United States Environmental Protection Agency Pollution Prevention Office Washington, DC 20460 March 1990 <&EPA Pollution Prevention News Inside: Editor's Corner Forum on £* Sustainable Agriculture O Demonstration «3 Projects /* Calendar of * Events Special Insert: PPIC User Bulletin To be added to our mailing list, please write: Pollution Prevention News U.S. EPA 401 M Street SW(PM-219) Washington, DC 20460 Editorial Staff: Prlsciila Flattery, Editor Gilah Langner by Rob Wolcott, Director, Environmental Resource Economics Division, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, U.S. EPA What economic activities result in the most severe and intractable environmental problems? Which of these are most ame- nable to a source reduction/pollution pre- vention approach? Reflecting upon EPA's assessment of the relative significance of residual environmental problems (Unfin- ished Business, 1987), one sector of concern is agriculture. Agriculture consists of multiple sources (over 2 million farms) generating diverse loadings (sediment, pesticides, fertilizers) to numerous pathways (streams, lakes, riv- ers, soils, and air). The sheer numbers which characterize agriculture are daunting. In order to supply the world's most prolific bounty, we apply enormous amounts of chemical inputs. Over 11 mil- lion tons of fertilizer and 8 million pounds of pesticidal active ingredients are applied annually in the United States. And the ex- panse of lands in agricultural use is vast over 800 million acres. Non-point source pollution, primarily related to agriculture, has become the most pervasive remaining water quality prob- lem in the U.S. For example, 70% of phos- phorus pollution, responsible for green algae and other excessive plant growth in lakes, is due to agriculture. Sediment is identified as a problem in most streams in the U.S.; detection of pesticides in surface and ground water is also a growing con- cern. In addition to water quality, agricul- ture is implicated in the majority of ongo- ing wetland losses, and emerging concerns about food safety and farm worker safety. The long term solutions to agricultural pollution, like the sources themselves, are highly diverse. Options include point source controls on feedlots, farm management plans that include practices such as nitro- gen soil testing, and ridge tillage to reduce erosion and pesticide losses, as well as regulatory and educational programs. In large part, however, the dominant theme of resolution must be voluntary, profit-maximizing, source reduction. The key elements of such a reduction strategy are the following: Revision of current federal farm price support policies which inefficiently foster continuous planting of single crops, the result of which is the use of more chemi- cally intensive production practices. Support of targeted, sustainable agricul- ture research to demonstrate and evalu- ate lower input production practices. Permanent placement in conservancy of agricultural lands that are critical envi- ronmentally either for habitat, ground- water vulnerability, surface water impacts, or wetland preservation and restoration. Demonstration and education regard- ing more environmentally benign pro- duction practices which also sustain yield and net farm income. Two common themes cut across all these approaches: first, the need to eliminate public policies that work against sustaina- bility in agriculture; and second, the need to generate and disseminate information that will make possible a voluntary shift in agricultural practices over the longer term. Printed on Recycled Paper ------- Pollution Prevention News - 2 March 1990 Forum on Sustainable Agriculture A Sustainable Agriculture Goal for the 1990 Farm Bill by Garth Youngberg The phrase "sustainable agriculture" has recently come into widespread use to de- scribe an ideal future agricultural system for the United States and the world as a whole. Using the word in its everyday sense, a sus- tainable system is one that can be main- tained indefinitely. By contrast, several fea- tures of the current system make it unsus- tainable, particularly in the long term. These include: heavy reliance on fossil fuels, including fuels consumed indirectly in the form of fertilizers and pesticides; environmentally damaging use of syn- thetic pesticides and inorganic fertilizers; cropping systems that degrade soils and water, both on and off the farm; chronically low economic returns that continue to force farmers, particularly family farmers, out of business; and undesirable side effects on the quality of life for rural communities, consumers, and society at large. At our present stage, no single set of currently available systems and technolo- gies can lay exclusive claim to having achieved the ultimate goal of agricultural sustainability. There is also much we do not know regarding the relationship between specific technologies and the actual sustaina- bility of an agricultural system. Nevertheless, this much we can say: that a variety of techniques currently available rotating crops, scouting fields to determine actual pest populations, the use of pest resis- tant crop varieties, recycling of animal