling of
impending danger. There is no
feeling of security, that a facility
will not cause pollution or
health problems," said Beatrice
" SeeEPAJournalJan. 1979
"The Love Canal Tragedy."
Tylutki, Director of the N.J.
Solid Waste Administration
and Chairman of an interstate
Resource Conservation and Re-
covery Act (RCRA) Task Force.
The other incident that has
become a major public concern
is the inadvertent contamination
by PBB (polybrominated
biphenyl) of a cattle feed sup-
plement and subsequent dis-
tribution of the feed to many
Michigan farmers.
Because this accident was
not discovered for approximate-
ly 9 months, there was exten-
sive contamination of food
products. Farms were quaran-
tined and animals destroyed.
The destruction of food prod-
ucts was massive—approxi-
mately 30,000 cattle, 4.500
swine, 1,500 sheep, 1.5 million
chickens, 800 tons of animal
feed, 18,000 pounds of cheese,
2,500 pounds of butter, and
5 million eggs.
Settlements for over $38 mil-
lion in damages and loss of ani-
mals have already been made,
and many suits are unsettled.
Long-term study is going on
concerning health effects on the
population. The total damage
has been estimated in the area
of $100to $200 million.
A Michigan Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) pub-
lication reports on public reac-
tion. "The effects of the cata-
strophe have ripped through the
farming community, causing
bitter hard feelings among farm
families," it reports. "People
have become dissatisfied and
frustrated. They call or write to
the Health Department wanting
a remedy for their poor health.
People from out of State and
even abroad write to the Depart-
ment saying they are ill, that
they passed through Michigan
several years ago and wonder if
PBB's are responsible for their
ill health."
"The PBB incident was
called 'the poisoning of Michi-
gan' by the media. Because of
it, our citizens are now afraid of
any chemicals referred to by
initials. It has become irra-
tional," said William G. Turney,
Chief of the Bureau of Environ-
mental Protection, Michigan
DNR.
The effects of these stories
on public opinion has been so
negative that the siting of any
future hazardous waste disposal
facility is seen as a problem of
almost insurmountable dimen-
sions.
"Not in my community; build
it someplace else," is how
Beatrice Tylutki characterized
public opinion. She pointed out
that more facilities will be need-
ed in the near future because
of increased production and
the closing down of unsafe
facilities,
"Regional facilities are need-
ed, not just local ones," Tylutki
continued, "but this makes sit-
ing even more difficult. Perfec-
tion of the state of the art is
necessary so that people will
not have the hazards in their
backyards. Long-term safety is
also imperative. We must pro-
vide citizens with the security
of a continuous monitoring
system."
Richard N. Little, Counsel for
the Subcommittee on Transpor-
tation and Commerce, House
Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce Committee, said audi-
ences he has talked to seemed
to want the Federal Government
to "step in and make the hard
decisions and come up with the
money, but the States want con-
trol. But there simply isn't going
to be a Federal bail-out or major
restructuring of RCRA."
Thomas C. Jorling, EPA
Assistant Administrator, Office
of Water and Waste Manage-
ment, said:
"Although the siting issue is
a very difficult one, I do not be-
lieve our system will be very
well served if we have to rely on
Federal authority for siting."
"Federal imposition would
be divisive," Jorling said. He
called the siting issue "a crucial
test for government. ... Is there
sufficient leadership to con-
vince the public that we can
deliver?"
Turney called Michigan citi-
zens' attitude "the backyard
syndrome. The idea of don't put
it anywhere near me has be-
come pervasive. This attitude
has come to include sewage
treatment facilities, recycling
plants, everything. We have
simply had to remove our
wastes out of the State, There
may be a crisis if we have to
stop that."
"There's always the same
deafening cry—take it some-
where else," said Turney.
"It's rather like the children's
game of Old Maid—the object
is to pass it off to the next guy,"
said Gardebring.
These statements underline
the problematic nature of the
hazardous waste issue and
public opinion.
Communities have begun
to try to close down disposal
facilities in their area, and as
public opinion continues
against siting of new facilities
—where does the material go?
"The future of RCRA will be
decided by the general public,"
said James R. Greco, Director
of Governmental Affairs,
Browning-Ferris Industries.
"We must assure ourselves and
the public that hazardous waste
can be handled safely."
William DeVille, Staff Chair-
man, National Governors' Asso-
ciation (NGA) Subcommittee
on Waste Management, said:
"We need an informed and
a wise public. Not just public
participation, but informed and
wise public participation. With
darn few exceptions, public par-
ticipation has become a stone-
wall opposition to siting. We
have to deal with this issue, and
soon." D
Nancy McKinney is a Public
Information Officer in EPA 's
Region 5 office.
FEBRUARY 1979
27
-------
A New England
Hazard
By Paul Keough
On a 5.2 acre site in Lowell, Mass.,
once owned by the now bankrupt
Silresim Chemical Corporation, are
stacked some 20,000 barrels containing
a million gallons of liquid hazardous
wastes. Also in storage tanks are another
300,000 gallons of all types of toxic
wastes.
Paul Keough is Region 1 Director of Public
A wareness.
The barrels are rusted and leaky. Chem-
ica! odors hang in the air above the site.
The ground is saturated and heavily con-
taminated with chemicals such as tri-
chloroethylene, which appears on EPA's
list of dangerous chemicals. Anyone hav-
ing access to the site must wear protective
clothing, special boots, and breathing
apparatus.
The stockpile of toxic, flammable, and
explosive chemicals presents an immedi-
ate hazard to residents of the City of
Lowell—some of whom reside only a few
hundred yards from the Silresim site.
Some of the chemical barrels sit only a
few hundred feet from River Meadow
Brook, which flows into the Concord River,
a tributary to the Merrimack River. The
Merrimack serves as a drinking water
source for several communities. While
testing by State and Federal authorities
has shown no significant concentrations
Workman preparing drums of hazardous waste for reprocessing at Silresim site.
of chemicals in the Merrimack, the poten-
tial for disaster isthere.
Plans to abate the problem are now mov-
ing ahead. The Massachusetts State Legis-
lature has appropriated $1.5 million to
accomplish the cleanup task. The State
Division of Water Pollution Control, which
has been selected to oversee the work, has
signed a cleanup contract with NEWCO,
Inc. of Niagara Falls, New York. The clean-
up operation will take somefour to six
months to accomplish.
The task is a complex one. Some of the
barrels have no labels. The contents will
have to be analyzed. Broken and damaged
barrels will have to be replaced. New Eng-
land has no approved landfill site for haz-
ardous waste disposal so most of the
chemicals will have to be shipped out of
the Region. Some of the waste can be re-
processed.
Ironically, the Silresim Chemical Cor-
poration was supposed to help solve the
chemical waste problem in New England.
The company was founded in 1970 by
Dr. John Miserlis (Silresim is his name
spelled backwards), a chemical engineer
and former college professor. Dr. Miserlis
pianned to accept hazardous wastes from
area industries, and hoped to salvage and
reprocess some of the chemicals that could
then be sold.
Those wastes that could not be recycled
would be neutralized and then discharged
into the municipal sewer system.
Dr. Miserlis hoped and believed that the
plant would become a model for areas all
over the country to emulate.
There is no single or simple reason why
the venture failed. There is a long history
of problems between the company and the
State. It appears that Silresim accepted
more waste than it could process. It also
appears that Silresim stockpiled chemicals
that it didn't have the facilities to treat. In
any case, almost every empty space on the
5.2 acres was covered with barrels, some
piled 10feet high.
In 1977 Silresim went into bankruptcy,
and later that year the State revoked the
company's license to operate.
Region I EPA Administrator, William R.
Adams, Jr., points out that Silresim is an
example of a good idea that went bad.
Adams commented:
"It also underscores the problem we
have in New England. We generate some-
where between one to three million tons of
hazardous waste each year. Since we have
no safe disposal sites in the Region, we
know that the bulk of this waste is being
disposed of improperly. Midnight dumping
along roadways, into sewers, and in iso-
lated woodland areas is taking place.
"If we had adequate storage areas, we
would not have such incidents taking place.
Identifying hazardous disposal areas with
appropriate safeguards will be a priority of
this Regional Office in 1979." D
28
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Environmental Almanac: Fei
A Glimpse of the Natural World We Hel|
Hope
•
New Jersey
f\ goldfinch with its feathers
fluffed to protect it from
the damp chill nibbles at the
thistle seed in a swaying feeder
as a blustery wind hums through
the bare branches of the trees
dotting the Greenbrook Sanc-
tuary on the New Jersey Pali-
sades cliffs.
