United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office ot Pe»ti;irie
and To>:ic Si'Jitances
Washington DC 20460
HPA-560, T i 13-81 -005
December 1 382
Tom; Suostances
State Integrated Toxics
Management: 18 Profiles
Toxics Integration
Information Series
-------
STATE INTEGRATED TOXICS MANAGEMENT: 18 PROFILES
PREPARED BY
REGIONAL AND STATE RELATIONS STAFF,
OFFICE OF TOXICS INTEGRATION
ANNE FENN
CAROL PARKER
ROBERT QCJINN
VICKIE REED
BRENDA SLATON
Scott STROUPE
and
MARSHA RAMSAY, PROGRAM MANAGER
-------
STATE INTEGRATED TOXICS MANAGEMENT: 18 PROFILES
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
ILLINOIS
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MONTANA
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
OKLAHOMA
PENNSYLVANIA
UTAH
VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
TOXICS INTEGRATION INFORMATION SERIES
-------
OTHER PUBLICATIONS IN THE TOXICS INTEGRATION POLICY SERIES:
State Administrative Models for Toxic Substances Management
(July 1980) EPA-560/13-80-018
State Integrated Toxics Management: Fact and Challenge
(July 1981) EPA-560/TIPS-81-001
Chemical Substances Designation (December 1981)
EPA-560/TIIS-82
OTHER PUBLICATIONS IN THE TOXICS INTEGRATION INFORMATION SERIES:
EPA Chemical Activities Status Report - 1st Edition (June 1979)
EPA-560/13-79-003
EPA Chemical Activities Status Report - 2nd Edition
(December 1980) EPA-560/13-80-040(a)
(3rd Edition due Jan. 1983)
Directory of Federal Coordinating Groups for Toxic Substances
1st Edition (June 1979), 2nd Edition (March 1980)
EPA-560/13-80-008
(3rd Edition due Feb. 1983)
Perspectives on the Top 50 Production Volume Chemicals (July 1980)
EPA-560/13-80-027
Federal Activities in Toxic Substances (May 1980)
EPA-560/13-80-015 Revised May 1983
(Next edition due May 1983)
TSCA Status Report for Existing Chemicals Volume 1, Issue 2
(July 1980) EPA-560/13-80-033
TSCA Status Report for Existing Chemicals Volume 2, Issue 2
(July 1981) EPA-560/TIIS-81-004
Perspectives on State-EPA Grant Activities (September 1980)
EPA-560/13-80-037
Chemical Selection Methods: An Annotated Bibliography
(November 1980) EPA-560/TIIS-80-001
Chemical Information Resources Handbook (January 1981)
EPA-560/TIIS-81-002
-------
Toxic Substances Control Act Grants to States (July 1981)
EPA-560/TIIS-81-003
TSCA Chemicals in C amerce: Regional and State Perspectives
(July 1981) EPA-5601 TIIS-81-005
For oopies, contact:
National Technical Information Service
4285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
-------
PREFACE
During 1982, we examined the health and environmental
programs of eighteen states to assess state capabilities and
common needs with respect to identifying and solving cross-
media toxic substances problems.
Discussions with a variety of state officials covered such
areas as statutory and executive authorities, organizational
structures, data management and toxics control efforts. In
addition, problems and issues such as proprietary information,
risk assessment, and resource cutbacks sometimes surfaced.
Using this information, the State Profiles were prepared.
Drafts of the Profiles were reviewed by officials in the
respective states, and their comments have been incorporated
into this document. In addition, drafts were reviewed by
selected EPA Regional and program office staff? EPA comments
are incorporated also.
As requested, the Profiles are being provided to health
and environmental agencies in all of the states to help facilitate
information sharing among them. Further, we are in the process
of evaluating mutual state needs in order to provide appropriate
technical assistance where feasible. We hope this publication
will serve to further both purposes.
Further information on the States Project can be obtained
by contacting Marsha Ramsay at (202) 382-3405.
M. 1 r.t ts_ t. '
Walter w. Kovalick
Director
Integration Staff
Office of Toxics Integration
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Arkansas 1
California 7
Colorado 20
Connecticut 28
Illinois. 37
Maryland 50
Massachusetts ^
Michigan 71
Montana 87
New Jersey. 97
New Mexico. 107
New York 115
North Carolina 131
Oklahoma 146
Pennsylvania 153
Utah 161
Virginia 171
Wisconsin 182
-------
Arkansas ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. Water and Air Pollution Control Act (as amended).
2. Hazardous Material Transportation Act.
3. Hazardous Waste Management Act.
4. Resource Reclamation Act.
•B. Major Agencies
1. Department of Pollution Control and Ecology (DPC&E).
2. Office of Emergency Services.
3. Department of Health (DOH).
A. Arkansas Transportation Commission.
C. Other Agencies
1. Department of Highways and Transportation.
2. Arkansas State Police.
3. Arkansas National Guard.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. Executive Order 78-2 creating the Toxic Substances and
Hazardous Materials Strategy.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Memorandum of Understanding on Toxic Spills between
DPC&E abd DOH.
2. "One stop" permitting.
3. Emergency Operations Plan.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Consolidated laboratories
2. Monitors and investigation trained in all media (air,
water, etc.)
3. Limited epidemiological studies.
4. Required reporting of amounts and kinds of all hazardous
wastes.
-1-
-------
B. Data Coordination
1. Consolidated data system within DPC&E.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Emergency Management
1. Emergency Operations Plan involving DPC&E, DOH, Office
of Emergency Services, Department of Highways and
Transportation.
8. Transportation - Related Problems
1. Cooperation between DPC&E and DOT in addressing problems.
Key State Officials
Governor: Bill Clinton
Jarrell E. Southall
Director, Department of Pollution Control and Ecology
8001 National Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72209
(501) 562-4444
Benjamin Saltzman
Director, Department of Health
4815 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 661-2000
Program Contacts
Richard Cassat
Director, Technical Services Branch
Department of Pollution Control and Ecology
8001 National Drive
Little Rock, AR 72209
(501) 562-7444
Robert Blanz
Deputy Director, Program Operations
Department of Pollution and Ecology
8001 National Drive
Little Rock, AR 72209
(501) 562-7444
Edward Stalltup
Coordinator, Emergency Operations Plan
Office of Emergency Services
P.O. Box 758
Conway, AR 72032
(501) 374-1201
-2.
-------
Donald Wise
Office of Hazardous Materials
Department of Health
4815 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 661-2000
J.P. Lofgren
Epidemiology Program
Department of Health
4815 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 661-2000
Henry Gray
Director, Department of Highways and Transportation
(501) 569-2000
Leon McGoogan
Director, Office of Emergency Services:
(501) 374-1201
Major General Harold W. Gwatney
Arkansas State Military Department
(501) 758-4053, ext. 2000
-------
Arkansas ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
Arkansas' integrated toxics management was formally initiated in
1978 under Executive Order 782, which mandated the creation of the Toxic
Substances and Hazardous Materials Strategy. This highly ambitious
Strategy was designed by a Committee of Department Heads representing
seven major State agencies (Department of Pollution Control and Ecology,
Department of Health, Department of Cotnmerce, Department of Transportation,
Department of Public Safety, Department of Computer Services and Department
of Game and Fish). The Strategy was completed during the fall of 1978.
The Strategy called for a highly visible and formal structure of
interagency subcommittees to provide coordination of major activities
such as emergency response, health studies, regulatory development, etc.
Due to a series of State and federal funding reductions beginning in
1979, interagency coordination has been on an informal, ad hoc, basis
rather than through the subcommittees.
Most of the needed legislation and regulation authorities which
were identified in the Strategy were obtained in 1979. Major legislation
included the Arkansas Hazardous Waste Management Act (Act 406 and Act
1979) and the Arkansas Resource Reclamation Act (Act 1098 of 1979), Act
406 and Act 109S authorizes the Arkansas Department of Pollution Control
and Ecology (DPC&E) to collect information and conduct studies regarding
most aspects of toxics. Act 406 further requires the DPC&E to "integrate
all provisions of this Act with the appropriate revision of other Acts."
As will be explained below, much of the integration of toxics management
is centered in DPC&E, due to the wide range of the Department's regulatory
and investigative authorities.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
As previously mentioned, resource limitations have caused the
formal interagency coordination which was envisioned in the Strategy to
give way to a much less comprehensive approach. Instead of focusing
resources through the various subcommittees envisioned in the 1978
Strategy, the State has focused its resources where there are immediate
needs and where toxics management is considered within those needs. For
example, DPC&E is currently developing a comprehensive groundwater
management strategy which necessarily recognizes and provides for interagency
efforts.
III. Information Management
The largest steps toward integration within the sector of information
management are being taken by DPC&E. The Department maintains a consolidated
system of laboratories. Those responsible for inspection and monitoring
are trained in all environmental media thus resulting in large economic
savings. Furthermore, all collected data is housed in a consolidated
data system.
-4-
-------
Efforts at integration of information management at the State
Department of Health have been somewhat less successful than those at
DPC&E. Birth defects and cancer registries, proposed within the Strategy,
were initiated but since have been ended. An analytical program with
the State University Medical Center, correlating health and environmental
data, was begun but was quickly eliminated due to funding problems.
The Hazardous Materials Section within DOH has been cut from seven personnel
to one. Finally, the epidemiology program within DOH is fairly limited
in effectiveness largely due to a scarcity of resources.
IV. Toxics Control
The control of toxics in Arkansas has followed the basic thrust of
the Strategy. However, federal initiatives, which were not envisioned
during the Strategy development, have caused certain deviations, as have
reductions in funds. Superfund, for example, has created a drain on
already limited State resources, but it has provided means for
developing information regarding waste disposal sites and for achieving
needed corrective measures. Similarly, toxics control has become an increasingly
important element in federal air and water pollution control programs.
Perhaps the federal program which has given DPC&E the most direct
opportunity to focus on the problem of toxics is the EPA hazardous waste
(RCRA) program.
DPC&E has received delegation of essentially all of the delegable
permit and enforcement authorities of the EPA and currently plans that
all such programs will be delegated by July 1, 1983. As DPC&E assumes
the operation of these programs, it is eliminating duplicative State
efforts and is establishing a foundation for improved toxics control.
Toxics are currently subject to the Department's permit controls
under the following programs: Air (PSD, NESHAPS, NSPS), Water (VIC,
NPDES), Mining and the Hazardous Waste Program. Additionally, the
Department's water quality planning program has established best
management practices to control toxics from nonpoint sources. With
respect to agricultural chemicals, the University of Arkansas has
had a longstanding integrated pesticide management program
which has resulted in a substantial reduction in the use of pesticides.