ma- nures, and a number of biologically-based methods of pest control all hold consider- able promise for reducing the need for pesti- cides, conserving soil or enhancing soil pro- ductivity, and making farming systems more sustainable. The relevance of sustainable agriculture as a guide for federal agricultural policy is also becoming more widely apparent, not only for purposes of the 1990 farm bill, but also as a general policy standard. One need only ask if the federal government ought to support an unsustainable agriculture an agriculture that damages the environment, or that is heavily dependent on limited, non- renewable resources, or that forces farmers out of business, or that for any other reason cannot maintain itself into the indefinite future. Clearly, the long-term goal of sus- tainability is the only valid one for the fed- eral government to pursue. Although the concept of sustainable agri- culture has only recently achieved popular currency, it appears to be capable of mobiliz- ing a broad coalition of interests both within and outside the agricultural communities. To be sure, there is still much work to be done in developing, refining and using cri- teria of sustainability to help guide the farm bill discussions. But if that can be accom- plished, there is reason to believe that the 1990 farm bill can provide the basis for a truly new and more sustainable direction in American agriculture. Dr. Youngberg is the Executive Director of the Institute for Alternative Agriculture in Green- belt, Md., and editor of the American Journal of Alternative Agriculture. Alternative Agriculture: Lessons From the NRC Report by Charles M. Benbrook The National Research Council's report on Alternative Agriculture, released in Sep- tember 1989, presented a comprehensive as- sessment of American agriculture, focusing on how alternative agriculture production systems can contribute toward improving both the economic and environmental per- formance of American agriculture. The con- clusions reached in the study may help to dispel certain misconceptions about alterna- tive agriculture, while also pointing the way to a hopeful future. The study's key conclu- sions include the following: Farmers who adopt alternative farming systems often have productive and prof- itable operations, even though these farms usually function with relatively little help from commodity income and price sup- port programs or extension. Well-managed alternative farming sys- tems nearly always use less synthetic chemical pesticides, fertilizers, and anti- biotics per unit of production than com- parable conventional farms. Reduced use of these inputs through increased effi- ciency in the designs of cropping systems lowers production costs and lessens agri- culture's potential for adverse environ- mental and health effects, without neces- sarily decreasing {in some cases, increas- ing) per acre crop yields and the produc- tivity of livestock management systems. One of the most critical findings of the report is that the economic and environ- mental performance of farming systems are often closely interrelated. Farming systems that result in high per unit production costs often do so because of a mismatch in crop- ping patterns, natural resource conditions, and technology. High cost systems tend to make poor use of purchased inputs, and con- tribute disproportionately to pollution. Conversely, low-cost systems are not always or necessarily low-input systems. Indeed, al- ternative systems are typically more hi-tech, more sophisticated, and clearly more de- pendent on information, management, and resource conservation expenditures. In recent years, about 70 percent of the na- tion's cultivated cropland has been enrolled in commodity price support programs. By tolerating and at times encouraging unreal- istically high yield goals, inefficient fertilizer and pesticide use, and unsustainable use of land and water, federal program rules have in some cases had adverse effects not only on the environmental but also on the economic performance of some farming systems. Fu- ture farm programs should reduce or elimi- nate incentives to manage farms and other fragile lands in a way that impairs environ- mental quality. Finally, our report places considerable faith in the resourcefulness of the American farmer. The transition to more biologically- based farming will challenge both farmers and academic researchers to develop new skills and much greater sophistication in re- enlisting Mother Nature in the enterprise of farming. Dr. Benbrook is the Executive Director of the Board on Agriculture, National Research Coun- cil. This article is based on his testimony before joint Congressional hearings in October 1989. ------- March 1990 Demonstration Projects Mississippi's Pesticide Containers Recycling Project by Patti Drapala and Robert McCarty An ambitious container disposal project begun last May in Washington County, Mississippi, has given pesticide users a legal and affordable alternative to burning pesti- cide containers or dumping them in landfills. The project involved the rinsing, collecting and recycling of empty pesticide containers, and could point