Some 300 feet below a huge
tanker steams up the silvery
Hudson River. To the south the
George Washington Bridge
stretches to the island of Man-
hattan whose great towers are
wrapped in the rainy mists of a
grey winter day.
Although only a cannon shot
away from the heart of the Na-
tion's biggest commercial cen-
ter, this 1 50-acre sanctuary
provides peace and the oppor-
tunity to watch the unfolding of
plans nature set in motion mil-
lions of years ago.
It is one of several of the so-
called postage-stamp sized
wilderness areas which offer
hope in New Jersey, a State
sometimes better known for its
high cancer rate, forests of in-
dustrial towers, and the acrid
odors sniffed by the millions of
motorists who use the New
Jersey Turnpike.
Other larger and notable New
Jersey wilderness areas include
the Great Swamp, which sup-
ports deer 20 miles from New
York City, and the Pine Barrens,
a remarkable forest between
Atlantic City and Philadelphia
of stunted pine and oak trees,
cedar swamps, meandering
streams, cranberry bogs, blue-
berry fields, and a variety of
rare plants and animals such as
the curly grass fern and the
carpenter frog.
These green islands provide
badly needed lungs for one of
the Nation's most urban and
densely populated States.
The Greenbrook sanctuary is
perched high above the Hudson
River, which daily receives the
discharge of millions of gallons
of untreated sewage.
Yet in the sometimes dis-
couraging environmental battle,
the success of this remarkable
sanctuary is a heartening sign.
If you look from the Palisades
across the river north of Man-
hattan you can see another, a
long low structure hugging the
shore near Yonkers. This is the
approximately $100 million
Yonkers waste treatment plant,
one of a string of water
pollution control facilities built
to protect the Hudson from
sewage wastes.
Meanwhile, the fact that the
sanctuary can flourish offers
hope that the environment can
be restored even in the New
Jersey-New York area.
A visitor to the sanctuary last
spring for a few hours saw a
ruby-throated hummingbird
sipping nectar from a Japanese
honeysuckle.
Two adult Canadian geese
followed by their goslings were
gliding across the sanctuary
pond. The sanctuary naturalist
reported that two other goslings
had disappeared a week earlier.
He speculated that they were
eaten by either a snapping turtle
or a fox.
The mirror surface of the
pond was suddenly broken
when a frog catapulted itself
from the water and landed on
shore inches ahead of a pursu-
ing water snake.
Warblers on their way to
northern nesting grounds flitted
through the pine and hemlock
trees. Over the Jersey shore of
the Hudson a large flock of blue
jays flew past on their migration
upriver.
Just off a path in the woods a
yellow slipper orchid nodded in
a breeze.
The diversity and richness of
these timeless woodland
scenes would be difficult to
match in most rural settings.
The fact that they can occur
within a few miles of the roar
of Broadway, the rumblings of
Wall St., and the clangor of
mid-Manhattan traffic is a
triumph of nature.
This victory recalls what
Rene Dubos, the noted scien-
tist and author on environmen-
tal subjects, calls the resilience
of ecosystems.
In an interview with EPA
Journal last year. Dr. Dubos
stated that "I believe that any-
where in the world, almost, an
ecosystem that has been dam-
aged can be brought back to a
good condition if you help
nature to function with the nat-
ural repair systems that exist."
—C.D.P.
FEBRUARY 1979
29
-------
&ROSOLS
©I975RC08B Wild and Woolley, Sydney, Australia
Blum Urges
Global Ozone
Protection
Deputy Administrator
Barbara Blum has called
for global cooperation to cut
back production of chloro-
fluorocarbons—known as
CFC's—in order to protect the
stratospheric ozone layer. The
ozone now acts to shield the
Earth from ultraviolet radiation
from the Sun.
In an address to the second
International Conference on
Chlorofluorocarbons in Munich
last December, Blum declared:
"We believe that only one
course of action is open: A
unified global approach to deal-
30
EPA JOURNAL
-------
ing with the health and environ-
mental risks associated with
CFC production and use. Multi-
lateral and unilateral support
for worldwide reduction of
aerosol emissions must come
from the European communities
and international organizations,
as well as from those of us
who have already taken some
form of action on this prob-
lem." Some 20 countries now
produce CFC's.
Following her address, the
Conference recommended that
"as a precautionary measure,
there should be a global reduc-
tion in the release of CFC's,"
which destroy ozone. It called
upon governments, industry,
and other organizations to work
toward such a cutback and
urged industry to seek substi-
tute products.
Scientists have become con-
cerned in recent years at the
increase in CFC gases released
from aerosol cans, refrigera-
tion, air conditioning, cleaning
agents in the solvent industries,
and from other minor uses.
Stratospheric ozone can be
depleted by CFC gases. The
process comes about when
these gases rise to the strato-
sphere and undergo photo-
chemical decomposition and
liberate atoms known as free
chlorine radicals. These radi-
cals react with ozone, reducing
it to molecular oxygen.
According to scientists, the
cumulative long-range effect of
reducing the ozone layer 10 to
15 miles above the Earth could
not only cause a rise in the
incidence of skin cancer among
humans but bring about other
environmental problems. In
1975 a Federal task force
warned that ozone depletion
could also cause climate
changes, disturbances in aqua-
tic and land ecosystems, alter-
ation of the stability and
effectiveness of farm chemicals,
reduced crop yields, and other
adverse effects.
Blum noted in her speech
to the conference that the
United States has been the
world's largest producer of
CFC's and user of products
containing these gases, "and
that we, therefore, have a spe-
cial responsibility to make sure
that our own house is in order
before urging other nations to
join us in taking the necessary
steps to reduce CFC-related
hazards on a global scale."
She pointed out that last
March EPA and the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration took
action to ban CFC's as aerosol
propellants. The regulations
took effect last December 15,
and prohibited virtually all pro-
cessing, including processing
for export, and distribution of
CFC for use in aerosol products
in the U.S. Furthermore, on
April 15, 1979, interstate ship-
ments of non-essential drug and
cosmetic aeroso! products
containing CFC's may no longer
be introduced into
commerce in this country.
Finished products already on
the market and in distribution
channels may be sold until the
stocks are exhausted.
{About 2 to 3 percent of total
CFC aerosol uses are exempted
from the ban. These include
drugs for inhalation therapy for
some respiratory ailments,
birth-control products, some
electrical cleaning sprays, air-
craft maintenance products,
and certain pesticides.)
In addition, warning labels
have been required on most
aerosol consumer products
so that consumers could volun-
tarily avoid using such products
until the ban took effect. The
warning states: "Contains a
chlorofluorocarbon that may
harm the public health and
environment by reducing ozone
in the upper atmosphere." Blum
also pointed out that since
April, 1977, EPA has required
that CFC's in pesticide aerosols
be identified on the product's
label.
Aerosol propellants have
been used in the U.S. chiefly
for such items as hairsprays,
deodorants, and cosmetics,
which account for more than
80 percent of all CFC aerosol
products in this country. The
other 20 percent have been
used in household cleaners,
laundry sprays, pesticides, auto
cleaners, room deodorants, and
some industrial products.
Substitute propellants are read-
ily available for the vast
majority of these items.
"As a result of these regula-
tory actions, as well as the
overwhelmingly positive and
cooperative actions taken by
U.S. industry in making volun-
tary cutbacks in CFC uses,"
Blum said, "we estimate that
U.S. production of CFC's will
drop from the 1973 level of
about 900 million pounds to
about 550 million pounds in
1979—over 85 percent of the
remaining will be produced for
non-aerosol uses."
However, she warned that
although the U.S. action should
decrease total world usage of
CFC's by 25 percent, if no
action is taken by other coun-
tries making and using CFC's
as aeroso! propellants, the
reduction will be offset by a
projected increase in world-
wide emissions by 1985.
The Deputy Administrator
said the impact of the regula-
tions on the economy should
be much less than original
estimates. According to the
Chemical Specialties Manufac-
turers Association, about 87
percent of products previously
using CFC propellants had
switched to other types of pro-
pellants or finger-activated
pumps by last spring. Aerosol
products have largely been
converted to hydrocarbon pro-
pellants, often formulated with
flame retardant to reduce fire
hazard. Blum noted that the
switch to such propellants "has
not proven to be a safety
hazard."