Arkansas' emergency response capabilities have been significantly
upgraded since 1978. The Arkansas Transportation Commission has provided
equipment and supplies for interagency responses to spills. The
State Office of Emergency Services has fully integrated spill response
procedures within the State's Emergency Operations Plan. Under that
Plan, DOH and DPC&E have developed a Memorandum of Agreement which
outlines the responsibilities of the respective agencies. Basically,
the agreement specifies that the DOH has lead responsibility
in providing medical service and other health related services whereas
DPC&E's responsibilities are spill containment, cleanup and monitoring.
Several spills have occurred which required implementation of the
Emergency Operations Plan and the assistance of numerous State and
federal agencies. A major oil spill on the Arkansas River resulted in
intensive involvement of DPC&E, the EPA, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the
Corps of Engineers with assistance of the Arkansas National Guard.
-5-
-------
Materials which were being transported on 1-30 west of Little Rock
became unstable in transit and resulted in the closing of the freeway
for a substantial period of time. This incident required intensive
involvement of the State Police, the Highway Department, DPC&E, DOH and
numerous local fire and law enforcement agencies. The 1-30 incident
clearly demonstrated the success with which the Office of Emergency
Services has been able to integrate local fire and law enforcement
agencies within the State's Emergency Operations Plan and to provide
essential coordination.
V. Current Status and Analysis
As previously mentioned, many of the more visible aspects of Arkansas'
Strategy have not been implemented due to the impacts of funding reductions
and the effects that subsequent federal initiatives have had on Arkansas'
programs. Major emphasis has been given to emergency response, prevention,
and remedial measures. To the extent possible, the State has attempted
to capture spinoff benefits of federal programs.
Comprehensive health effects studies and consumer programs which
were envisioned in the Strategy have not materialized. Health effects
studies which have been conducted were associated with known environmental
problems. None, except in the most preliminary fashion, have been
designed to alert health authorities to emerging problems. The State
has also lost the potential benefits which would have resulted from the
continuation of the formal interagency subcommittee structure. However,
considerable staff time is needed to make such a structure successful.
For some agencies, that time was not available because of staff reductions
and increased responsibilities in other areas.
Arkansas' Strategy is a well thought out and well drafted document
which is currently too elaborate for the needs of the State. It has
served the State by identifying specific program needs which must be
addressed if comprehensive toxics management is to become a reality.
Agency personnel are addressing these needs as resources permit. The
plan would serve as an excellent model for other states that are striving
toward greater toxics management integration. The State could also play
a very important role by presenting to these interested parties the
perceived weaknesses and strengths of the Strategy.
-------
California ITM Suimary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics-Related Legislation
1. The Hazardous Substances Information and Training
Act of 1980 (Worker Right-to-Kncw).
2. The Hazardous Waste Control Law.
3. California Superfund.
4. The Emergency Response Act.
5. The California Occupational Safety and Health
Act.
6. Safe Drinking Water Bond Act.
7. Section 4171 of the California Health and Safety
Code (airborne toxics).
8. Porter-Cologne Act (water).
9. California Food and Agriculture Code (pesticides).
10. Occupation Carcinogen Control Act.
11. Birth Defects Monitoring Act.
B. Major Agencies
1. Department of Health Services.
2. Department of Industrial Relations.
3. Water Resources Board.
4. Department of Food and Agriculture.
5. Department of Fish and Game,
6. Air Resources Board.
7. Department of Business and Transportation.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. No comprehensive ITM legislation exists in
California.
2. Emergency Response Act mandates development of
of an inter-agency emergency response system.
3. Toxic Substances Coordinating Council established
by Executive Order.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. The Toxic Substances Control Division under
the Department of Health Services.
2. Community Right-to-Know Program.
3. Permit Assistance Desk.
-7-
-------
3. Hazardous Waste Assessments.
4. Pesticide Registry.
5. Birth Defects Registry.
B. Data Coordination
1. Information is gathered and stored by separate
agencies with few mechanisms for data sharing.
2. HESIS.
3. CRIS.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. California's Carcinogen Policy enables different
State agencies to rank carcinogens.
2. CAL OSHA's Carcinogen Registry.
3. Department of Health.Services and CAL OSHA conduct
short-term and long-term epidemiology studies.
B. Risk Assessment Models
The Department of Health Services in cooperation with
other State agencies is developing risk assessment
methodologies for carcinogens.
C. Emergency Management
Under the Emergency Response Act of 1981, California's
Office of Bnergency Services is developing an inter-agency
toxics disaster contingency plan.
D. Current Character of Toxic Substances Control
Coordination is chiefly carried out by informal meetings
of the ad-hoc Toxics Advisory Group of the Toxic Substances
Coordinating Council.
—8—
-------
Key State Officials
Governor: George Deukmejian
Program Contacts
Peter Weiner
Special Assistant
for Substances Control to the Governor and
Chief Deputy Director
Department of Industrial Relations
Office of the Director
P.O. Box 603
San Francisco, California 94101
(415) 557-3356
Ken Finney
Assistant to the Governor
for Toxic Substances Control
Governor's Office
State Capitol
Sacramento, California 95814
(916) 322-7691
Jeannie Werner
Chief, CAL OSHA Policy
Department of Industrial Relations
P.O. Box 603
525 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, California 94101
(415) 557-1946
Dr. Robert Stevens
Deputy Director
Toxics Substances Control Division
Department of Health Services
2151 Berkeley Way, Rocm 235
Berkeley, California 24704
(415) 540-3003
Wade Cornwell
Special Assistant
Toxics Substances
Control Division
Department of Health Services
714 P Street
Rocm 599
Sacramento, California 95814
(916) 324-1826
-9-
-------
Kent Stoddard
Di rector
Program and Policy Development Branch
Toxic Substances Division
Department of Health Services
714 P Street
Rocm 599
Sacramento, California 95814
(916) 323-6578
Dr. John Harris
Director
Epidemiology Studies Section
Toxic Substances Control Division
Department of Health Services
2151 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, California 24704
(415) 540-2669
**10"*
-------
California ITM
I. State Legislative Authorities Regulating Toxics
In the last several years, major legislative initiatives have
taken place which have strengthened toxics control (and improved
integration) among California's seven agencies regulating toxics.
These legislative acts have been incorporated into the California State
Code, primarily the Health and Safety Code and the Food arid Agricultural
Code. The chief legislative authorities regulating toxics are:
o The Hazardous Substances Information and Training
Act of 1980 (Worker Right-to-Know) (SB 1874)
o The Hazardous Waste Control Law
o California Superfund (SB 618)
o The Emergency Response Act (SB 183)
o Itie California Occupational Safety and Health
Act
o Safe Drinking Water Bond Act
o Section 4171 of the California Health and Safety
Code (airborne toxics)
o The Porter-Cologne Act (water)
o California Food and Agriculture Code (pesticides)
o Birth Defects Monitoring Program Act (SB 834)
o Occupational Carcinogen Control Act
The Hazardous Substances Information and Training Act of
1980 (SB 1874) is California's Vforker Right-to-Know law. It requires
companies to provide employees with information on the chemicals they
produce. Material Safety Data Sheets are developed by the employer
which provide detailed information including chemical name, hazardous
ingredients, health hazards, special protection information and
precautionsr potential fire, explosion and emergency data, and physical
properties. Companies are protected from revealing trade secrets by a
confidential business information protection clause. Employers are
also required to train workers about the acute and chronic health
risks posed by chemicals to which they may be exposed during normal
work operations or in reasonably forseeable emergencies.
>11-
-------
The Hazardous Waste Control Law has recently been amended by
thirteen different actions to strengthen its public protection and
enforcement provisions. These include tightening procedures and reporting
requirements for hazardous waste transportation, storage and spills.
Penalties for violations were increased and more authority was given
to both localities and the State for inspecting, regulating and enforcing
hazardous waste provisions. In addition, four separate laws were passed
to prevent future construction on or near contaminated sites.
California Superfund (S 618) increased assessments on companies to
pay for health and property damages, epidemiological studies and
clean-up. Companies were already required to report information on
the manufacture, storage and transportation of hazardous materials and
were assessed a fee under the Hazardous Waste Control Act. (The Department
of Health Services conducts its hazardous waste program based on these
fees.) Industry has already been assessed ten million dollars for
California Superfund. The law allcws industry to be assessed up to that
amount each year for ten years.
The Emergency Response Act (SB 183), passed in 1981, mandates
the establishment of a State toxic disaster contingency plan, calling
for a central notification and reporting system for all toxic spills,
training and increased coordination among numerous agencies by the
Office of Emergency Services.
Under the California Occupational Safety and Health Act, physicians
are required to report incidents of occupational disease. This data is
computerized for CAL OSHA's use and for workmen's compensation claims.
This system is separate from the Hazard Evaluation System Information
Service which conducts health related searches for various agencies.
CAL OSHA also develops 12-14 Hazard Alerts per year to notify employers
and employees about new health hazards.
The Safe Drinking Water Bond Act sets up an integrated program
for improving drinking water quality. Previously the Department of
Health Services was responsible for small drinking water sources and
the State Wkter Board managed large sources. Under this act the two are
required to conduct a joint management program to improve drinking
water quality.
Section 4171 of the California Health and Safety Code authorizes
permitting and monitoring of industries releasing airborne toxics.
The Porter-Cologne Act created 'Water Resources Board which has
reponsibility for both surface water and ground water quality. The
Board conducts permitting and monitoring of toxic substances.
Numerous pesticides laws have been incorporated into the California
Food and Agriculture Code and are carried out by the California
Department of Food and Agriculture Pesticide Division,
-12-
-------
Under the Birth Defects Monitoring Program Act (SB 834), passed
in May 1982, The State Department of Health Services will expand its
birth defects monitoring program from two counties to five. The
additional counties were added in response to public concern about
possible adverse health effects from the spraying of malathion from the
fruit fly infestation.
California's Occupational Carcinogen Control Act requires
reporting by employers on 22 carcinogens. The data is conputerized
by CAL OSHA into an occupational carcinogen registry.
II. Organization for Toxics Management
Regulation of toxic substances in California does not rest with
any one agency. Authority for managing toxics is spread among seven
different agencies.