the way for farmers and applicators to solve a mounting problem in a county heavily dependent upon agriculture. Mississippi is the first state to start a vol- untary disposal project that addresses all phases of the container disposal problem. The comprehensive aspect of the program has attracted the attention of such agricul- tural states as Iowa, Kansas, Florida and Minnesota. Program participants were asked to pressure rinse or triple rinse metal and plastic containers used during the 1989 grow- ing season, emptying the rinsate back into the spray tank for further use on crops. More than 650 pressurized nozzles were supplied to farmers and users by ICI Americas. Eight designated collection sites were made available by aerial pesticide applica- tors in Washington County. Empty contain- ers were separated at these collection sites. Metal containers were hauled to Friedman Steel, a metalwork plant in Greenville, Miss., where they were melted at a high tempera- ture, destroying all remaining residues. Plastic containers, however, posed a dis- posal problem. It wasn't feasible to melt A cotton trailer full of empty pesticide containers ready for crushing and baling at the cotton gin. them. Project organizers improvised a solu- tion after cotton producer Rex Livingston of Leland, Miss., suggested using his old cotton gin to crush and bale the plastic. The bales of plastic were then shipped to Ohio and pul- verized into flakes and pellets for recycling. A research team from Du Pont was re- cruited to analyze samples of the rinsed plastic containers and residues left within the plastic. The analysis, when completed, will provide answers concerning possible products made from recycling containers and will be shared with manufacturers of the collected products and members of the Na- tional Agricultural Chemical Association. Project organizers are pleased with the success of the project. They note, however, that a number of issues require further atten- tion, including the availability of facilities for crushing plastic containers; the need to separate sodium chlorate containers because of the risk of fire if they come in contact with phosphate-based products at high tempera- 3 - Pollution Prevention News ^, w > s mm tures; and the need to provide ongoing com- prehensive instructions to participants on implementing the program. What happened in Washington County, though, is a good example of what can hap- pen elsewhere. More counties in Mississippi are eager to begin recycling projects, and many organizations, including EPA, are studying the experiment. "Farmers don't want to contaminate the environment," says Robroy Fisher, a prominent cotton and soy- bean farmer from Glen Allen, Miss. "Here, we think we've proved that farmers do care, that they can properly clean and collect the containers and that the containers can be recycled into a useful product." As part of the project, Mississippi has been examining a variety of packaging and transportation options for pesticide prod- ucts, with the goal of minimizing the han- dling and disposal of containers. Discus- sions were held with dealers, manufactur- ers, distributors, farmers, and commercial applicators on the feasibility of returnable, refillable containers; the useof different types of materials for containers (such as paper, glass, plastic, and metal); and how best to match different types of container materials with different types of disposal programs. A report summarizing the findings of the proj- ect will be available later this year. Patti Drapala is a writer with the Department of Information Services at Mississippi State Uni- versity. Robert McCarty is deputy director of the Division of Plant Industry for the Mississippi Department of Agriculture and Commerce. For further information, call 601-325-3390. Pollution Prevention/ LISA Project As part of last year's Agency-wide 2% pollution prevention project competition, EPA is funding a new initiative to educate farmers, extension agents, and crop consult- ants to use the latest information in their weed management decisions. Scheduled to begin in October 1990, the project calls for the joint efforts of EPA Regions 7 and 8, EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and agriculture experiment stations and univer- sities in Minnesota, Illinois, and Colorado. The aim of the project will be to involve farmers and others directly in research, dem- onstration, and educational activities which promote low-input sustainable agricultural production decisions. A computer model will be distributed that contains ten years of research data with over 150 herbicide/cul- tural options for corn and corn rotations, plus their projected yields and costs. Grow- ers can use this information to reduce their reliance on chemical herbicides. The benefits of reducing herbicide usage in corn produc- tion include cost savings to farmers; reduced exposure to herbicides during mixing, load- ing, application, and cleanup; and a reduced risk of ground-water contamination in the Central Great Plains and Midwestern Corn Belt corn production systems. Pilot studies conducted in Colorado have demonstrated an 85% reduction in