The economic impact of the
aeroso! CFC ban had been
estimated to range from $169
million to $267 million annu-
ally for the four years following
announcement of the regula-
tions. However, the switch to
other propellants could result
in consumer savings from $58
million to $240 million annu-
ally in the same period. An
estimated loss of some 2,000
jobs in the filling, valve, and
container segments of the
aerosol industry would occur,
Blum said, "but with the excep-
tion^of the filling segment, the
impact on small businesses
would be minimal, and there
is likely to be some positive
effects on small businesses that
produce and market alterna-
tives to CFC products."
Half the estimated economic
impact on the U.S. market was
originally calculated on the
basis that marketers would not
have a substitute product to
sell. However, by the end of last
September, aerosol shipments
were running 5 percent ahead
of the 1977 figures, indicating
that marketers were turning to
substitute propellants.
Blum noted that EPA planned
to do a retrospective study later
to assess the economic impact
of the regulation.
The United States is now
studying how to achieve further
emission reductions and is
looking into the use of CFC's
in refrigerators, air condition-
ers, and other products, Blum
noted, since "the CFC's used
in such non-aerosol ways are
emitted into the atmosphere,
often after residing 20 or more
years in a particular product."
Results of this study will be
available some time in 1979.
Also representing EPA at
the Munich Conference were
Alice Brandeis Popkin, Office of
International Activities; Dr.
Herbert L. Wiser, Principal
Physical Science Advisor, Office
of Research and Development;
and John P. DeKany. Deputy
Assistant Administrator for
Chemical Control, Office of
Toxic Substances.
Countries and organizations
participating in the Conference
were: Australia, Belgium,
Canada, Denmark, France,
Italy, Netherlands, Norway,
Sweden, Switzerland, the
United Kingdom, United States,
Yugoslavia, the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and
Development, the United Na-
tions Environment Program,
and the Commission of the
European Communities.
At press time only two coun-
tries, the United States and
Sweden, had banned non-
essential uses of fluorocarbons.
Canada earlier had asked for
a voluntary reduction in their
production and use, and re-
ported a decline between 1974
and 1977 in their use from 32
million pounds to 15 million.
Canada, Norway, and most
members of the European Com-
munity currently are consider-
ing some form of ban. Q
FEBRUARY 1979
31
-------
A Senator's View
Continued from page 5
would be made where the affected industry
had itself arranged for adequate disposal.
The core problem of dealing with toxic
and hazardous substances in the environ-
ment is how to establish useful standards
for the management of non-threshold pol-
lutants. The 1970 Clean Air Act estab-
lished a revolutionary way of setting
standards protective of public health. The
national primary ambient air quality stand-
ard was to be set at the level necessary to
eliminate effects on health, with an ade-
quate margin of safety. Under the law, that
standard has to be achieved, regardless of
cost or ease of attainment. The current
fashion with environmental regulators,
where there is no statutory guidance on
establishing standards, and often even
where there is, is to substitute "risk assess-
ment" for the absolute of protecting public
health.
That may be dangerous, in its applica-
tion to non-threshold pollutants such as
carcinogens, mutagens, and radioactivity.
Committee members will consider provid-
ing a legislative framework in which to
make regulatory decisions on such pollu-
tants. That will be a very difficult task but
no navigator ever distinguished himself
on a calm sea.
In its recently published Criteria for
Radioactive Wastes, the Environmental
Protection Agency says an acceptable risk
for a non-threshold pollutant is one that
does not pose an unreasonable risk to
human health and the environment.
Although a little circular, that does not
sound too bad—until you find out what it
means. In a recent briefing on draft stand-
ards for high level waste repositories, EPA
personnel displayed a graph summarizing
their risk assessment for a model reposi-
tory. The vertical axis was probability. The
horizontal axis was health consequences—
somatic fatalities—integrated over the
extended period for which the risk assess-
ment was done. At the left axis at a proba-
bility of nearly one, there is a flat curve
extending out to between 103 and 103. In
the neutral language of "risk assessment"
that means it is virtually certain that be-
tween 100 and 1000 persons will lose their
lives because of that repository—albeit
over many years. I do not consider that a
reasonable risk. The Committee may con-
sider ana Iternative approach to risk
assessment. One, which might be dis-
cussed, would be to allow no activity with
which is associated a substantial proba-
bility of death or serious disease of any
individual or any mutagenic effects.
A consequence of such a principle would
be to subject activities with great risk or
risks over extended periods of time, such
as nuclear waste disposal facilities, to
very close scrutiny and increased control.
These subjects constitute an ambitious
agenda for the Committee on Environment
and Public Works. Hazardous and toxic
substances in the environment pose a criti-
cal challenge to the public health, however,
and the Committee is determined to re-
spond to these issues in a timely and
practical way.
An important first step will be the En-
vironmental Protection Agency's final
promulgation of regulations implementing
the hazardous waste control programs,
under subtitle 6 (c) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act. I am not hopeful the Agency
can shorten its internal review procedures
and promulgate those regulations by Sep-
tember of 1979. Much legislative work
remains to be done in the areas discussed
in this article, however, and the Committee
on Environment and Public Works will
make that work its first order of business
in the 96th Congress. D
Regulations
Continued from page 6
it and just simply not duck this
thing....
"Better that this stuff goes to
a place that's designed to han-
dle it than that it just disappears
in the night somewhere, and we
have no idea where it is. That's
what compelled Congress to
take the approach that there
should be a manifest system
that tags that waste at the time
it's generated and allows you to
follow it to wherever it finally
goes," he added.
EPA estimates that 10 to 15
percent of the annual produc-
tion of 344 million metric tons
of industrial waste is hazard-
ous, and the volume of haz-
ardous waste is expected to
increase by 3 percent annually.
The Agency estimates that 90
percent of such waste is now
managed by practices that will
not meet the new Federal stand-
ards. More than 400 cases of
damage to health or the envi-
ronment due to improper haz-
ardous waste management have
been documented by EPA.
The proposed new system
has as its keystone a control
system over hazardous waste
by means of manifests and re-
porting. Only sites that have
permits may treat, store, or dis-
pose of the material. An esti-
mated 30,000 permits will be
issued by EPA and the States
over the next five to six years to
those that store, treat, or dis-
pose of such waste.
Within two years after the
new regulations are promul-
gated, States must apply for
and secure full authorization
for their own hazardous waste
programs. The criteria for such
authorization are that they must
be equivalent to the Federal
program, consistent with other
State and Federal programs,
and must be enforced ade-
quately.
The new system will cover
more than 35 million tons of
hazardous waste produced an-
nually in the United States.
About 270,000 waste-generat-
ing facilities, 10,000 trans-
porters and 30,000 treatment,
storage and disposal sites will
be involved. Companies pro-
ducing less than 100 kilograms
(about 220 pounds) of hazard-
ous materials per month would
be exempted from the new
regulations.
The proposal calls for land-
fills for hazardous waste to be
lined with clay, plastic, or other
materials to prevent the waste
from moving through the soil
and reaching water sources.
Landfills would have to be at
least 500 feet from any water
source, and a site that is closed
would have to be sealed with
clay or other material. Constant
monitoring of active sites by
the operator would be required.
Closed sites would have to be
monitored and maintained by
owners for 20 years to assure
that the waste is not moving
into nearby soil or water. The
owner also would have to
assume financial responsibility
for $5 million per damage in-
cident during site operation and
set aside funds for properly
closing, monitoring, and main-
taining the site for the next 20
years after closure.
Asked about complaints that
EPA was behind schedule in
proposing the regulatory pro-
gram, Jorling said there is
"immense complexity" in un-
derstanding the dimensions of
this system. "We took the pol-
icy that it is better to be late and
good than to be bad and issue
on time," he said, adding that
the Agency, like others, has
been suffering from a shortage
of resources and an overabun-
dance of procedures.
"We think we have now
established a program which
will keep us on track and a pro-
gram people will put reliance
on," he emphasized.
Summing up the new system,
Costle declared:
"We've had now in place a
major air pollution program, a
basic water pollution program,
and the thing that's now being
addressed is the land disposal
question and the handling of
hazardous wastes that normally
go back to the land in some
fashion. . ..
"What we're engaged in, in
effect, with air, water and solid
waste, is essentially trying to
get control of the whole prob-
lem and not just push pieces of
it around from one sink to the
other. It is a major undertaking
and one that needs to be done
with considerable care and
thoughtful input from every-
body affected."D
32
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Managing
Hazardous Wastes
Continued from page 8
it, or prevent any release. Such
methods are feasible from an
engineering standpoint and we
have to move in those direc-
tions.