These agencies and their responsibilities are as follcws:
Department of Health Services
Department of Industrial
Relations
Water Resources Board
Department of Food and
Agriculture
Department of Fish and Game
Air Resources Board
Hazardous Waste and
Drinking Water
Occupational Health and
Safety
Clean Wfeter
Pesticides
Oil and Toxic Spill
Clean-up
Clean Air
Department of Business and Hazardous Materials
Transportation (including Transportation
Office of Emergency and Spill Clean-up
Services and the Highway
Patrol)
The chief inter-agency toxic substances integrating mechanism in
California is the Toxic Substances Coordinating Council. Established
by Executive Order in February 1980, the Council is responsible for
developing policies to minimize toxics' hazards and to coordinate and
promote consistency on regulatory actions, epidemiological research and
investigations. The Council has no regulatory authority, but makes
recanmendations to encourage integrated regulation development among
the different agenices. The Council is headed by the Governor's Special
Assistant for Toxic Substances and consists of the seven agency and
department heads listed above.
-13-
-------
It was reported that the Council's formal meetings were not as
effective as hoped due to open public meetings and lobbying pressure;
smaller, informal meetings of a new toxics advisory group, made up of
almost the same composition as the Council, have been found to be more
productive.
The advisory group has met recently and discussed an integrated
carcinogen policy, the Conmunity Right-to-Know program and formaldehyde.
The cam\ittee has recently completed an integrated carcinogen policy,
based on the CAL OSHA carcinogen reporting law, It has developed an
informal guidance paper which each agency will use to develop coordinated
regulations on carcinogens.
Legislation to centralize all toxic substances related activities
into a special toxic substances department failed to pass, but many
State toxics-related functions have been reorganized under the Toxic
Substances Control Division under the Department of Health Services.
The structure of this division is as follows:
Toxic Substances Control Division
1) Hazardous Waste Management Branch
a) Alternative Technology and Policy Development Section
b) Procedures and Regulation Enforcement Management Section
c) Permit, Surveillance and Enforcement Section
d) Site Clean-up and Bnergency Response Section
2) Laboratories and Epidemiology Studies Branch
a) Epidemiology Studies Section
b) Hazard Evaluation System and Information
Service (HESIS)
c) Hazardous Materials Laboratory
d) Air and industrial Hygiene Laboratory
The Office of Appropriate Technology has a Permit Assistance Desk
which provides assistance and help in coordinating the numerous agencies
involved in permits for hazardous waste sites. This function will be
expanded and transferred to the Toxic Substances Control Division in the
Department of Health Services next year.
-14-
-------
III. Information Management
Responsibility for information management lies within each of
California's seven agencies. These agenices have extensive authority
to gather information on toxic substances, bat no comprehensive system
to coordinate data between agencies exists. Most of the agencies with
toxics management authorities computerize their data separately. There
are son? limited coordination of data systems and plans for a movement
in that direction. There are also informal ad hoc sharing and coordination
of data.
The chief coordination of data is in the new Toxic Substances
Control Division in the Department of Health Services. The Hazard
Evaluation System Information Service (HESIS) was set up a repository
of information on occupational health effects. It is a comprehensive
system with access to 130 different data bases. HESIS will develop
comprehensive literature searches on occupational health of toxic
chemicals for employees, employers, local and State agencies with
evaluation by technical experts.
CAl OSHA's Occupational Carcinogen Registry under the
Department of Industrial Relations requires conpanies to report use,
production volume, chemical and trade names, number of employees and
plant exposure information on 22 registered carcinogens. Information
is computerized and utilized together with occupational disease reports
in inspection determinations and workmen's compensation claims.
California's Department of Health is developing a new Birth Defects
Registry. Mandated under recent legislation to prevent birth defects,
the Toxic Substances Control Division's Epidemiology Studies Section
will gather data on birth defects, miscarriages, childhood cancer and
various other serious infant problems frcm hospital medical records,
birth certificates and social services agencies. Birth defects will
be carefully monitored and categorized by county of residence and
occupation to determine possible problems due to environmental or
occupational exposure, or drug intake.
A Conwunitv Right-to-Know program has been developed to increase
knowledge about chemical production, use and disposal at the local
level. A handbook has been produced containing models of
community right-to-know ordinances, as well as the State Worker
Right-to-Know Law and a list of the kinds of information available on
chemicals fran State agencies with addresses and phone numbers. Four
local cam&jnities have right-to-know ordinances in California.
Most of the laboratories analyzing toxic substances are now under
the same division in the Department of Health Services, although the
hazardous materials laboratory remains separate from the air and
occupational laboratories. An effort is being made to standardize
testing procedures utilized by the separate laboratories.
15-
-------
Another computerized system, the California Resource Inventory
System (CRIS) will provide geographical analysis and mapping capabilities
for siting to all agencies. This system was previously called the
Environmental Data Center and has been moved from the Office of
Appropriate Technology to the Department of Conservation (part of Human
Resources).
Although there is little information sharing between agencies, and
development of a data coordination mechanism would greatly assist the
State in identification of toxic problems and joint management solutions,
California does have several important informal and ad hoc information
sharing capabilities. The State agencies traditionally provide
information and technical assistance on toxics pr6blems to local
governments. For example, counties identify toxics problem to the
State Epidemiology Studies Section, which then conducts studies or
provides them with technical assistance. The Governor's Ccnrrunity
Right-to-Know Handbook lists information available on use, storage,
transportation, discharge, disposal and health effects of toxic
substances. It lists the kinds of information available and the name,
address and telephone number of the agency where that information can
be obtained. Finally, agencies are working together in sharing
information in the permitting of hazardous waste sites and the Permit
Assistance Desk is helping to further coordinate among the different
agencies.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
The California Department of Health Services has recently released
a Carcinogen Identification Policy. The policy, based on CAL OSHA's
Occupational Carcinogen Registry, was the result of an inter-agency
effort by the Toxic Substances Coordinating Council. The policy stated
that a chemical shall be considered a carcinogen upon evidence of
one well-conducted positive laboratory animal test and outlines standard
criteria for determining carcinogens. The State is presently developing
risk assessment methodologies. A second phase of the State's carcinogen
policy will be to develop regulatory control strategies for carcinogenic
substances based on the risk they pose to the hurran population.
Environmental epidemiology studies are conducted by the Toxic
Substances Control Division in the Department of Health. Occupationally
related epidemiology studies are conducted by CAL OSHA in the Department
of Industrial Relations.
The Office of Emergency Services is establishing a State toxic
disaster contingency plan and developing a central notification and
reporting system for all toxic spills. The Office is working with the
California Highway Patrol, the State Fire Marshall and members of the
Toxic Substances Coordinating Council to establish a Statewide
emergency system. The Office is developing an integrated training
program of State and local agency personnel. An on-scene coordinator
for all spills will be designated and a 24-hcur emergency response
technical assistance hotline will be established to provide localities
with detailed medical and scientific information.
-16-
-------
V. Current Status and Analysis
The chief toxics problems in California are hazardous waste facility
siting, and waste generation, inconsistent carcinogen control and
integrated data management. Multi-permitting requirements by
the hazardous waste, air, water and local programs make site designation
difficult. The State is providing coordination and assistance to the
different agencies through its Permit Assistance Desk. Its functions
will be expanded when it is incorporated into the Toxic Substances
Control Division next year. The problem of waste generation is being
addressed by pending legislation to encourage innovative technology in
the area of hazardous waste reduction, recycling and containment.
Additional legislation has been proposed to create more equitable siting
mechanisms and develop clean sites.
California's Carcinogen Policy presently being developed will provide
all State agencies with additional scientific methods for assessing risks
to carcinogens and assist in developing control strategies for the
State.
In the last several years, California has implemented several new
toxics programs and upgraded many others. Although the public and the
legislature have been strong supporters of improved toxics management,
there are few formal integrating mechanisms in the State and the
Legislature refused to set up a permanent structure for integrating
toxics. The chief integrating mechanism between the State's seven
toxics agencies, the Toxic Substances Coordinating Council, exists
only by Executive Order of the previous Governor and new meets only
informally.
Steps are being made towards a more integrated approach in information
management, but a greater effort still needs to be made in data sharing
between the separate programs. The diversity in both expertise and
interests in California remains as another problem area. Agricultural
interests promote continued use of pesticides (over 500 million pounds
of pesticide are used annually in the State), while other agencies
believe the Food and Agricultural Department is not strict enough with
its regulation of pesticides. In addition, local governments, including
36 counties, districts, etc., are very influential and frequently autonomous.
There is an awareness among many State agency officials of the need
for better integration. Many of the State's diverse toxic programs
have been recently reorganized under one division in the Department of
Health, the Toxic Substances Control Division. Several laboratory
programs were brought together under the new Division. The Division will
also include a permit assistance program to coordinate permitting
activities among several programs. The State's new toxics disaster
contingency plan established by the Emergency Response Act mandates
coordination among State agencies in emergency management. Materials
created for the Ccramunity Right-to-Kncw program delineate different
-17-
-------
agency responsibilities in managing toxics and outlines for local
government officials and the public what toxics information is available.
Sane of these mechanisms, when tested by time, might prove as valuable
models for other States.
-18-
-------
CALIFORNIA STATE AGENCIES
REGULATING TOXIC SUBSTANCES
GOVERNOR
Toxic
Substance
Coordin-
ating
Council
DEPT. OF
HEALTH
SERVICES
Hazardous
Was te
Management
DEPT. OF
INDUSTRIAL
RELATIONS
Occupations I
Health &
Safety
STATE WATER
RESOURCES
BOARD
DEPT OF
FOOD &
AGRICULTURE
Clean Water Pesticides
DEPT OF
FISH &
GAME
Oil &
Toxic
Spill
Cleanup
AIR
RESOURCES
BOARD
Clean Air
CALIF.
HIGHWAY
PATROL
Hazardous
Materials
Transportation
i
o*
H
t
*Meml»ers are the Direct)!? of Department of Health Services, Director
of Department of Industrial Relations, Chairperson State Water
Resources Control Board, Chairperson Air Resources Board, Director
of Department of (food and Agriculture, Secretary of Resources Agency
(includes Department of Fish & Came), Secretary of Business, Transport-
ation and Housing Agency (includes California Highway Patrol). Coordinator
of Council is Special Assistant lo Governor for Toxic Substances Control
-------
Colorado ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Legislations
1. Colorado Air Quality Control Act of 1979.
2. Colorado Water Quality Control Act of 1981.
3. Colorado Solid and Hazardous Waste Acts.
4. Mine Land Reclamation Act.
B. Major Departments
1. Colorado Department of Health.
- Board of Health.
- Office of Health Protection.
- Local Health Departments.
2. Department of Natural Resources.
C. Other Departments
1. Department of Agriculture.
2. Colorado Department of Highways, Division of
Highway Safety.
II. Organizational Coordination
A. Legislative Integration Mandate
1. No such mandate exists in the State of Colorado.
2. The mining reclamation statutes are multi-programstic.
B. Cooperative Efforts
1. Governor's multi-agency cabinet advisory on natural
resources.