the use of herbicides and a cost savings of $25 per acre. On a national basis, this would translate to a potential reduction in the use of corn herbi- cides by 170 million pounds annually. The use of herbicides on corn accounts for roughly 40% of all agricultural herbicide use in the United States and 25% of all agricultural pesticide use. All eight of the major corn herbicides have been detected in groundwa- ter in recent studies. For more information, contact Dr. Bernard Smale in OPP at 703-557-1443. ------- Pollution Prevention News - 4 March 1990 Calendar of Events Title Sponsor Dates Contact EarthTech 90: Technology Fair and International Forum Environmental and Energy Study Institute April 4-8 Washington, DC Nisha Desai 202-289-0800 New England Environmental Expo Various organizations April 10-12 Boston, MA Daniel Moon 617-489-2302 8th Annual Virginia Waste Management Conference Government Refuse Collection & Disposal Association April 24-25 Richmond, VA Lanier Hickman 800-456-4723 Waste Exposition '90 National Solid Waste Management Association May 2-4 Atlanta, GA Registrar 202-659-4613 National Conference on Building Products Tennessee Initiative for Environ- mental Sensitivity in Construction May 6-8 Washington, DC Trust for Future 615-297-2269 Hazwaste Expo Atlanta '90 National Association of Hazardous Waste Generators May 7-9 Atlanta, GA Robert McCarty 215-683-5098 Haztech International '90 Institute for International Research: American Chemical Society May 8-10 Houston, TX Benjamin Deutsch 212-826-3340 Enviro Expo Anchor Resources, Inc. May 15-16 Baton Rouge, LA Andy Johnson 504-291-99% 5th Annual Aerospace Haz. Waste Minimization Conference Hughes Aircraft Company May 22-24 Costa Mesa, CA Alex 3apre 213-568-6365 The first National Town Meeting on Solid Waste issues will be held on April 4,1990,2-4 P.M. Eastern Time, through a video conference entitled "Let's Not Waste the '90s." Sponsored by Keep America Beautiful, Inc., the conference can be picked up free of charge by any college, hotel, or community center with a satellite receiving the C or KU bands. For more information, contact Susanne Woods at (203) 323-8987. United States Environmental Protection Agency (PM-219) Washington, DC 20460 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 FIRST CLASS MAIL POSTAGE & FEES PAID EPA PERMIT NO. G-35 II1.I.II.....I.III.....I.II..I1I iiiMn.Mniilsluhllnainii.nl ------- Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Pollution Prevention Office Office of Environmental Engineering and Technology Demonstration March 1990 1 s The Bulletin Sets Its Course The PPIC User Bulletin is designed to assist Federal, State, and local pollution prevention programs in the transfer of relevant technical, scientific, and legislative information. The Bulletin will appear as a periodic insert of the Pollution Prevention News and will spotlight information available through the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse (PPIC). A national and international communication network, the PPIC consists of: a hotline, repository, the Electronic Information Exchange System (EIES), and networking activities. Hotline Telephone Access to PPIC Information The PPIC has coordinated with the RCRA/ Superfund hotline and Small Business Ombudsman (SBO) hotline to provide free telephone service to answer or refer pollution prevention questions, access information in the PPIC, and assist in document searches and ordering. The number for the RCRA/ Superfund Hotline is (800) 424-9346. The number for the SBO Hotline is (800) 368-5888. The RCRA/Superfund hotline has access to the following PPIC sources: pollution prevention definitions Federal, State/local program summaries industry programs/case studies waste minimization assessments Regional and State contacts calendar of events the EIES. The SBO and ORD's Pollution Prevention Research Branch will also convey information on grants available to small businesses to demonstrate innovative pollution prevention techniques and programs. The project results will be disseminated by the PPIC as they become available. The RCRA/Superfund hotline, staffed with 25 information specialists, receives about 100 calls per month regarding pollution prevention. The large majority of these calls are requests EPA publications on pollution prevention. The SBO Hotline, staffed with 5 information specialists, provides small businesses and their trade associations with answers to technical and policy questions concerning asbestos, TSCA, RCRA, CERCLA, and chemical emergency preparedness, in addition to general information on pollution prevention. John Ferris of the RCRA/Superfund Hotline In addition to these Hotlines, interested parties can pose questions on pollution prevention and the EIES system J, , through the PPIC Technical . Assistance Line (703) 821 -4800 or through the EIES Message Center. ¦ Pollution Prevention Hotline Resources RCRA/Superfund 800-424-9346 SBO 800-368-5888 Karen Brown, Director of the SBO Hotline Send Us Your Comments Welcome to the first Issue of the PPIC User Bulletin. EPA's PPIC Staff encourages comments on topics for future Issues. The effectiveness of The Bulletin