How would you compare
the hazardous waste
problem to air and water
cleanup, toxic sub-
stances, and other en-
vironmental concerns? Is
it more serious, harder to
solve?
I don't befieve it's any harder.
It's newer, and it needs action
on the part of Federal and State
government. In many respects,
technically, the hazardous
waste problem is less compli-
cated than, let's say, writing an
effluent limitation for compli-
cated chemical plants.
We have several basic prac-
tices for managing hazardous
wastes. One is incineration—
high temperature incineration
for the structure of organic
chemicals. Another technique
is reprocessing. This is the
preferred policy within the
Agency. Usable materials are
removed from the chemical
wastes, and the most toxic are
taken from them, hopefully
leaving only a harmless resid-
ual. Another practice is simply
storage. Most people associate
that with radioactive waste,
but it is also a practice here.
We don't know what to do with
it so we in effect just store the
waste until we come up with
better answers in the future.
So technically, the questions
of hazardous waste manage-
ment aren't that great. They
would be simpler if we could
reduce the volume of hazardous
waste by reprocessing.
What we do face though is a
practice that disturbs me
greatly. We are devoting more
and more of the landscape to
uses such as hazardous waste
disposal that are incompatible
with utilization of the land for
more productive, human-
oriented ends. We are talking
now of setting aside sections
of the landscape for the per-
petual care of these types of
materials. That is very short-
sighted. Hopefully EPA's pro-
gram and the society in general
will move away from such an
approach. When you add haz-
ardous waste sites to nuclear
generation and nuclear storage
facilities, you have a very sub-
stantial acreage condemned to
an exclusive use.
Is the Agency making a
special effort to achieve
various effective methods
of handling hazardous
wastes?
The incentives to develop such
methods generally flow from
the regulatory requirement. As
it becomes more expensive
under the regulations to dispose
of waste in a certain way, the
industrial community tends to
tell its engineers to come up
with a better method to avoid
that problem.
We see in water cleanup,
for example, that some indus-
tries that traditionally dis-
charged great volumes of waste
have gone to recycling. The
same thing will happen in the
solid waste area. As certain
waste-handling costs increase,
industry will respond with
methods such as source separa-
tion, containment, and re-
cycling to reduce the output of
this material during production.
That would be the best outcome
of the regulatory program.
Is there anything you
would like to add to
these comments?
On its face we are behind the
statutory schedule and behind
where most people would like
us to be. But I have been very
pleased and have a great deal
of respect for the people within
the Agency who have been
working on these programs and
developing these regulations.
Professionally they are ex-
tremely sound, their commit-
ment is great, and they have
been working harder than it's
really possible to describe in
meeting the mandate of the
statute.
So while our actual perform-
ance is behind, it isn't due to
lack of commitment or pro-
fessional conduct within the
Agency. The staff is very good
and I take comfort in that and I
think when the regulatory pro-
gram goes into effect we will
be able to demonstrate some-
thing that I think the people are
demanding—good government
service. We will see that in
this area. D
Do you know someone in industry or in a civic
group who wants to keep up with national
environmental developments involving EPA?
Let them know about EPA Journal. If they want
to subscribe, give them this form. The sub-
scription price is $1 0 per year and $1 2.50 if
mailed to a foreign address. A single copy
sells for $1.00. (Agency employees receive
this publication without charge.) Anyone
wishing to subscribe should fill in the form
below and enclose a check or money order
payable to the Superintendent of Documents.
&EPA JOURNAL
Please Print
Subscriptions
Name-First, Last
Company Name or Additional Address Line
M M M M M M M M M M M M M I
Street Address
City
State
Zip Code
Payment enclosed
Charge to my Deposit
Account No. .
Mail order form to
(Superintendent of Documents)
Government Printing Office
Washington, DC. 20402
FEBRUARY 1979
33
-------
Inside EPA
What kind of a future
lies ahead for EPA? Is
the Agency succeeding
in its mission? Will EPA
employees be laid off
because of reorganiza-
tions or civil service re-
forms? What are the
most difficult manage-
ment problems facing
the Agency? These are
some of the questions
answered in this inter-
view.
An interview with
William Drayton, Assist-
ant Administrator for
Planning and Manage-
ment, about the opera-
tion of the Nation's
largest regulatory
agency.
This interview was conducted
by Charles Pierce, Editor,
Truman Temple, Associate
Editor, and John Heritage,
Assistant E ditor, of EPA Journal.
How would you rate
EPA's performance in
carrying out its environ-
mental cleanup mission?
I have done consulting work for
about 1 5 large organizations,
most of them public (including
a number of Federal agencies),
some of them private. EPA is
the strongest of the public
agencies with which I've dealt
in terms of the quality, morale,
and commitment of the staff.
Our Agency is also strong in
terms of its extraordinary or-
ganizational framework. EPA is
more trusting of its people than
virtually any other public
agency I've seen, and that gets
good results. We have decen-
tralized and delegated our work
to the States, to the Regions, to
the labs, and to the different
programs—a very logical, even
necessary policy given both the
nature of the job and the people
we have.
Still it's quite unusual. Most
of the government operates on a
top-down, untrusting, pyramidal
model that reflects the thinking
of Louis the Fourteenth, and
Herbert Hoover, certainly not
that of the Federalist Papers. It
often doesn't work. By contrast,
EPA has a healthy, pragmatic,
program-solving approach to
doing its business. It is a little
untidy, as most democratic sys-
tems are, but it's both sensible
and successful. This approach
has attracted and kept good
people.
Does this approach work
at the regional level?
Compare our Regions with those
of many of our sister agencies:
it is clear that real things hap-
pen in ours. Our Regions are
trusted to deal with real prob-
lems; as a result they have good
people; as a result they can be
trusted to act. .. .
The Regional Office legal
staff of one of our large, sister
regulatory agencies spends 86
percent of its time getting clear-
ance from Headquarters. De-
spite all the pulling and shoving
between Regions and Head-
quarters at our Agency, we have
a very different pattern.
Decentralization alone, how-
ever, is not enough. The genius
of the Federalist Papers, and I
would argue of almost all good
management, takes concrete
form in the system of rules and
incentives that allow the mem-
bers of a decentra lized body to
reason together, to behave in a
unified, responsible and pur-
poseful way.
EPA has been developing a
number of cross-cutting deci-
sion processes that help us
reason together sensibly. Our
regulation development process
(sometimes called the "Steer-
ing Committee" or "Red Bor-
der" process) allows us to work
out the policies that the decen-
tralized parts of our organiza-
tion later implement together.
It ensures that no one is cut out;
that our policy decisions take
water impacts as well as air
benefits into account, enforce-
ability, and economics and
technical competency and legal
and Congressional risks as well
as program strategy. It helps us
ensure integrated environmen-
tal policies as well as compe-
tent, balanced policies. That's
why the President's Executive
Order on Regulatory Reform is
patterned on this EPA process.
What role does Zero Base
Budgeting play in this
process?
Zero Base Budgeting covers the
second key area where we must
regularly make decisions to-
gether: management priority
setting and resource allocation.
What we're struggling to do
here is to develop common,
reliable data bases and then get
the right combinations of people
together to make the hundreds
of management trade-offs we
face each year. This approach
is in radical contrast to the old
budget office dictate.
Our personnel reforms are
designed to provide a third
key cross-cutting tie. By giving
our managers Agency-wide
careers and skills, we'll also be
ensuring that they develop
broad environmental perspec-
tives and loyalties.
In sum, I think EPA's a ter-
rific, increasingly successful
institution. Both by design and
historical accident it is going
down a path very much at vari-
ance with a way of running the
government that has failed.
I believe that EPA is, in
effect, becoming a model for
an alternative way of organizing
the Federal Government, the
Federalist Papers way.
This approach is based on
trusting the people, but in the
context of a realistic set of in-
centives. It releases their en-
ergy and initiative and imagina-
tion, but in organizationally and
socially responsible ways.
Is our reliance on the
States a part of this
pattern?
Yes. It's exactly the same
principle.
We're still working it out, but
we've taken the basic big leap
of saying we are going to trust
the States and they are going
to do most of the work because
they are in a better position to
do it. That's a bureaucratically
radical concept. But it would
probably seem quite familiar to
the folks who set the country up
200 years ago.