2. Hie Governor's coordinating role in several toxic substances
issues.
3. The Hazardous Waste Management Advisory Council.
4. The Colorado Commission on Hazardous Materials Safety.
5. The establishment of the Colorado Training Institute.
III. Data Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Permitting and monitoring.
2. Cancer Registry.
3. Birth and Death Registries
—20—
-------
B. Data Coordination
1. Currently, data is coordinated solely within the
individual offices.
2. State did conduct an Environmental Data Manaagement Program.
C. Data Accessibility
1. No legislation exists in the State of Colorado which deals
with data accessibility such as "Right to Know".
Toxic Substances Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Problem identification results chiefly front State monitoring
and citizen complaints.
2. The Colorado Department of Health has the lead in priority setting
in consultation with the Governor's Office. Inter-agency problem
ranking is conducted informally on an ad hoc basis by the
Governor's office.
3. No formal structure guides either process.
B. Risk Assessment
1. No formal risk assessment models are used in the State,
although epidemiology studies are conducted.
C. Emergency Management
1. Primarily the responsibility of the individual offices.
-21-
-------
Key State Officials
Governor: Richard Lamn
Dr. Frank Traylor, M.D.
Executive Director
Colorado Department of Public Health
4210 E. 11th Ave.
Denver, Colo. 80220
(303) 320-8333
Mr. Monte Pascoe
Executive Director
Colorado Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St.
Room 718
Denver, Colo. 80203
(303) 866-3311
Program Contacts
Dr. Robert Arnott
Assistant Director
Office of Health Protection
Colorado Department of Public Health
4210 E. 11th Ave.
Room 350
Denver, Colo. 80220
(303) 320-8333
-22-
-------
Colorado ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
Toxic management in the State of Colorado is primarily the
responsibility of the Colorado Department of Health (CDH), and the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The Department of Health's
Divisions of Air Pollution Control, Water Quality Control, Disease
Control and Epidemiology, Waste Management, Consumer Protection, and
Radiation Control, all under the Office of Health Protection, provide
the basic media monitoring and permitting services. The Water Cteality
Control Commission and the Air Quality Control Ccmnission, functionally
autonomous regulatory bodies under the Office of Health Protection,
are vested with power in their respective areas. Both Commissions
are composed of gubernatorial appointees. The Board of Health and
the Ccmmissions have regulatory authority over all other Department
of Health activities, while CDH has primarily administrative and
policy responsibility. The Department of Natural Resources is involved
chiefly with issues concerning oil development and mining; however,
DNR's authority is substantial given the predominance of these
activities in Colorado.
There is seme control over toxics which is vested in offices
outside of CDH and DNR. The Department of Agriculture is in charge
of the State's pesticide program. Eight of the fourteen local health
departments, which are essentially autonomous, manage their own air
quality programs under contract with CDH. Finally, the Colorado
Division of Highway Safety has assumed the management of a hazardous
waste emergency training program, the Colorado Training Institute.
There are several State statutes which guide Colorado's toxic
management. The main laws are the Colorado Air Quality Control Act,
Colorado Water Quality Control Act, and the Colorado Solid Waste and
Hazardous Waste Acts. All of these acts provide the basis for CDH's
monitoring and regulatory programs. General mine land reclamation
statutes outline DHR's role in groundwater and water quality management.
Likewise, consumer protection legislation authorizes a formaldehyde
regulatory program. A Colorado Occupational Health and Safety Act
was ratified by the Colorado State Legislature, but was recinded in
1980.
II. Organizational Coordination
Colorado has not enacted any legislation which addressed the
integration of toxic management. Although the mine land
reclamation statutes do attempt to account for the various environmental
media and deal with an array of media programs, no specific interactive
mechanisms were made explicit.
-23-
-------
Perhaps the largest inter-agency coordinating activity in Colorado
is the on-going role that the Governor's Office plays in toxic
substances policy. The Governor has established an inter-agency
cabinet advisory group which deals specifically with natural resources.
This committee has served as a medium for greater discussion among
the agencies, primarily on specific issues, and has, in fact, increased
the level of inter-agency cooperation in particular instances. For
example, the groundwater contamination allegedly caused by the U.S.
Army's Rocky Mountain Arsenal is a problem cited by State officials as
one with a high degree of coordination, and a large role for the
Governor. Other projects where such coordination has also developed is
general State groundwater contamination, and in the State's preparation
for the anticipated massive development of oil shale. In all of these
examples, the Governor has taken the initial steps towards identifying a
problem area, assembling the appropriate agencies, and appointing a lead
agency, if necessary.
In addition, Colorado has attempted to solicit citizen and business
cooperation within the State in the management of the environment. The
Hazardous Waste Management Advisory Council consists of business,
citizens, and government representatives that deal with a broad variety
of pertinent issues. The Colorado Commission on Hazardous Materials
Safety is a study group composed of Federal, State and local government
representatives, as well private industry representatives.
A final interactive mechanism in the State is the Colorado Training
Institute. The Institute, which is now operated by the Colorado Division
of Highway Safety, was organized through the cooperation of a host of
State agencies. The Governor issued an executive order directing all
State agencies and departments to cooperate in this effort.
The Colorado Department of Health did attempt to fornulate an inter
and intragovernmental pilot program in Colorado Springs. The program's
aim was to integrate environmental programs at the local level, and it
involved representatives from all levels of government and a variety of
State offices. The project was not completed, hcwever, and only normal
local coordinating activities are now being operated by Colorado Springs.
III. Information Management
The chief means of data gathering in Colorado is through monitoring
and permitting. The State has no chemical production or use reporting
requirements. The State has a cancer registry, but it is just new being
completed as a data source on a Statewide basis.
Data is generally not formally coordinated across media programs,
or between departments. Data is shared among offices on purely ad hoc
basis; although there is no organizational mechanism for transferring
information, there is informal sharing within the Colorado Department
of Health's Office Health Protection. Colorado recently conducted an
Environmental Data Management Review Program of all data management
activities in their air, water, radiation and hazardous waste programs.
-24-
-------
In addition, the program was to conduct an overall data needs
assessment of all media in the Department of Health. The Program's
basic finding was that the State needed to upgrade each office's data
and data management procedures before any attempt could be made at
coordinating department or Statewide information. These attempts are
now being initiated on a basis of program priority.
There is no legislation in Colorado which deals specifically
with the accessibility of private or State toxic-related data.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
Problem identification is primarily the result of monitoring
activities and citizen ccmplaints. CDH has the lead in ranking of
priorities in consultation with the Governor's Office and the cabinet
level Advisory Board. Yet, there is no formal process by which problems
are brought to the attention of State officials or judged on their level
of importance. The Governor's Office does conduct inter-agency priority
setting on an informal, ad hoc basis.
The State has sought to control a number of individual chemicals
through separate statutes. Regulations which set entnission and testing
standards exist on asbestos, beryllium, mercjry, vinyl chloride, lead,
hydrogen sulfide and urea formaldehyde. Hcwever, there is no cross media
control on any of these substances. Within CDH, however, program cross-
contact on specific problems is high.
In the area of risk assessment, no formal risk assessment
models are used in Colorado. Epidemiology studies are conducted,
although a State report characterized the service as being in need of
upgrading.
Emergency management is primarily the responsibility of the
individual environmental media divisions with coordination at the Office
of Health Protection level. Coordination of emergency management was
listed as a priority item in the 1982 SEA. The Colorado Training Institute
has also been helpful in increasing the level of toxic hazard emergency
preparedness in the State.
Current Status and Analysis
The existing environmental priorities in the State of Colorado are:
1) concerns over the anticipated oil shale development? 2) automobile
pollution in Denver; 3) contamination of groundwater, such as the Rocky
Mountain Arsenal (the State of Colorado has filed suit against the U.S.
Army in an attempt to get assistance in the abatement of this problem);
and 4) hazardous waste disposal, mentioned earlier. All of these
problems constitute areas with direct involvement by the Governor.
25-
-------
There are currently no new formal initiatives in the field of
integration, although a noteworthy undertaking has been proposed in the
field of health data gathering. A program to monitor health effects on
oil shale workers has been proposed for the Union oil shale project.
Its significance lies in the fact that it would be the first health
effects study to monitor all workers frcnt their first day of employment.
The study was proposed as a voluntary program, but did not meet with
success because of Union's objections. The future of this effort is
uncertain.
Recommended assistance for Colorado is chiefly the encouragement of
their participation in future integration discussions among states.
-26-
-------
I-T'l
(•I |N ••<»»'• Ml •(I ill III
. I
I
—I—.
MMMfHSHIAIIvr I
wnvNis I
DIVISHMt |
I AHOI(A •!»» V I
I'lVr.MW I
#V>/ »1R«<
tJ
ai* rttt
otvmw
RM(A 4MIAI IIV I
l«K*l«tOI I
1J
I I MMf Uf! I
I || <•» At Ml A» HI St NVN « «-.J
COLORADO DEPARTMENT
OF HEALTH
ORGANIZATION CHART
(Nftr* IN t«|MT*| I
I am •fl'INHIHM I
MWMVIMirMINI I
tMIVIMII ntNll IIM I
A',| I IMHINM I
IMVI'i'M I
r
f*A|HA
—99m
' OIVlSHIN
£
c ivntmi •
r*l hy SlMHr
r>1 mm
Aw / IIM
Am • K4>M>'lY'°iN>|ii4(|n*wi«*«y « ••»••• */ nt in*.
IIkjMi I .<¦ ilitr« Hmti* ('••*«•« tl I KM
lUh iiKi" AiW«y l'i1 Ml | iwifiirv Mnb J IMD1
I AMD V I
in Aim I
VI HVITM IHVI^HW I
Alt n»HH
AMI IHHIt.
MMM IUVKNIN
I
r*
N
I
1 AWIHHH A
i: IIHM fl I l*M
-J]
-------
Connecticut ITH Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. Clean Water Act.
2. Clean Air Regulation.
3. Title 333 of the General Statutes
(Dept. of Health Services).
4. P.A. 80-257 (right-to-know)
5. Recently, passed K.B. 251 (right-to-know)
B. Major Agencies
1. Department of Environmental Protection. (DEP)
2. Department of Health Services. (DHS)
C- Other Agencies
1. Department of Labor.
2. Department of Transportation.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. No comprehensive ITM legislation exists in
Connecticut.
2. Clean Water Act does mandate comprehensive programming
and inter-agency consultation.
E. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Memorandum of Understanding on Groundwater
Contamination, signed May 1982.