will depend in large part on the participation of our readers. Comments should be mailed to: PPIC User Bulletin USEPA 401 M Street, SW, RD 681 Washington, DC 20460 Thank you! Myies E. Morse, PPIC Director Printed on Recycled Paper ------- Repository Resources Available Open to the public With the help of State agencies, PPIC is expanding a nationally accessible repository of pollution prevention information. The repository is an important resource for EPA and State technical assistance programs and serves as the backbone of the PPIC. The repository documents include texts, journals, manuals, fact sheets, case studies, and legislation. Over half the documents have been provided by state pollution prevention programs. The states of California, Alaska, Oregon, and the Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP) have been major contributors of fact sheets and case studies for industries including: automotive repair, pesticide formulating, metal finishing, printing, photo finishing, and dry cleaning. A bibliography of available documents can be accessed through the EIES or upon request, obtained directly from the PPIC. Smaller documents and brochures, especially those developed by EPA, are also available upon request through the PPIC. Other documents, will be available through the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). For those documents not available through the PPIC or NTIS, information will be available on how to obtain these documents through their original publishers. By late summer, the entire collection will be available for viewing at the EPA Headquarters Library. Abstracts of all documents in the repository are currently available on the EIES. If a document is not currently available through the repository, PPIC staff will be glad to help locate it. If you have a document about pollution prevention that you wish to list or distribute through the repository, let us know by phone (703) 821-4800, letter, or through the EIES. ¦ New Publications Clean Technology Great Britain's Department of the Environment This 24-page booklet describes clean technology options and payback scenarios for eleven common industries. Using examples of actual companies, each section describes a process that was modified, how the modification was made, and what advantages were gained, including economic benefits. Hazardous Waste Minimization (HWM) McGraw-Hill This 344-page text is written by waste reduction experts and edited by Harry Freeman, Chief of EPA's Pollution Prevention Research Branch of the Office of Research and Development. To order HWM, call McGraw-Hill Inc., at 1-800- 2-MCGRAW. HWM identifies solutions and incentives in adopting a company pollution prevention program such as reduction of operating costs and waste management liabilities. HWM describes the essential components of a corporate pollution prevention program; details how to include pollution prevention in your business and marketing plans; and how to conduct a waste minimization assessment. HWM summarizes inventory management, process modification, and recovery techniques and technologies. HWM also profiles local government and corporate programs, including California's Ventura County Waste Minimization Program and the General Dynamics Zero Discharge program. ¦ Upcoming PPIC Publications Pollution Prevention Training Opportunities in 1990 A new publication of the Office of Pollution Prevention, this document will soon be available from the PPIC repository. The manual describes State pollution prevention training programs and lists instructional materials, including manuals and videos. Pollution Prevention Curricula A document describing pollution prevention curricula in college and graduate level science and engineering programs is also being produced and will be available from the PPIC repository when completed. Teleconference Video The PPIC will distribute copies of a video about PPIC and EIES, being produced as part of the upcoming teleconference sponsored by the University of Tennessee's Center for Industrial Services. PPIC Vital Statistics Holdings: Repository Case Studies Video Library 617 400 8 Calls: January 1, 1990 to February 22,1990 EIES 745 PPIC Staff 353 PPIC Technical Support Line 32 RCRA/Superfund Hotline 193 Information Packets PPIC offers a general information packet that contains: Waste Minimization: Environmental Quality with Economic Benefits EPA Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessment Manual Flyers summarizing PPIC and EIES functions EIES User Manual "Profiting from Waste Reduction in Your Small Business," published by the Alaska Health Project EPA Pollution Prevention Policy statements The PPIC also offers industry-specific information packets. A packet now available on metal finishing contains: Waste Minimization in Metal Parts Cleaning (EPA Manual) Pollution Prevention in Metal Manufacturing: Saving Money Through Pollution Prevention (EPA Manual) Oregon Hazardous Waste Reduction Program: Guidelines for Waste Reduction and Recycling: Solvents and Metal Finishing, Electroplating, Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing Case Studies on Metal Finishing from Minnesota, Oregon, and