President Carter came to
office with a core mandate to
make the government work
better. Although the antique,
obsolete, worn-out ideas of
Hoover centralism linger on, the
real thrust is towards respon-
sible decentralization. Top-
down box shuffles and their ilk
have not been big successes.
The things that have worked,
such as Civil Service reform,
are based on the principle that
over-control doesn't work. It
doesn't. I rest my case with the
old Civil Service System and
with GSA. EPA is experiment-
ing with, developing, and suc-
cessfully demonstrating the
alternative model. I think that's
a very important part of our
business.
Is EPA's alternative ap-
proach paying off?
As long as we have a healthy
organization, with quality peo-
ple who have the ability to come
'Up with new ideas and to try
EPA JOURNAL
-------
new things, we'll continue to be
an exceptionally effective or-
ganization. That doesn't mean
that we do everything right, but
it does mean that we're solving
problems, that we're adapting
and experimenting, and that
we're continuing to attract
people who like such an
environment.
We have a very good momen-
tum going. We've not solved all
of our problems. But we've
done a lot more than anyone
could reasonably expect. We're
one of the few government
agencies that can point to real
accomplishments, real meas-
urable changes. Look at the
objectives we set ourselves five
or six years ago: We have cut
biological oxygen demand 65
percent, total suspended solids
69 percent, and airborne partic-
ulates 41 percent.
However, as we gained on
these initial objectives, our
Research and Development has
forced us to face new problems
and our objectives have
changed. We haven't solved the
new problems yet. But the fact
that we've identified them and
are coming to grips with them
is another type of success we
can be proud of.
The Zero Base Budget
process, in which EPA is
a recognized leader, seems
to consume a lot of time.
Is there any way to
simplify this process: Do
you think it will work it-
self out so it will be
simpler in the future?
We're at the end of the first year
and a half of what's probably a
two to three year process of
putting in place Zero Based
Budgeting, the second major
cross-cutting decision process
of the Agency. We've moved
from having a small number of
people making decisions to
having literally hundreds of
different managers in this
Agency, meaningfully and
effectively involved, and in fact
really making those decisions.
You have to set up a reasonably
complicated process, so that
the information is defined in
common terms and so that the
right people sit down together
with the right set of facts. Then
a whole series of decisions flow
together.
We have spent much of the
last year putting the system in
place and getting the Regions
involved. Everyone was learn-
ing. Last year in some Regions
we re-did decision units three
times before they were usable.
In many cases, junior managers
were not given adequate guid-
ance because senior managers
had not yet figured out what
to do.
Even if we did nothing to
simplify the process—which
together we will—next year's
burden would be significantly
less. Not that there won't be
further problems. But a lot of
the time-consuming and frus-
trating aspects of this year's
effort are no longer going to be
there. For instance, we will not
have to start from scratch and
write decision units. We already
have done that. Instead, it will
be a matter of making adjust-
ments, modifications. We will
not have to redo them once, let
alone three times.
Also, the operating plan next
year will not be as difficult to
prepare as this year's was—
simply because our 1980
budget (on which we base the
next plan) is much more com-
plete. There was a whole series
of issues that we did not ad-
dress in the 1 979 budget that
we have for 1980. So we will
face fewer decisions in the
operating plan. But even if we
had as much work to do, it
would take less effort because
people now know what to do.
The benefits of shared deci-
sions are really quite central to
the Agency's overall manage-
ment design, of being decen-
tralized while still integrated.
And we want to push both. The
trick is to have a couple of key
cross-cutting decision proc-
esses, such as Zero Based
Budgeting, that everyone under-
stands and knows how to work.
Do you anticipate any
downgrading or reduc-
tions in force at EPA be-
cause of Civil Service
Reform or other planned
reorganizations?
It's useful to look at this in
some perspective. The Agency
is always in a state of flux. Our
mission changes from year to
year. New statutes are enacted,
telling us new things to do. As
a result we regularly reprogram
(move) peopfe from job to job
much more than almost any
other Federal Agency. Our levei
of reprogramming is going to be
somewhat higher in 1979 than
in 1978.
But I do not anticipate that
all this reprogramming will lead
to many serious problems. It's
taking place in the context of
growth and in an organization
that's learned how to deal with
growth. There are going to be
some cases, especially in
smaller units, where we're go-
ing to have to work out new
opportunities for people in other
units. We're in the process of
setting up a central reference
system now.
So far I've been talking about
employees who are pulling their
weight. But one of the purposes
of the Civil Service Reform
legislation is to make it easier
for management to deal with
the tiny, tiny, tiny proportion of
employees who are not willing
to pull their weight. I'm sure
that our managers are going to
be as vigorous in that regard as
any in the government. This
Agency is acutely understaffed
and we can't afford to have
people who are not pulling their
weight. Fortunately, we have
very, very few people who fit
that description.
Your office seems to have
a large number of natural
targets for complaints
from the rest of EPA. You
are responsible for build-
ings and facilities, bud-
get, personnel, contracts.
What are you doing over-
all to try and improve the
services of these offices?
Let's deal with each of the major
areas separately. The budget
area, we've discussed to some
degree. We're going through a
really major change. The main
benefit of that, of moving the
budget process out from behind
closed doors to be a shared
process on an agency-wide
basis, is that the Agency is go-
ing to be better managed. In
fact, it is easier for us to face
difficult decisions and make
them now than it was before.
I am very proud about what
the budget shop has been doing.
They've been doing it against
very great odds and working
extraordinarily hard. We're now
getting past the worst of the
transition from one system to
another. During this coming
year we'll focus more on issues
and less on process. We'll have
a lot less waste motion.
However, the complaints are
not going to go away com-
pletely: the budget process is
always the harbinger of bad as
well as good news, and people
are less likely to comment on
the good news than the bad.
Those that don't like the results
often find it more acceptable to
attack "the process" than their
associates who just decided
against them. But I'm very
pleased with what's happening
with the budget.
In another area, the Agency's
reporting system, its account-
ability system, has been in some
disarray. One of our major
thrusts this year is redesigning
that to fit the needs of the
Agency's new management
group. So that is going to be an
area in the budget office where
there's going to be a good deal
of activity.
Now, in the area of support
services, the personnel area is
probably going to be under the
greatest pressure. EPA's own
reforms, which I mentioned
earlier as one of our three basic,
necessary thrusts to integrate
the Agency, are going to take a
lot of work. We also have the
new Civil Service Reform law.
Not only does it require scores
of changes, all of which entail
work to implement, but many of
the functions that are now in the
Civil Service Commission will
be delegated to the Agency.
FEBRUARY 1979
35
-------
Virtually every area of per-
sonnel management will under-
go fundamental change. We
also have our new supergrades
that we are putting into place.
But Personnel is not getting
an increase in resources com-
mensurate with its increased
workload. Unfortunately, that
means that with the best efforts
in the world, I am skeptical that
we are going to be able to have
a dramatic improvement in
services over the next 12
months. We are going to try.
But it is clear that the workload
hitting the Personnel Office in
the next year is going to be
stupendous and we're going to
have to rely on people around
the Agency to understand that.
Let me add a note about con-
tracts. This is the area where
we have the most complaints.
Many people have commented
favorably on the performance of
Personnel. But I get a much
higher ratio of complaints about
contracts. We're going to have
to do something about that. It is
one of the areas on which I plan
to work this coming year. It's a
message that came through very
clearly in the budget process.
However, we should all un-
derstand that this last year, the
contracts people faced more
than a 20 percent increase in
workload with no increase in
staff. That is unrealistic and
irresponsible and it is unreason-
able for people to expect an im-
provement in service when the
contracts staff is faced with that
reality and also pressure from
Douglas Costle and me not to
let our contract carryovers go up
to $80 million or $100 million.
Because the Agency, the
Office of Management and
Budget, and the Congressional
Appropriations Committees
have all agreed, we will hence-
forth have a formula linking the
number of personnelists and
contract personnel to the size of
our staff and the size of our con-
tract budget respectively. With
this step, I hope we will avoid
in the future gross increases in
workload without compensating
staff increases.
But we are not getting re-
sources to compensate for the
workload increase of last year.
So we must make up the differ-
ence with productivity gains or
through reductions in service
quality. Nonetheless, I think
that there are a number of things
we can do to improve the re-
sponsiveness and client orien-
tation of the contracts office,
and that's going to be one of the
early priorities of the new
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Management and Agency
Services.