2. A Memorandum of Understanding is currently
being written between the DHS Toxic
Hazards Section and the DEP Air
Compliance Section.
3. Cooperative Use of DHS Laboratories by DEP,
Agriculture, and Labor.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Reporting Requirements for handlers of
carcinogenic substances. (chapter 3A0d Section I9-169q)
2. Tumor and death certificate registries operated
by DHS.
3. Environmental monitoring and permitting conducted
by DEP.
28-
-------
B.
Data Coordination
1. Data is collected and computerized by each major
agency,
C. Information Availability
1. P.A, 80-257 - Concerns carcinogenic substances.
2. H.B. 251 - Expands list to include 400 toxics substances.
3. Freedom of Information - Establishes a CBI principle.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Input received from monitoring data, industry
surveys and citizen complaints.
2. No priority-setting process has been formalized.
B. Risk Assessment Models
1. Epidemiological studies are used, but no formalized
model is used systematically,
C. Emergency Management
1. Majority of authority for toxics emergencies contained
in the Oil and Chemicals division within DEP.
D. Current Character of Toxics Control
1. Some coordination is evident within the agencies;
however, the control is generally fragmented.
-29-
-------
Kev State Officials
Governor: William O'Neill
Department of Environmental Protection
Commissioner - Mr. Stanley Pac (203) 566-2279
Assistant Commissioner - Mr. John Anderson
Director of Hazardou's Waste Materials - Dr. Steven Hitchcock
(203) 566-4924
Department of Health Services
Commissioner - Dr. Douglas Lloyd (203) 566-2279
Chief of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention - Dr. Stephen Havas
(203) 566-5911
Director of Preventable Disease - Dr. Peter Galbraith
(203) 566-5475
Program Contacts
Mr. Tom Turick
Office of Hazardous Waste Materials
Department of Environmental Protection
State Office Building
165 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06115
(203) 566-4630
Mr. Allan Siniscalchi
Toxics Hazards Section
Department of Health Services
79 Elm Street
Hartford, CT 06106
(203) 566-8167
-30-
-------
Connecticut ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
Under the auspices of the Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) and the Department of Health Services (DHS), the State of Connecticut
administers a number of statutes related to toxic substances. In general,
authority to administer environmental programs has largely been delegated
to DEP through such Federal statutes as: TSCA (i.e. PCB enforcement)
and CERCLA (superfund); and such state laws as the Clean Water Act and
Clean Air regulations. However, significant authority is delegated to
DHS in Title 333 of Connecticut's General Statutes, which instructs the
Commissioner of Health Services to "employ the most efficient means for
the prevention and suppression of disease." This mandate has not only
been carried out by the State DHS, but has also been extended to the
local health departments who are playing an increasingly important role
in policy making and implementation. Minor authority has also been
delegated to the Departments of Labor and Transportation.
Connecticut also has a number of statutes which deal specifically
with various aspects of toxics management. In the area of information
gathering, Chapter 340 d, Section 19-169 of the General Statutes establishes
reporting requirements for handlers of carcinogenic substances. Information,
dissemination is guided by Connecticut's Freedom of Information legislation,
which establishes a CBI principle, and two Right-to-Know laws (P.A 80-
257 and the recently enacted H.B. 251). Finally, chemical control
initiatives are taking place within DEP's Hazardous Materials Management
Unit (HMMU) through a PCB monitoring and inspection grant under TSCA
Section 10. In addition the HMMU has primary responsibility for implementing
state statutes 25-54 rr through xx pertaining specifically to PCB management
and state statutes 25-54 hh regarding the transport, storage and treatment
of certain toxic waste materials.
Although interaction among the agencies occurs, there is no legislation
within Connecticut which mandates integration of toxics management.
However, a loose directive is provided by the State's Clean Water Act
which instructs the Commissioner of DEP to develop "comprehensive programs"
and to "advise, consult and cooperate with other agencies of the state."
In addition, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed in May of 1982
between the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of
Health Services concerning cooperative efforts to eliminate ground water
contamination. The agreement is in effect through April 30, 1983. The
DPH Toxic Hazards Section is also working with the DEP Air Compliance
Section on a Memorandum of Understanding on Air Emission issues.
The above constitutes the extent of any formal cooperative arrangements
that currently exist within the State of Connecticut. Presently, no new
initiatives exist in the field.
-31-
-------
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
DE? and DOHS share lead agency responsibility in toxic waste management
Connecticut has assigned the Department of Environmental Protection vit'n
the primary responsibility for regulating and monitoring media pollution.
Six units within the DEP carry out these functions; they are: Air,
Water, Water Resources, Solid Waste, Hazardous Materials Management and
Radiation.
The Department of Health Services, serves in defining, regulating
and collecting data on toxics hazards, and human health effects. All of
this is largely the responsibility of the Toxics Hazards Section, the
Water Supply Section and Epidemiology section of DHS. In addition, the
local health departments have become a valued partner.
With no mandate for integration, DEP, DHS and the specific divisions
within each of these agencies operate independently. Yet, there are a
few exceptions, particularly concerning water supply issues. Frequent
interaction has developed between the Water Compliance Unit of DEP, and
the Office of Water Supply in DHS. The new Memorandum of Understanding
referred to earlier will only tend to increase such cooperation. The
M.O.U. establishes joint efforts in the areas of goal setting, program
development, monitoring, enforcement and information dissemination. The
agreement, which was set out by the SEA, is seen as a major achievement
and is characterized as a "working model" for future cooperation.
Interaction has also occured on general environmental/health questions.
This is due in large part to the shared use of the Department of Health
Services Laboratories, which involves not only DHS and DEP, but the
Departments of Agriculture and Labor as well. It is also in the
environmental/health field where the local health departments are most
active. Other cooperative efforts exist in Connecticut, such as shared
laboratory services with the Ct. Agricultural Experiment Station, but
they are more sporadic and ad hoc. It is this interaction which constitutes
the bulk of the inter-agency relationships, and it is for this reason
that Connecticut's toxics management in general must also be characterized
as ad hoc. Connecticut is working towards altering this approach.
III. Information Management
Information management has been an explicit concern in Connecticut
over the past several years. Information gathering is addressed in
Chapter 340d Section 19-169q which stipulates that any person or manufactur^
who uses or produces any carcinogenic substances in the manufacture of
any item must file a report stating: the method of disposal; the amount
of carcinogenic substance used; the amount of each carcinogenic substances
currently held in inventory; and the method of transportation. This
report must be submitted annually to the DHS Commissioner. The law is
sj.lent on toxics substances not determined to be carcinogenic.
32-
-------
Other information gathering programs include a tumor registry
arranged between DHS and various hospitals, and a registry of death
certificates. DEP also collects data through its monitoring and permitting
activities. A great majority of the environmental data that is collected
is computerized and centralized within each agency. Currently, hazardous
waste manifests are in the process of being computerized.
In the area of information dissemination, Connecticut is in varying
stages of development. Between the agencies, no formalized process or
program has yet been devised to fully utilize the available environmental
and health data in establishing environmental priorities and programs.
Therefore, although information is accessible and is shared among agencies,
it is done sporadically, on a case by case basis. Such information is
not integrated into overall state toxics management.
Connecticut's "Right-to-Know" legislation is more fully developed.
P.A. 80-257 stipulates that any industry which is a user or producer of
carcinogenic substances must: 1) Post a list of such substances in
plain view for all employees; 2) Provide an education and training
program for the workers; and 3) Insure that all containers for such
substances are properly labelled. Host recently, H.B. 251 has passed,
expanding the list of substances which must be made known to employees
to include 400 toxics substances. However,, the new law does not provide
for employee training. Therefore, the only training programs in effect
are those which were mandated under P.A. 80-257, which is concerned only
with the handling of carcinogenic substances. In addition, information
that is made available to the workers under H.B. 251, will be made
available to the general public after January 1, 1984. After this time,
Connecticut will have both State-wide worker and community right-to-know
laws.
All information dissemination is complicated by the State's freedom
of Information Law. The main relevance that the statute has to toxics
is that it establishes protection for trade secrets. However, access to
such information is granted to State officials with purpose under Section
22A-6 cf the General Statutes which stipulates: "in accordance vith
constitutional limitations (a designated state official) may enter at
all reasonable times upon any public or private property." Therefore,
confidential information policies do severely limit public access, but
only slightly hamper the state's accessibility.
IV. Toxics Control
Toxics Control can generally be characterized as similar to Connecticut's
information management; there is a solid foundation for control with a
sizeable amount of activity taking place in the field, but with little
emphasis on comprehensive, integrative programming.
-33-
-------
Problem identification originates from a wide variety of sources:
environmental monitoring, industry surveys and citizen complaints.
Likewise, a number of programs have been initiated, specifically concerning
PCB's, solvents and asbestos. However, there is no process by which
State officials rank the problems in order of importance, and no "control
strategy" has been developed to implement the programs that do exist.
Epidemiological studies are used quite frequently to assess health
risks. Yet, it is not apparent that any innovative formal model has
been developed, or put to systematic use.
There is one exception to all of this, and that is in the area of
emergency management. The primary responsibility for emergency management
lies with the Oil and Chemical Spills Division of the Hazardous Waste
Unit within DEP. The Division has authority over all emergencies concerning
oil or chemicals and serves as the coordinating body should they deem it
necessary to bring in other agencies. The Office of Civil Preparedness
also is involved in emergency management, but deals mainly vich natural
disasters. Their facilities, however, are made available to DEP when
necessary. Therefore, emergency management represents one aspect of
Connecticut's toxic control in which the authority and ability to coordinate
activities is well established.
V. Current Status and Analysis
Connecticut's approach to toxic waste management remains a problem-
oriented approach. Little effort has been made to develop a fully
integrated management system. Connecticut does possess strong potential
for future integration programs.
Connecticut's demonstrated desire to develop a broad and accessible
toxics data base provides a very supportive environment for integrated
toxics management. In addition, the views of State officials seem
generally favorable for such an effort, as reflected in the 1981 SEA
which stressed the need for close multi-media coordination.
Yet Connecticut faces a definite challenge should officials decide
to integrate. The main obstacle to the development of coordinated
management is the lack of legal authority or mandate in Connecticut for
such a •move. The system, as it exists now, is ad hoc.
-34-
-------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
CONNECTICUT
Commissioner
i
!
Deputy
Commissioner
eau Bureau of
n Planning -- - . Health Regulation
Office of
Health Promotion and
Disease Prevention >
Laboratory
Community Health Preventable Division
Division Disease Division
Water Supplies Toxic Hazards Epidemiology
Section i Section Section
-35-
-------
«.*V
UlIIMfl tfKiWCIHBI «m
ii( fft(fn3*rt>iii Camk Sill
ami or uwiNionctvtm.