the PPIC To receive any of these materials, write, call, or leave a message on the EIES. ¦ User Bulletin 2 ------- Electronic Information Exchange System (EIES) EIES To Expand On March 15, 1990, EPA opened its Electronic Information Exchange System (EIES) on a new computer system dedicated to the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse (PPIC). The new system is faster, more accessible, and offers users additional features. The new EIES system allows up to 20 users toaccess information simultaneously via 14 telephone lines. Six additional lines will allow connection through a dial-up service such as Dialcom or Telenet. The new EIES boasts new features: EIES Contact List: An electronic directory of over 400 State and Federal contacts that can be searched by name, state, and area of expertise. Pollution Prevention Legislation Data Base: This Federal and State tracking system contains summary, status, and the full text of legislation. New Mini-exchanges: Each mini-exchange is a self-contained system that allows users to access message systems, files and data bases dedicated to specific pollution prevention topic areas. They include: International Cleaner Production Information Clearinghouse (ICPIC) Users can convey messages, view bulletins and download files from the computer system developed for UNEP in Paris, France. All messages and files are automatically transferred bi-weekly to and from the ICPIC. EPA Regional Exchanges Set up to assist in communication among EPA regions and their states, the first two exchanges feature the Region I Association of State and Interstate Agencies and the Region X Northwest Regional Roundtable. Waste Exchange PPIC is developing a national waste exchange to promote the reuse of waste materials. PPIC is coordinating its efforts with existing waste exchanges. International EIES Underway EPA donates new computerAs part of a proposed three-year cooperative agreement between EPA and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), EPA delivered a computer and a duplicate of the Electronic Information Exchange System (EIES) to UNEP in Paris, France in October, 1989. EPA has donated the system to assist UNEP in the development of an international information network on pollution prevention. The EIES computer system will operate as part of the International Cleaner Production Information Clearinghouse (ICPIC). Information on UNEP's computerized system will include technical, programmatic and legislative information on activities ongoing within United Nations member countries, and will expand upon the EIES case studies data base. Information will be transferred on a bi-weekly basis between ICPIC/EIES and the U.S. PPIC/EIES. EIES users will be able to exchange messages and information with international contacts without making an overseas connection. During the next few months, the EPA and a limited number of other users will assist UNEP in testing the ICPIC system to prepare for the unveiling of the UNEP network at the Seminar on the Promotion of Cleaner Products in Canterbury, England in late September of 1990. ¦ PPIC ON THE ROAD EIES IS... A computerized system that provides easy access to pollution prevention information contained in the PPIC. The system is open to the public free of user fees. EIES features literature search functions; a national calendar of conferences and workshops; a message center; and direct access to news and documents. For more information on EIES, you may obtain a free user guide by calling the PPIC Technical Support line at (703) 821-4800. ¦ PPIC poster sessions and demonstrations will be on display at the following events: Hazmat Chicago March 13 to March 15, 1990 Globe 90 Vancouver, BC March 19 to March 21,1990 University of Tennessee Teleconference March 19 to March 21, 1990 EPA RREL 16th Annual Research Symposium April 3 to April 5, 1990 Cincinnati, OH New England Environmental Expo, Boston April 10 to April 12, 1990 ADPA Atlanta April 17 to April 20, 1990 Haztech International Houston May 8 to May 10, 1990 Waste Minimization in Metal Finishing May 23 to May 24, 1990 Manhattan, KS Connect with EIES for detailed conference schedules and contacts. After March 15, EIES users must dial (703) 506-1025 to access EIES. A toll-free number is reserved for State and local government users. Clearance for the toll-free number can be obtained by either dialing EIES using the number above and leaving a message with the system operators, or by phoning the PPIC Technical Support number, (703) 821-4800. User Bulletin 3 ------- Networking and Outreach Efforts One of PPIC's roles is to network with other Pollution Prevention efforts. By developing this network, EPA can provide all PPIC users with information on current pollution prevention projects. Two members of the national network are EPA Region IV and EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory. Updates of their latest projects can be accessed through PPIC. Summaries of these programs appear below. Region IV Undertakes Pollution Prevention Efforts EPA Research Center for Waste Minimization and Management Region IV and Region VI operate one of EPA's five Hazardous Substance