I expect the new Deputy
Assistant Administrator respon-
sible for these support services
to make a difference. Further-
more, the new Associate Assist-
ant Administrator for Manage-
ment Reform will help provide
leadership for the personnel and
contracting reforms that are
needed. Similarly, in the com-
puter area we have to ask some
very difficult questions about
the management of the Agen-
cy's computer investments. Do
we need this or that program?
Should this data base be shared
with some other program?
Should they be meshed? I think
we have focused too much on
hardware and not enough on
these sorts of management
questions so far.
What do you consider the
most difficult manage-
ment problem that the
Agency faces currently?
I'd list two. They are closely
related.
The first is working out our
relationships with States and
local governments. We're mid-
way through an evolution that
has perhaps not received the
conscious attention it should.
With 85 percent of the people
who do environmental regula-
tion working as State and local
employees, we cannot do our
job and they cannot do their job
unless we work out a fully effec-
tive relationship.
At the moment, we have very
few tools for this task, and ex-
cept in one or two Regions I
don't think we have done the
job we really should to make
that relationship work. This is
our toughest and most funda-
mental management problem.
Very closely related to this
issue is that of developing the
right management tools to help
both our decentralization and
integration thrusts. EPA is still
visibly the result of a merger of
different predecessor organiza-
tions. We have not really effec-
tively integrated the pieces.
Very few of the Agency's senior
civil servants have had experi-
ence in both Headquarters and
Regions. Very few of our senior
managers or other staff have
had experience across pro-
grams. We do not have inte-
grated agency-wide career
paths. We're just beginning to
work out cross-cutting manage-
ment tools such as ZBB. No one
of these efforts to integrate the
Agency will work without the
others.
This Agency is in the busi-
ness of giving out more "bads"
to more people in our society
than any other agency of the
government. But we've had very
strong popular support, good
Congressional support, and
now for the first time we have
very strong support from the
White House. But in the future
these conditions may not al-
ways apply. And unless we
succeed in integrating the
Agency effectively and firmly
establishing ourselves as a well-
managed Agency that is per-
ceived as being highly profes-
sional and whose regulatory
independence people conse-
quently agree should not be dis-
turbed, the Agency and every-
thing else we're doing may be
in jeopardy.
It would be very easy to take
us apart again—unless we suc-
ceed in finishing the integration
job now. That means over the
next several years. That's why
the regulation development
process, the budget/manage-
ment process (it's really much
more than a budget process),
and our personnel reforms de-
signed to integrate the Agency's
managers into an environmental
management corps, are so
critical.
Those are the two big prob-
lems—our relationships with
State and local governments and
our need to finish integrating
our healthfully decentralized
institution. We have a clearer
sense of what we're doing in
terms of integrating a decen-
tralized, trusting Agency than
we do with the State-local re-
lationship. But it's the same
sort of problem. And if we can
solve those two problems, we
will have gone a long way to-
ward ensuring EPA's ability to
function successfully over the
long term.
What future do you see
for EPA? Are you opti-
mistic about being able to
achieve the goals that you
just outlined?
I see no reason why we can't
succeed. Just about everything
is in our favor. The Agency is
already moving in the right di-
rection, our job is to help his-
tory along.
Furthermore, President Car-
ter really wants to make the
government work. He's very in-
terested in management issues.
Doug Costle is as well. So we're
getting top management sup-
port. Just as important, we have
a professional staff that is very
good, very motivated, very used
to and accepting of change. And
everyone in this Agency has
been used to turbulence ever
since it got started. It's our nor-
mal state of affairs. Also, be-
cause everyone is so busy and
we have so much more than we
can possibly do, the turf con-
sciousness that so paralyzes
many of our sister agencies is
not as severe a problem here.
This is not to say there are
not very difficult tasks. But I
can see no reason why, given
reasonable flexibility and good
will and some understanding,
that we can't succeed. If the
Federalist Papers approach to
management is going to suc-
ceed anywhere in government,
it will succeed here.
And if it doesn't succeed
here, the government is in deep
trouble.D
EPAJOURNAL
-------
News Briefs
EPA Proposes
Chemical Rules
Costle Appoints
Council Director
EPA recently proposed rules to help protect
public health and the environment from the
hazards of new chemicals before they are
marketed. The proposed rules, issued under the
Toxic Substances Control Act, would require
chemical manufacturers to notify EPA of their
intent to produce new chemicals before test
marketing and full-scale commercial production.
Chemical companies would also have to submit
all information available to them about how a
new chemical would affect human health and the
environment. EPA will evaluate the information
submitted on each chemical and, if necessary,
take steps to reduce risks—weighed against
benefits to society and the economy—that a
chemical may present to public health and the
environment.
Administrator Douglas Costle recently announced
the first major staff appointment to the Admini-
stration's new Regulatory Council. Costle has
named Peter J. Petkas as director. Petkas, 33,
has served since April, 1977, as director of
the President's Reorganization Project Management
Staff, in the Office of Management and Budget.
He will head a staff of 16 at the Council.
The Council's first responsibility will be to
develop and publish a semi-annual Calendar of
upcoming Federal regulations. Costle was named
by President Carter to organize and chair the
Council.
States Served by EPA Regions
1
Region 1 (Boston)
Connecticut. Maine.
Massachusetts. New
Hampshire, Rhode Island,
Vermont
617-223-7210
Region 2 (New York
City)
New Jersey. New York,
Puerto Rico, Virgin
Islands
212-264-2525
Region 3
(Philadelphia)
Delaware. Maryland.
Pennsylvania. Virginia.
West Virginia. District of
Columbia
215-597-9814
Region 4 (Atlanta)
Alabama, Georgia,
Florida, Mississippi.
North Carolina. South
Carolina. Tennessee,
Kentucky
404-881-4727
Region 5 (Chicago)
Illinois. Indiana, Ohio.
Michigan. Wisconsin.
Minnesota
312 353 2000
Region 6 (Dallas)
Arkansas, Louisiana,
Oklahoma, Texas. New
Mexico
214-767-2600
Region 7 (Kansas
City)
Iowa. Kansas, Missouri,
Nebraska
816-374-5493
Region 8 (Denver)
Colorado. Utah,
Wyoming, Montana.
North Dakota. South
Dakota
303-837-3895
Region 9 (San
Francisco)
Arizona. California.
Nevada. Hawaii
415-556 2320
Region 10 (Seattle)
Alaska. Idaho, Oregon.
Washington
206-442-1220
FEBRUARY 1979
37
-------
Around the Nation
R.I. To Enforce
Water Act
EPA's Boston Regional
Office announced recently
that the State of Rhode
Island has been granted
primary enforcement re-
sponsibility under the
Federal Safe Drinking
Water Act. Before respon-
sibility under this Act
could be transferred from
EPA, the State had to
establish drinking water
health standards at least
as tough as EPA's, and
had to show adequate
testing and enforcement
procedures. The Rhode
Island plan includes State
primary drinking water
regulations, an inventory
of public water systems, a
systematic program of
sanitary surveys, a State
program for certification
of water testing labora-
tories, and State labora-
tory facilities certified by
EPA. The State also has a
review program for plans,
record-keeping and re-
cording procedures, a pro-
gram for issuing variances
and exemptions, and a
plan for providing safe
drinking water under
emergency conditions. All
elements of this program
will be carried out by the
Rhode Island Department
of Health, Water Supply
Division.
Water Agreements
Signed
Regional Administrator
Eckardt Beck has signed
two water quality agree-
ments with the State of
New York that will put
new emphasis on con-
trolling toxic wastes in the
State, bring in 52.5 billion
in Federal construction
aid, and create another
185,000 construction
jobs within New York in
the next five years. The
Agreement on Water
Quality Management out-
lines how State agencies
will manage diverse
water quality programs
together and how New
York plans to spend both
State and Federal money
during the next five years
in addressing major water
pollution problems. The
major emphasis of the
agreement is on the con-
trol of toxic wastes, on
pretreating industrial
sewage wastes, on man-
aging solid wastes so that
resources are recycled or
wastes are buried in safe
landfills, and on con-
trolling polluted urban
and land runoff. The New
York Delegation Agree-
ment, which was made
possible by an amend-
ment to the Clean Water
Act, defines how the State
Department of Environ-
mental Conservation will
take over complete man-
agement of the waste-
water treatment works
construction program. By
signing the second agree-
ment, New York will have
available up to $47.5
million over the next 5
years to manage its own
construction grants pro-
gram, thus streamlining
the management, speed-
ing up the grants to mu-
nicipalities, and cutting
construction costs.