I If iNfOKCIMINI Wll
mi
tviii 01 iimtin.
IISHUKS UKII
Itkril inn mi
SUll lOStUlt.
lOiHUt U»ll
l*»al Sill
cootomiToi.
CI I vet 01 lltOUM Ml»!«
XiUi )(lnsllll /oft
ttllI 01 Mm 1 HItkJ 1)10*.
mis X tlCHJ.liU* UMI
Wfllta* Millrr ? 10 4
(Kill Of *1101:11.
Kit lltll UXt[
fj.lUmf IH )
Director,
Business Administration Unit
C)«ui lOM
MfeSONNU I PUHim
Ci'cl Ht*tf
fURCHniNC t ciHifiit utrnus
Ui'i
ntmine t atvfktiis
I illtit Smiiiti 1101
mjdmci hi iti nMJtmu
Willum t il.l lilt
IIMAHCIm SIRVICfS
HbiIwi 15)8
HKKIMCS i ffMNSCIIttS
ludj Mo»l< <0/(
otu mocisuHc
fi»U li«V« IIIS
Oiieclor,
Stalf Scmices Unit
C(»i|t Vmirlt 401/
•NiCIM.
WlOHMlllON t tmiCAlKMt SICIKMI
Vliltiiift Ofliaq iiH
tWI 1 HI IKINCS 0IIICI1
KJtltlHCllKW SttllQH
IHiIlm* McPte tiS<
OIKICIOt
lUO DCOUISifIONMI MI
Kiltm m<
ornmui.
ftMUMl HIMWItUS CI Nil I
Hy{0 Ikomii )Slt
OWI £10*.
mime i coaui mil hcmi.
lit )MO/ JIJI
citicim
tti it* torn «oi
(ulCiriii ill)
OltKIOI. 11CMjM I
¦MOIIftnlM OUJIItl)
lit uni
CMICIOa. 8ICI0H II
ISOUMWISI OU'lM>1
7SI-IJS!
DIR1CIUK. RICItiH III
fHIODIf ItSIIIH UIUSIII)
ISM OK?« lit)
OIRICION. IIGIOA IV
IIA* 1JISIIHM QUtHK*)
m ;iu
OtPUTV COMMISSIONER.
Division of
fiuiionmeutal Quality tut
wmciav
JISCOUPIIAKCJ Iran
IlKiN I'mImii IQH
BlMCIOt.
WIIUCOHPlllrttOMI
Rcbeil Khii WIS
oiaiciot.
sotiDwtsu Mixta taur wii
CS*il
-------
Illinois ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. Illinois Environmental Protection Act of 1970.
2. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 5.
3. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 48 Safety,
Inspection and Education.
4. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 48 Health and
Safety Act.
5. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127 Commission on
Intergovernmental Cooperation.
6. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127
Intergovernmental Cooperation Act.
7. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 48 Workers
Occupational Diseases.
8. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 111 Uniform
Hazardous Substances Act of Illinois.
9. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127 The Department
of Labor.
10. Illinois Annotated State. Chapter 127 The Department
of Public Health.
11. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127 The
Illinois Emergency Services and Disaster Agency
Act.
12. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 61 Wildlife Code.
13. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 96.
B. Major,Departments
1. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA).
2. The Department of Public Health - Environmental
Toxicology Program - (ETP).
3. The Department of Labor and Industrial Commission
(DLIC).
4. The Illinois Emergency Services and Disaster
Agency - (IEDS).
5. The Pollution Control Board (PCB).
C. Other Departments
1. The Department of Agriculture - (DOA).
2. The Department of Conservation - (DOC).
3. The Department of Transportation - (DOT).
II. Organizational Coordination In Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Act
and The Intergovernmental Cooperation Act both
-37-
-------
emphasize the importance of inter-agency
coordination.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Within IEPA cooperative efforts include the Coordinative
Permit Review Committee, the Multi-media Toxics
Coordination Committee and the Multi-media Laboratory
Committee.
2. IEPA inter-agency coordination methods are the Toxics Advisory
Committee cooperative agreement funding, joint agency
investigations, and the 24 hour emergency hot-line.
3. Within DPH cooperative efforts include the Intra-departments
Task Force.
4. DPH inter-agency coordination includes joint investigation
and studies, and the ETP brochure and newsletter.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. IEPA/DPH field and regional staff investigation
and monitoring.
2. Permit and licensing submittals.
3. Toxic exposure incidence reporting.
4. Morbidity and mortality data, birth defects monitoring
data, and an experimental cancer surveillance
program.
B. Data Coordination
1. Data is collected and stored by individual agencies.
C. Information Availability
1. IEPA and DPH data are not readily accessible to other
agencies and must be specifically requested.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Problem identification and Ranking
1. Input is received from local health departments,
citizen requests, local physicians, permit submittal
applications, monitoring data.
2. No formal State priority setting process has been established.
B. Risk. Assessment Models
1. The Department of Public Health (ETP) has informally
taken responsibility for risk assessment taken responsibility
for risk assessment work. The DPH is waiting for the
Michigan Risk assessment study.
2. The IEPA Multi-media Toxics Coordination Committee
will produce an issue paper on risk assessment.
-38-
-------
C. Current Character of Toxic Control
1. IEPA has more regulatory authority for the actual
control of toxic substances.
Key State Officials
Governor: James Thompson
Mr. William L. Kempiners
Director
Illinois Department of Public Health
535 West Jefferson Street
Springfield, Illinois 62761
(217) 782-4977
Mr. Richard J. Carlson
Director
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois 62706
Program Contacts
Mr. Chris Wiant
Chief, Environmental Chemistry Section
Illinois Department of Public Health
535 West Jefferson Street
Springfield, Illinois 62761
(217) 782-4674
Mr. Roger Kanerva
Manager of Environmental Programs
Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois 62706
(217) 785-5735
Mr. Larry Eastep
Manager, Industrial Unit
Permits Section
Division of Water Pollution Control
Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
Springfield, Illinois 62706
(217) 7S2-0610
-39-
-------
Illinois ITM
1. State Legislative Authorities Directing Toxic Control
'• Illinois Environmental Protection Act 1970 The Act is a
comprehensive/umbrella piece of legislation which states that the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency has primary responsibility
for protecting the public from toxic and carcinogenic environmental
pollutants. The >ct recognizes the importance of a multi-media
approach to solving environmental problems and mandates the coordination
of all state environmental programs. The .'ct designates that:
o The I EPA may require submission of information from applicants
for permits.
o The IEPA may investigate alleged violations.
o All files are public except trade secrets, privileged information,
internal agency communication and confidential data or information
concerning secret manufacturing process.
o The IEPA authorizes the Pollution Control Board to determine,
define, and implement environmental control standards.
2. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 5, "Illiinois Pesticide Act of 1979,"
effective July 1, 1980
This Act is the Illinois version of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act. The flct is administered by the Department of
Agriculture.
3. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 48, "Safety Inspection and Education,"
effective October 1, 197?
Under this chapter, the Department of Labor and Industrial Commission
is required to "foster and promote safety practices" and to enforce
the occupational health and safety standards and rules of the
Health and Safety Act (mentioned below). Specifically, Chapter 48
states:
o Information reported through an inspection or proceeding which
might reveal a trade secret is confidential.
o Employers are required to keep records of employee exposure to
potential toxic substances and employees must have access to
the records.
o The Department of Labor is authorized to enter, and inspect
workplaces.
o Employers must notify employees of exposure to concentrations
and levels of toxic substances.
o Employees may request an investigation of a suspected imminent
danger.
-40-
-------
4. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 48, "Health and Safety Act,"
effective January 1, 1980
Under the supervision of the Labor Department and Industrial
Commission the Act states that it is the duty of employers to
provide protection for the lives, health and safety of employees
and to furnish a workplace "free from recognized hazards".
o Employers are required to maintain records of work-related
deaths, injuries and illinesses.
o Employers are required to monitor and measure employee toxic
exposure.
o Labels are required so that employees know the hazards to
which they are exposed, their symptons and emergency treatment,
and conditions for safe use and exposure.
o Emergency temporary standards may be imposed to protect employees
exposed to grave danger from toxic substances.
5. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127, Commission on Intergovernmental
Cooperation, Effective July 1, 1979
The Act creates the Commission for Intergovernmental Cooperation.
The Commission facilitates informal cooperation between governmental
offices and serves as an information and research clearinghouse.
6. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127, "Intergovernmental Cooperation
Act," effective Oct. 1, 1973
The Act states that any powers and authorities exercised by any
governmental unit or agency can be exercised jointly, as long as it
is not prohibited by another law.
7. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 48, "Workers Occupational
Diseases", effective January 1, 1980
This Act requires that employers maintain records of work-related
deaths, injuries and illnesses and report all occupational diseases
to the Industrial Commission. Reports oust satisfy the requirements
of the Health and Safety Act and the Safety Inspections and Education
Act.
8. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 111, "Uniform Hazardous Substances
Act of Illinois," effective September 26, 1978
The Act provides the Department of Public Health with the authority
to administer the State's Hazardous Substances Act.
9. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127, The Department of Labor
The Department of Labor is authorized to improve working conditions,
foster, develop and promote the welfare of employees. In addition,
-41-
-------
Che Labor Department may collect and report statistics about commercial
conditions, labor production, conditions of employment, and prevention
of accidents, etc.
10. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127, the Department of Public
Health, effective October 1, 1977
The provision authorizes the Department of Public Health to supervise,
preserve and improve the public health. The Department is responsible
for "examining nuisances and other threats to Che security of life
and health, ... and promoting measures aimed at reducing death from
cancer and other chronic diseases."
To fulfill this mandate, the Department of Public Health is directed
to maintain laboratories to test, air, water, wastes, and equipment
and conduct State-wide diagnostic testing. In addition, the Health
Department is required to cooperate with other State agencies and
Medical Associations in efforts to promote and improve health
throughout the State. Under this provision, the Department of
Labor is also required to distribute information concerning disease
prevention and health and sanitary conditions of the State.
11. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 127, "The Illinois Emergency
Services and Disaster Agency Act of 1975"
The Emergency Service and Disaster Agency is directed to assure
preparedness in case of disaster from natural or artificial causes.
12. Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 61, "Wildlife Code," effective
January 1, 19S0
The Department of Conservation is authorized to cooperate with the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency in developing pollution
investigations and reports.