Research Centers. The center's mission is to develop practical means for industry to eliminate the use and generation of hazardous substances. Research is provided by North Carolina State University, which focuses on pollution prevention, and by the University of North Carolina and Texas A&M University, which both study remediation and control issues. According to Elizabeth Shaver, Region IV's Pollution Prevention Program Manager, researchers at the year-old center are studying ways to eliminate chlorinated solvents in semiconductor manufacturing. Other potential projects include studying dioxin and chlorinated organics in the pulp and paper industry and volatilization of organics in flexible foam manufacturing. The PPIC includes a description of the center's activities in EIES bulletin #13. PPIC is creating a mini-exchange on pollution prevention research. (See the EIES section of this Bulletin for information on mini-exchanges.) Waste Reduction Resource Center for the Southeast The Region IV Hazardous Waste Management Roundtable sponsors the Waste Reduction Resource Center for the Southeast (WRRC). The WRRC was established to assist Region IV states in developing and implementing their pollution prevention programs. Businesses and communities within the Region can contact the WRRC with specific pollution prevention questions. The WRRC draws from the extensive experience and resources established by the North Carolina Pollution Prevention Pays (NCPPP) program, including a library of over 2,500 pollution prevention holdings. WRRC's trained engineers suggest pollution prevention options and compile responses (including case studies and equipment vendors) to businesses and communities within the Region. Information requests vary greatly. "Sometimes it's as simple as office solid waste recycling, or as complicated as 'I've got a mixed waste stream and want to do source reduction,"' observes John Keith, staff engineer. The WRRC also refers callers to other links in the national pollution prevention network. "One of our big referrals is to the Southeast Waste Exchange. If someone has already done what they can in source reduction, I try to hook them up with the waste -jUJltON PWvtNn exchange," Keith says. Keith also relies on the EIES as a technical back-up. "I access the EIES regularly," he says. "Sometimes we get a question we just can't answer, so I will throw the question out to the network." Keith also uses the EIES to keep abreast of "what's going on in industries, what users are chatting about." Individuals in Region IV may reach the WRRC by contacting: Waste Reduction Resource Center 512 N. Salisbury Street P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, NC 27611-7687 (919) 733-7015 The WRRC has compiled a Core Reference Library, a selection of documents from the NCPPP, for Region IV states. EPA will make the core library references available to PPIC users in April. The core bibliography is available in Bulletin # 4 on EIES. Inspection and Enforcement Innovations Region IV's pollution prevention strategy employs enforcement and inspection programs as a conduit for pollution prevention information to the regulated community. Inspectors receive pollution prevention instruction as part of their training. During inspections, they will be distributing basic materials and answering questions on pollution prevention. Further, the Region actively participates on an Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring (OECM) work group that is drafting guidelines to incorporate prevention options into enforcement actions. Region IV will pilot the new guidelines in at least one settlement within each media program in 1990. The progress of enforcement efforts will be tracked In Bulletin #13 on ties. Progress summaries will be updated quarterly by PPIC. ¦ Innovative Technology Research The Waste Reduction Innovative Technology Evaluation (WRITE) Program is one of several pollution prevention programs run by the Pollution Prevention Research Branch (PPRB), of EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory. WRITE is designed to develop, evaluate, and demonstrate clean production technologies and implement other innovative pollution prevention techniques. WRITE conducts these evaluations by issuing R&D grants to States and directly to industry. Several projects are now underway through the WRITE program: New jersey DEP is evaluating the Zerpol "Zero Discharge" electroplating wastewater recovery system. California DHS is evaluating several process modifications at General Dynamics. These include on-demand rinsing; substitution of bead blasting for TCE paint stripping; installation of a robotics with proportional paint mixing, and electrostatic spray guns. Illinois HWRIC is exploring the substitution of water based and soybean oil based inks in the flexographic printing industry. Summary reports from each WRITE project will be filed in the PPIC repository upon completion of each case study. The new EIES R&D mini-exchange will also track the progress of each WRITE project. For further information contact PPIC through its Technical Assistance Line or through the EIES. ¦ User Bulletin 4 ------- |