I & M Session Held
The Office of Intergovern-
mental Relations and Pub-
lic Awareness in Region 3
recently held a public in-
formation seminar in
Trenton, N.J. on the auto
emissions Inspection and
Maintenance (I&M) pro-
gram. More than 40 repre-
sentatives of Mid-Atlantic
State governments, citi-
zen groups, auto industry
and health associations
attended. The seminar
focused on the benefits
and costs of the I&M pro-
gram, which is required
by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1 977 for
States where other air pol-
lution control measures
will not lead to attainment
of health protective am-
bient air quality standards
by 1983. The I&M pro-
gram run by the State of
New Jersey was high-
lighted at the seminar.
The mandatory New Jer-
sey program was added
to the statewide auto
safety inspection program
in 1 974, after a two-year
voluntary program was
completed. It was the first
statewide auto emissions
program in the Nation.
The group attending the
seminar visited the State's
diagnostic auto emissions
laboratory and heard
briefings from EPA staff
members and representa-
tives of the N.J. Division
of Motor Vehicles, which
operates the I&M pro-
gram, and the N.J. Depart-
ment of Environmental
Protection. Region 3 is
working with 5 State-level
jurisdictions to implement
I&M programs. The Com-
monwealth of Pennsyl-
vania has already agreed
in a consent order to in-
stitute I&M in the Phila-
delphia and Pittsburgh
metropolitan areas.
TVA Agreement Set
The Tennessee Valley
Authority has agreed to
spend over $1 billion to
bring ten of its power
plants into compliance
with Federal air quality
standards by 1982. The
agreement settles a law-
suit brought several years
ago by ten environmenta I
groups, and later joined
by the States of Alabama
and Kentucky and EPA.
Region 4's Enforcement
Division Director Paul
Traina and Air Enforce-
ment Branch Chief James
Wilburn were instrumen-
tal in working out the de-
tails of the settlement on
behalf of the plaintiffs.
TVA Board Chairman S.
David Freeman began
negotiations on behalf of
TVA leading to the agree-
ment shortly after his
appointment to the Board
in August, 1977. Former
Chairman Aubrey Wagner
had refused to sign a set-
tlement before he retired.
The third board member,
William Jenkins, resigned,
citing his opposition to
Federal environmental
regulations. Final action
on the settlement was
stalled until a second
board member, Richard
M. Freeman, took his post
and gave the TVA board a
quorum. The settlement
calls for installation of
emission control equip-
ment to remove sulfur
dioxideand particulates,
the use of low sulfur coal
at some plants and pre-
washing of some high
sulfur coal. The plants are
required to be in compli-
ance with Federal air
quality standards by 1982.
Black News
Workshop Held
Region 4 and 6 recently
held a workshop for black
newspaper editors, pub-
lishers, and owners in
Atlanta. EPA staff briefed
the newspaper people on
Agency programs in clean
air, noise, water pollution
control, and toxics. The
National Newspaper Pub-
lishers Association spon-
sored the meeting through
a grant from EPA. The
workshop participants
took a special bus tour of
the new urban National
Park along the banks of
the Chattahoochee River
to point up the fact that
the new park is accessible
to inner-city residents for
a 15 cent bus fare.
Steel Co. Sued
A suit filed by the U.S.
Attorney for the Northern
District of Indiana, at the
request of Region 5, seeks
a court-ordered cleanup
schedule for Bethlehem
Steel Corporation's mill
at Burns Harbor, Ind. and
fines of $25,000 per day
for noncompliance. Ac-
cording to Enforcement
Director James 0. Mc-
Donald the action is di-
rected at two coke bat-
teries emitting over 2,200
tons of particulate matter
per year. Federal air pol-
lution regulations allow
approximately 500 tons
per year from such a
source. The suit also cites
the mill for air pollution
violations at its basic oxy-
gen facility. The particle
pollution from the mill is
an added problem be-
cause the surrounding
area does not meet Fed-
eral air quality standards.
Also the Bethlehem facil-
ity is located adjacent to
the Dunes National Lake-
shore Park and the par-
ticle discharges, which
are very visible, damage
the appearance of the
Park. Bethlehem was to
EPAJOURNAL
-------
have met the necessary
regulations by mid-1975.
Although the company is
constructing some facil-
ities to meet the regula-
tions, it is not now on an
enforceable Federal com-
pliance schedule.
Trinity River Authority of
Texas because Prime
Contractor H. B. Zachry
of San Antonio, Tex., has
allegedly violated provi-
sions of the Davis-Bacon
Act. The Regional Office
has asked the Office of
Civil Rights at EPA Head-
quarters to request an
administrative hearing
through the Secretary of
Labor to settle the dispute.
Fuel Switchers Fined
Region 6 has fined the
City of Irving, Tex..
$6,500 for using leaded
gas in unleaded gas
pumps at the Irving Mu-
nicipal Garage. Use of
leaded gas in late model
cars interferes with proper
operation of emission
control equipment, in-
creasing the release of
gases that combine with
sunlight to produce pho-
tochemical oxidants.
Edward B. Finch, EPA Ad-
ministrative Law Judge.
noted that the City had
not tested the lead con-
tent of its unleaded gaso-
fine for three years before
the excess was disclosed
and did not start testing
the gas until three months
after the contamination
was found. Finch ordered
the City be fined the full
amount requested by EPA.
Water Fine Set
Hunt-Wesson, Inc., of
New Orleans, La., has
reached a preliminary
agreement with Region 6
and the Department of
Justice to pay a $40,000
penalty for failing to meet
the deadline for attaining
Best Practicable Treat-
ment of water discharges.
The deadline was July 1,
1977. The company has
also agreed to a compli-
ance schedule to achieve
the correct treatment
level.
Grant Withheld
Region 6 is withholding
$298,000 in construction
grants funds from the
St. Louis Air
Analyzed
Region 7 has recently re-
leased a report, "Air Pol-
lution Over Greater St.
Louis," which identifies
air quality problems in the
city from data provided
by the States of Missouri
and Illinois. The report,
written by Seymour
Shuster of the Regional
Air Support Branch, dis-
cusses the nature of the
air pollution over the St.
Louis area and describes
the methods being used to
reduce the pollution to an
acceptable level. The Re-
gional Office published
the report to help people
gain a better understand-
ing and a greater appre-
ciation for the difficult
and complex task of clean-
ing up air pollution. Cur-
rently, the area only meets
air quality standards for
nitrogen dioxide. Particu-
lates, carbon monoxide,
and ozone still pose
problems. The Missouri
Department of Natural
Resources has drafted
legislation for an Inspec-
tion and Maintenance
program for automobiles.
State and local authorities
are working together to
develop other measures to
improve air quality over
St. Louis.
Foothills Accord
Reached
Region 8, the Denver
Water Board, and theU.S.
Army Corps of Engineers
have reached an agree-
ment that may clear the
way for construction to
begin on the Strontia
Springs Dam, part of the
Foothills Water Treat-
ment Complex. The ac-
cord cameafteran all-
night negotiating session
carried out with the help
of Rep. Tim Wirth ID-
Colo.). Under the terms
of the agreement the Den-
ver Water Board has
promised to implement a
water conservation pro-
gram to cut the area's per
capita water use at least
5percentby 1984andas
much as 20 percent by the
year 2000. The Regional
Office has agreed to drop
its opposition to a permit
needed by the Board in
order to build the Strontia
Springs Dam. The Corps
of Engineers was expected
to issue a dredge and fill
permit in late January,
and construction should
begin approximately a
month after the Board is
satisfied that no more
legal barriers exist. EPA
had opposed the construc-
tion of the dam, arguing
that alternatives had not
been sufficiently explored.
The Agency sought a wa-
ter conservation program
similar to the one set by
the agreement. Regional
Administrator Alan Mer-
son said, "No one got
everything they wanted,
but we all have something
we can live with."