13¦ Illinois Annotated Stat. Chapter 96, effective July 14, 1978
The Illinois Institute of Natural Resources was established under
this Chapter, The Institute was directed to study and investigate
the technology and administration of environmental protection and
water resources. The Institute conducts economic impact studies on
regulations proposed by the Pollution Control Board.
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency has delegated federal
authority for the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.
There are two significant toxics oriented bills pending in Illinois:
SB15S6 and HB1S56. Illinois SB 1536 would require employers to label
all containers possessing toxic substances listed on the NIOSH Registry,
This law would pertain to containers of one gallon or more. The bill
also would require employers to supply information to employees regarding
toxic substances upon request. Furthermore, any retaliation against an
employee for exercising his rights would be forbidden.
-42-
-------
The bill, introduced in 1981, was not reported out of the Senate
that year. Illinois law states that the second year of each session be
reserved for appropriations and emergency bills. Since this was not
deemed an emergency bill, it was not acted upon. The deadline for
assignment of bills into the House was May 28, 1982; the bill did not
make the deadline. According to the sponsor, the bill will be resubmitted
in 1983.
Illinois HB 1556, like its counterpart in the Senate, would require
the labeling of containers of a gallon or more holding toxic substances.
The proposed bill is more extensive than the Senate bill in that it
specifies a time period of 72 hours in which the employer must provide
information to the employee after his request. The bill also requires
the employer to post a notice informing employees of their right to
request information. Also, it allows the Director of Public Health to
conduct an outreach program, using television, radio, and leaflets in
public areas, which would further inform employees of their right to
know. HB 1556 also contains a CBI clause. The bill will be reintroduced
in 1983.
The most significant toxics issues in the State are hazardous waste
disposal and hazardous waste facility siting. Clean-up operations have
been initiated on PCB's in the Waukegan harbor and, under court order,
the Wilsonville landfill site will be excavated.
II. Organizational Structure of Lead Agency/Office on Toxics Management
The State agencies which have Che major roles in Illinois toxics
management are the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, the Department
of Public Health, the Pollution Control Board, the Department of Labor
and Industrial Commission and the Illinois Emergency Services and Disaster
Agency. The Department of Agriculture, Department of Conservation and
the Department of Transportation are also involved but to a lesser
degree.
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency CIEPA) mandate and
authorities are similar to that of the U.S. EPA. The Agency is responsible
for preserving and protecting the Illinois environment. The Agency
possesses the resource management and enforcement authority to carry out
the mandate. The Agency is organized by media under the management of
the Director of Environmental Programs. There are five divisions including
the Division of Water Pollution Control, Air Pollution Control, Land
Pollution Control, Water Supplies and the Division of Laboratories. In
addition, the IEPA has established a Data Processing Office for computer
data management. The IEPA functions according to a matrix management
style and although information is gathered and expertise is maintained
in the individual programs, Information is shared among the various
program offices.
Under the manager of Environmental Programs, the IEPA has developed
three basic intra-agency coordinative methods. These three methods
include the Coordinative Permit Review Committee, the Multi-media Toxics
-43-
-------
Coordination Committee, and the Multi-media Laboratory Committee. The
Coordinative Permit Review Committee is composed of representatives from
each of the divisions. The committee meets weekly to review permit
applications and identify permits which require additional media inspection
and/or permits. In this way, the permit application procedure is streamlined
The Multi-media Toxics Coordination Committee is an agency-wide committee
including members from each division. The committee meets monthly and
is responsible for insuring that toxics activities and plans among each
division are coordinated and integrated. Each division prepares a
"Toxic Pollutant Status and Prospects Report" which is then examined by
the committee. The committee then reviews these reports for duplication
of effort, major program gaps, areas for potential regulatory actions
and opportunities for US EPA cooperative work. This committee is also
working on a major toxics integration strategy document. A Toxics
Advisory Committee has recently been assembled to assist the IEPA develop
the Agency toxics strategy. The committee is composed of industry,
citizens, academia and the Illinois Department of Health. The first
meeting will be in September '82. The Multi-media Laboratory Committee
is also composed of division representatives who act as liaison for the
laboratory staff.
In the past, the IEPA has consciously focused attention.on upgrading
its internal toxics integration; however, the Agency is now redirecting
its emphasis towards improving communication with other State agencies
involved in toxic substances control. The IEPA works primarily with the
Department of Public Health on a case by case basis. The Department of
Public Health will work cooperatively with IEPA on specific chemical
problems, epidemiology studies or permit applications. The DPH has also
received cooperative agreement funds from the IEPA to conduct studies on
heavy metals, groundwater and drinking water. The IEPA has also worked
with the Corp of Engineers and the Department of Transportation on
dredge and fill projects and the Department of Conservation on emergency
situations having to do with fish kills. The IEPA has assigned one
person in the Environmental Standards office to be responsible for
working with the Department of Agriculture and the agricultural community
on pesticide-related concerns.
In addition, the Emergency Response Unit located in the IEPA Environmental
Standards Office operates a 24 hour hot-line, coordinates emergency
response plans and emergency situations with a number of State agencies
including DOT, DPH, DOL and the Illinois Emergency Services and Disaster
Agency.
The Illinois Department of Public Health is divided into three
major offices: Health Regulation, Health Services and Health Planning.
Under these three offices the Department is sub-divided into Divisions
and then Sections. The most active program having to do with toxics is
the Environmental Toxicology Program (ETP). This Program in located
within the Environmental Chemistry Section in the Division of Engineering
and Sanitation. The Division is in the Office of Health Regulation.
-44-
-------
Although other offices within the Department have contributed to toxic
control activities, the Environmental Toxicology Program is responsible
for conducting toxic related public health investigations and coordinating
the Department's toxic activities in general.
The Environmental Toxicology Program was formally created in 1978
as a response to the increasing number of requests from the public,
local health departments, schools and other agencies. Citizens were
asking the Department to investigate cases associated with chemical
exposure. Cases include pesticide contamination of drinking water
wells, exposure to formaldehyde in homes, and occupational exposure to
toxics. The Environmental Toxicology Program is better equipped to
handle requests now and has attempted to reshift its reactive approach
to a preventive one. This is explained in Section III of the paper.
The Environmental Toxicology Program has relatively informal communication
with other State agencies although there is a move to begin formalizing
these relationships. The ETP interacts primarily with the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency and the Emergency Services and Disaster Agency.
ETP has been working closely with the IEPA Emergency Response unit on
the 24-hour hotline. ETP and IEPA will often perform joint investigations
at hazardous waste sites and specific toxic air and water problems in
the State. In addition, the Department of Health created the Intra-
Departmental Task Force to coordinate toxics efforts of the State Agencies
and increase the likelihood of receiving early warnings of health hazards.
This Task Force does not meet regularly but only when a particular issue
surfaces.
III. Information Management
In Illinois there are currently no inventories or reporting requirements
for industry (aside from worker Right-to-Know information). The IEPA
gathers a majority of its environmental data from field and regional
staff investigation and monitoring. IEPA monitoring efforts include
compliance monitoring, ambient monitoring, toxic monitoring, biological
monitoring and the on-going Great Lakes monitoring. The air monitoring
program includes sampling for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone
carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, particulate matter and metals such as
lead zinc, iron, copper, cadmium and arsenic.
IEPA has been delegated the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System authority (NPDES). The NPDES requires water permits for all
point sources which discharge into waterways and insures that dischargers
monitor wastes and report the amount and nature of all waste elements.
The State does maintain a list of major dischargers which ranks dischargers
according to size. According to the National Governors Association, the
Illinois EPA has been actively studying trace organics in water dischargers.
The State's work has resulted in the development of new sampling methodology.
They use the mathematical theory of sampling in addition to equipment
specifically designed to reduce errors involved in collecting samples
containing large numbers of organic compounds present at trace levels.
With the assistance of the University of Illinois and the SIU School of
¦45-
-------
Medicine, the State is also attempting to modify the Ames bacterial
mutagenicity testing procedure. A majority of the Illinois EPA sampling
and monitoring data is computerized on Store" and currently managed by
the Data Processing Division. This data is not readily accessible to
other State agencies and must be specifically requested. Information
requests from citizens are handled by either the Agency's Public and
Intergovernmental Affairs Office, the Public. Participation Staff or the
Public Affairs staff person assigned to each division.
The Department of Public Health, Environmental Toxicology Program
has developed a three tiered program to study environmentally related
disease and toxic exposure. The program, which is partially supported
by TSCA Section 28 funds, includes the development of a State-wide
communication network, improving the early-warning methods for identifying
toxic hazards and the data management and evaluation system, and developing
the Agencies' field investigative capabilities. The major activity of
the communication network effort is a printed brochure describing the
Department's Environmental Toxicology Program and a newsletter. The
brochure has already been distributed to State and local health professionals
It is hoped that the brochure will generate data and disseminate information
on toxic substances problems requiring investigation. In the past, the
Department has noted that physicians in the State often notice a frequency
of chemical-related problems and alert the Health Department. The
brochure and newsletter are designed to encourage this activity as well
as develop communication between relevant State and local offices.
The Environmental Toxicology Program has emphasized toxic data
gathering and management and has developed a number of data systems.
These systems include morbidity and mortality information, environmental
sampling analyses conducted and maintained by the Department's Environmental
laboratory, birth defects monitoring data, and a cancer surveillance
program. The cancer surveillance program is on a pilot basis. Information
will be obtained from sixteen counties with the ultimate goal of gathering
hospital reports on diagnosed cases of cancer.
To increase the Department of Public Health's field investigation
capabilities, the University of Illinois School of Public Health has
designed a number of survey tools. One of the survey tools is a questionnaire
The questionnaire will gather information on medical history, exposure
and occupational data, and demographic information.
The Illinois Department of Health has utilized the Chemical Substances
Information Network (CSIH) with the assistance of the National Governors'
Association. Because it. was found very helpful, the Department has
expressed interest in direct access to CSIN. DPH has access to the
Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (RANES) and the National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health Surveys.
IV. Toxics Control
The Department of Public Health and the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency learn of chemical problems through a variety of ways.
The DPH receives a number of complaints and requests for investigations
-46—
-------
from local citizens, health departments, physicians and veterinarians.
Some requests come through the 24 hour ESDA emergency hot-line. The
Department is in the process of gathering and computerizing morbidity
and mortality data, birth defects information and exposure incidence
data in the hope that potential chemical problems can be identified
early. The Illinois EPA utilizes air and water monitoring data, permit
submission data and XEPA regional monitoring information, as well.
The establishment of priority chemical problems is somewhat informal
in Illinois. The IEPA Divisions determine priority problems. Division
program decisions are then discussed in senior staff meetings and final
decisions are made by department heads. The enforcement program in IEPA
also plays a major role in directing the selection of Agency priorities.