Air Plan Set
A draft air quality plan for
southern California has
been drawn up with the
cooperative efforts of the
South Coast Air Quality
Management District and
the Southern California
Association of Govern-
ments. The plan, which
went to the Regional
Office early this year, is an
effort to develop an ac-
ceptable Air Quality Man-
agement Plan for the area,
as required by the Clean
Air Act and California's
Lewis Air Quality Man-
agement Act. The draft
plan contains a "shopping
list" of innovative meth-
ods to control air pollution
from all sources. Some of
the methods include pref-
erential parking for car-
pool vehicles, increased
reliance on one-way
streets, wider use of bi-
cycles as alternative
transportation, and modi-
fied work schedules to
ease traffic flow. The two
local government groups
have actively encouraged
participation by residents
and local industries
through a series of 1 5
workshops and public
hearings.
made under section 301
of the Clean Water Act,
which opened the door for
publicly-owned sewage
treatment works that dis-
charge to marine waters
to be excused from the
secondary treatment re-
quirement. The law set up
eight statutory criteria,
which must be met to EPA
satisfaction before waiv-
ers can be granted.
Recycling Works
In the 1 5 months since the
staff of EPA's Seattle Re-
gional Office began re-
cycling office paper, more
than 24 tons have been
collected and sent to
paper mills for re-use in
other paper products. The
mills currently pay about
$ 110 per ton for high-
grade paper, so the re-
cycling effort is paying off.
Even after the handling
charges of about $40 per
ton, EPA makes about
$70. The funds, which so
far total more than
$1,700, go into the U.S.
Treasury.
Water Agreements
Signed
Region 1 0 recently signed
water quality management
agreements with two of
the four States in the re-
gion. Separate agreements
with the Alaska Depart-
ment of Environmental
Conservation and the
Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality
spell out mutual objec-
tives that will be pursued
jointly by the State agen-
cies and EPA. In a com-
panion action in Alaska,
EPA delegated full author-
ity for the management of
the construction grants
program to the State. [~1
Waivers Sought
Region 10 has received
more than 1 00 requests
from communities in
Washington and Alaska
for waivers from the Fed-
eral requirement that all
publicly-owned sewage
treatment plants should
provide secondary treat-
ment. The requests were
FEBRUARY 1979
39
-------
Mining for Urban Ore
Continued from page P6
stantial advantage there can be no such
thing as central city industrial development.
It's simply not realistic." Garbage, as un-
likely as it may seem, is the advantageous
factor upon which the Port Authority's and,
in some part, the White House's urban
revitaltzation efforts are based.
"There is another important element
which is crucial to the success of these in-
dustrial parks," Montanus added. "When
you take recovered materials and ship them
to existing plants, the recovered material
has to bear the brunt of transportation costs
to the plant and back. It is not possible to
bear these costs and compete with virgin
materials. Most plants today are located in
the vicinity of primary materials. In order
for recovered materials to compete with
virgin materials the plant must be brought
to the new source of raw materials, which
happens to be the urban center. The urban
center also happens to be the market. Only
when you bring the plant to these locations
can the recovered material compete."
The Port Authority's program envisions
private developers and industrialists join-
ing public agencies to reclaim large
amounts of abandoned, dilapidated, or
vacant land in central cities. This could
help revitalize the urban economies in the
New York City-New Jersey region. Three
sites, which the Port Authority feels are
prime spots for the industrial development
program are Spring Creek in Brooklyn,
N.Y., the Greenville Yards in Jersey City,
N.J., and Doremus Avenue in Newark, N.J.
The Urban Development Corporation and
private industry as well as the Port Author-
ity are vying for the rights to the New York-
New Jersey region's 40,000 tons per day of
garbage. New York City, under pressure
because its existing landfills may have to
close by 1985, is performing studies before
awarding any contracts.
Much resource recovery activity has
been concentrated in the New York City
metropolitan area because landfills there
are scarce and energy costs higher than in
other parts of the country. But the appeal-
ing idea of steering municipal wastes away
from incinerators, landfills, and the ocean
and toward a technological process that
will enable the economic system to reclaim
it in the •form of fuel, raw materials, jobs,
and revenue will soon become practicable
in urban areas across the Nation. Private
industry and some public authorities are
ready to assume the risks of this enterprise,
and to reap its profits. D
Industrial Incineration
Continued from page ?1
incinerator. Just dumping chemicals into
an incinerator is neither efficient nor is it an
environmentally sound practice. Before we
can dispose of semi-solid or liquid chem-
icals safely and efficiently, we must know
more about them—their flammability rates,
heat content, and hazard characteristics."
Kodak offices and labs classify all
wastes that are sent to the incinerator.
They use a computer hook-up to identify
the make-up of the waste solvents, tars,
chemical sludges, and other materials that
go to the facility for disposal. Chemicals
that cannot be fully identified may be
turned back to the sender.
Fiber packs of semi-solid chemical
wastes are introduced into the kiln at timed
intervals. Operators constantly supervise
the changing blends of liquid and solid
wastes entering the incinerator to get maxi-
mum heat value and top efficiency from the
facility. Fine tuning of the incinerator dur-
ing its two years of operation has led to a
significant drop in auxiSiary fuel needs. The
incinerator now gets less than 4 percent
of its heat from fuel oil—a decrease from
13 percent when it first opened.
Combustion residues go into a quench-
ing chamber where they are cooled to 1 60-
1 80"F. This brings the vapors, which con-
tain various chemicals, down below their
dew points, so that they condense. A
highly-efficient water scrubber cleans the
cooled flue gases of fly ash and condensed
vapors. The solution from the scrubber then
goes to the wastewater treatment plant
for cleansing.
Scrubbed flue gases escape through a
chimney equipped with special ports to
allow sampling for environmental tests.
Kodak is studying ways to recycle heavy
metal salts such as silver, zinc, and iron
from the wastewater stream. The ash that
results from the combustion process has
been landfilled. Some of it is being sold to
a source that recovers the silver from the
residue.
The company estimates that it costs
about $1.5 million per year to run the
incinerator, which operates around the
clock, seven days a week.
TheSM Corporation's incineration sys-
tem is located at its Chemolite plant in
Cottage Grove, Minn. The facility, which
began operation in 1 972, is built on two
levels and burns wastes from many opera-
tions. Most wastes arrive in 55-gallon
drums, but the incinerator also has facil-
ities for tank truck unloading. The company
requires each operation to separate wastes
and to label all drums at the source. The
operations are charged a fee on each drum
of wastes that they send to the incinerator
for burning. This fee system helps encour-
age recycling and prevention of pollution
at the source.
The liquid wastes are pumped into one
of the five 1,000-gallon tanks at the site.
A semi-automatic feed system moves each
drum of oily rags and sludges directly into
the kiln. If possible the drum is recovered;
otherwise it burns with the wastes. Liquid
wastes pumped from the tank farm keep
the kiln at a minimum temperature of
11 00°F. Depending on the heat content of
the solid wastes being dumped into the
kiln, the temperature can go as high as
2200°F.
The employees at the facility have
earned one of 3M's Pollution Prevention
Pays awards for increasing the efficiency of
the facility's operation. They segregate the
drums of hot-burning wastes from the cold-
burning wastes and then mix the barrels of
waste to control incinerator temperature.
This uses the "hot" wastes to burn "cold"
wastes. The changeover has reduced 3M's
fuel costs by $1 50,000 per year. It also has
reduced the amount of sulfur dioxide pro-
duced by burning oil. The paniculate dis-
charge from the facility has been reduced
by approximately 2,000 pounds a year as
a result.
Inert ash and burned-out drums from the
kiln drop Into a quench chamber for cool-
ing. The materials travel on conveyor belts
into dump trucks, which carry them out to
landfills.
A secondary combustion chamber oper-
ating at temperatures over 1600°F, oxi-
dizes the gases and smoke that the kiln
generates. A 500-horsepower fan pulls
gases through a series of air pollution de-
vices, which use up to 1 ,500 gallons of
water per minute to scrub out impurities,
and then force the air up a 200-foot stack.
The gases enter the atmosphere at approxi-
mately 1 1 5°F. The dirty water produced
by the scrubbing process undergoes puri-
fication at a wastewater treatment plant
before it is discharged into the Mississippi
River.
These companies have shown that high
temperature incineration is a workable
alternative for treating hazardous wastes.
As controls on hazardous wastes become
tighter and producers are obliged to ac-
count for the wastes they turn out, more
industries may be persuaded to follow
these examples. D
Opposite: High temperature incinerator
at 3M Corporation site in Minnesota.
cover: Warning signs nt hazardous
waste site in Lowell, Mass.
40
EPA JOURNAL
-------
-------
\/\/
•*••
NO
TRESPASSING
WOKS WILL BE
PROSECUTED,
LPD
United Slates
Environmental Protection
Agency
Washington DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
Postage and Fees Paid
Environmental Protection Agency
"",335
Third Class
Bulk
------- |