The Department of Health is responsible for producing two reports for
the State legislature: the Human Services Plan and the State Health
Plan. In writing these annual reports, the Health Department staff must
focus on program goals and objectives, thus the exercise becomes in part
a priority setting one.
Risk, assessment models are not used with any regularity in the
State. The Health Department is talcing the lead on this issue now and
are awaiting the results of the Michigan inter-governmental risk assessment
study. The IEPA Task Force will also prepare a philosophical paper on
the potential use of risk assessment.
In addition to the Waukegan Harbor and Wilsonville clean-up operations,
Illinois responds to toxic incidents on a case by case basis. Control
strategies are developed according to the toxic problem. For example,
the Department of Health ETP was called in to investigate and solve
apparent bromine poisoning at the Illinois National Guard Headquarters.
ETP did a health survey of those people affected, traced the source of
the problem to the ventilation system, requested the assistance of
architects and engineers, and developed recommendations for solving the
ventilation problem. A recommendation was selected and the bromine
poisoning problem was solved. Another example involves a hog farmer in
Illinois. Members of the farmer's family were becoming sick from arsenic
poisoning. The source of the arsenic was unknown until ETP investigated
and found a cross-connection between the farmer's pesticide supply
container and the family's water wells. The problem was then easy to
solve. Cases similar to these occur routinely in Illinois. The Department
of Public Health responds to about 800 inquiries annually.
V. Analysis
Illinois ranks seventh among the States in number of manufacturers
and importers reporting for the TSCA inventory of chemicals in commerce,
and fifth in the number of different substances reported. As a result,
the State has become more active in toxics management in the last five
years. The IEPA has managed to improve its technical expertise and
information base in each environmental medium and strengthen the Agency's
internal toxics coordination. Three major multi-media committees have
-47-
-------
been created which continue to stream-line agency procedures and open
communication channels. The IEPA is in the process of developing an
intra-agency toxics strategy and this document should be completed
within the year. The Department of Public Health's Environmental Toxicology
Program responds to toxic incidences and is trying to develop and computerise
its public health data bases.
Although there are no industry reporting requirements (other than
permits) and State-wide inventories are lacking, the State is developing
a toxics management program which fits the needs and resources of the
State.
-48-
-------
ORGANIZATION CIIAHT
fNV|RONM£NTAt PBOIfCIION AGtMCV
state of iuinois
MmcIi. 1VB2
OIHECTOR
diehard J. Cwlson
Ohfltltfd »f
Adhtlftlllltllofl
Jmihrny JatMilM
Suf^mtt S«»n*
to Ui« OliHtm
Jim 0'B*y*n
E f O CowdbiftMi
SMfl«y Cf»w#«r4
PI* iltmU
Dfmly l)|f«ctw
OtHwtl HiicMwy
*. )
wyw J
MHc
ln(«i|ovMfini«nl^ frtgiMiw
Bmhm4 KWm
MM)* CoMa*
Public Pwtlci|wlkNi
Ql«ii Ci«v««i
bvirbwMilUl P1091MN
RofW KaMlVA
D
ClfilMMl I
Clwl** J*(Ni> |
Contact A«Jmm
r
I 1 nofw kimivi 1 p -|
I A«lcuHur>l Aitvtew I 1 ' I M»« I
I A 0. Tayto* j ~r | »wM Bwlwl J
OUUk* t#f All
puNiiltuo Conical
Pan 0»«4wIm
ArilblMI AV Mo«VKMtt
-------
Maryland ITM S'"Trmary
I. Toxic Substances Authorities
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. Hazardous Substances Act.
2. Council on Toxic Substances Act.
3. Water Pollution Control and Abatement Act.
4. Safe Drinking Water Act.
5. Maryland Environmental Service Act of 1970.
6. Air Quality Control Act.
7. Maryland Pesticide Regulation and Labeling Law.
8. Pesticide Applicator's Law.
B. Major Agencies
1. Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
C. Other Agencies
1. Department of Agriculture.
2. Department of Licensing and Regulation (Division
of Labor Industry)
3. Department of Natural Resources.
4. Department of Transportation.
5. Department of State Planning.
6. Department of Economic and Community Development.
7. State Fire Marshall's Office.
8. State Police.
9. Civil Defense and Disaster Preparedness Agency.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxic Substances Management
A. Legislative and Executive Mandates
1. An Executive Order in 1980 created a centralized
integrated management structure for environmental
programs in the State Department of Health and
Mental Hygiene.
2. Governor's Council on Toxic Substances.
3. Hazardous Waste Siting Board.
4. Hazardous Substances Advisory Council.
_B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Toxic Substances Registry.
2. Air Toxics Coordinator.
3. Consolidated Laboratories.
4. Aquatic Toxics Program.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Industrial Survey.
-50-
-------
2. Health Hazard Alerts.
3. Cancer Registry.
4. Occupational Disease Registry.
5. Birth Defects Registry.
B. Data Coordination
All toxics related data is computerized into a centralized
system, the Toxic Substances Registry.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Environmental programs use a number of risk
assessment criteria in a problem solving approach.
2. The Science and Health Advisory Group provides assistance
to individual programs and helps coordinate joint priorities
within DHMH.
3. The Governor's Council on Toxic Substances coordinates
efforts across programs and agencies.
B. Risk Assessment Models
The State uses a number of criteria to assess risks.
C. Emergency Management
A number of agencies respond to toxics emergencies. An alert
system was established by the Governor's Council on Toxic
Substances.
V. Current Status and Analysis
A. Existing Priorities
Hazardous Waste Disposal
B. Integration Activities
1. Centralized Environmental Program Office in Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene provides excellent structure
for cross-media coordination.
2. Additional coordination provided
a. Governor's Council on Toxic Substances.
b. Sciences and Health Advisory Group.
c. Toxic Substances Registry.
d. Hazardous Waste Siting Board.
e. Hazardous Substances Advisory Council.
51-
-------
Key State Officials
Governor: Harry Hughes
Williaa M. Eichbaum
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Programs
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
201 West Preston Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
(301) 383-7328
Program Contacts
Max Eisenberg, Ph.D.
Director
Science and Environmental Health
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
201 West Preston Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
(301) 383-2365
John E. McQuaae, Chief
Division of Environmental Science and Technology
Office of Environmental Programs
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
201 West Preston Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
(301) 383-6390
-52-
-------
Maryland ITM
I. State Authorities Regulating Toxic Substances
Major legislative authorities for the regulation of tcxic substances
are contained in the Council on Toxic Substances Act, the Hazardous
Substances Act, the Water Pollution Control and Abatement Act, the Safe
Drinking Water Act, the Air Quality Control Act, the Maryland Environmental
Services Act and several pesticides acts. Host of these acts are now
incorporated into Article 43 of the Maryland Annotated Health Code.
In many cases broad authority, rather than specific requirements,
is given to the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene to conduct environmental
programs. Article 43, Sections 690-706 of the Health Code enables the
Secretary to monitor emissions and issue regulations in order to protect
community health. Under this section, the air program carries out
monitoring activities, and the State conducted a survey of industries
producing toxic substances. Section 33 gives authority to the Secretary
to secure information on the incidents and causes of disease. Under
this section, the State has set up a Cancer Registry to require physicians
and hospitals to report tumor incidents and related data. Section 18
does make specific requirements of physicians to report incidents of
occupational disease.
In January 1980, a major reorganization of Maryland's State agencies
regulating toxic substances was initiated by an Executive Order and
approved by the Legislature. A number of environmental programs, chiefly
water and hazardous waste, were transferred.from the Department of
Natural Resources in Annapolis to the Department of Health and Mental
Hygiene in Baltimore, to maximize sharing of information and expertise
in a problem solving approach to protect public health. An Office of
Environmental Programs was established under the Department of Health
and Mental Hygiene, and the air, water, waste and community health
programs were reordered under a new Assistant Secretary for Environmental
Programs. State laboratories for toxic substances testing were consolidated
into the Laboratories Administration under the Department of Health and
Mental Hygiene. Primary authority for the regulation of toxic substances
under the Maryland Annotated Code was shifted from the Natural Resources
Code to Article 43 of the Health Code.
A chief integrating mechanism for toxic substances control in
Maryland was created by the Council on Toxic Substances Act. The Act
created the Governor's Council on Toxic Substances* with broad inter-
agency, university and public representation to provide advice on all
matters relating to toxic and carcinogenic substances. The Act is now
contained in Section 813A-813C of Article 43 of the Health Code.
The Hazardous Substances Act was recently amended to strengthen
penalties for illegal hazardous waste activity. It sharply increased
fines and stiffened sentences for violations. The Act was also amended
to create a Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Board* representating local
communities, the scientific community and the public to recommend certification
* See Section II
-53-
-------
of hazardous waste sites. During the last session of the legislature a
bill was passed closing one of the two remaining facilities in the
State. Presently, fourteen sites are under consideration. The Act also
contains a requirement to establish an inter-agency Hazardous Substances
Advisory Council* to assist the State in developing policy and regulations
concerning hazardous waste disposal.
The 1982 legislative session passed a number of toxics related
bills. Chief among these was the Sentinel Birth Defects Information
Act. The law requires physicians to report incidents of children born
with birth defects and are specifically required to report any knowledge
of environmentally related incidents. The reporting form requires
information on the parents including residence, occupation, smoking
habits, and origin. The data is physician/hospital reported, not based
on residence.
Other bills passed by the last legislative session are:
1) The Transportation of Hazardous 'Materials Act enabling the
State to designate routes, procedures and equipment for the transportatioc
of hazardous waste;
2). The Hazardous Waste Facilities Health and Safety Standards Act
requiring the State to issue health and safety standards for the
safe operation of hazardous waste disposal sites;
3) The Drivers Certification Act giving the State the ability to
require licensing of drivers transporting hazardous waste; and
4) The Asbestos Licensing Act requiring licensing of any business
involved in the containment or removal of asbestos.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxic Substances Management
Maryland's Office of Environmental Programs in the Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene now manages most of the State's toxic substances
control programs. Several of the State's environmental programs were
transferred from the Department of Natural Resources to the Department
of Health and Mental Hygiene in 1980. The State's environmental programs
are now centralized to maximize coordination and sharing of information.
Four divisions within the Office of Environmental Programs carry out
programs in air, water, waste and community health (food, drug, product
safety, noise, and radiation). Water resources responsibilities' are in
DNR; pesticides, in Agriculture.
Environmental health coordination, both inside the Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene and with other agencies, is provided by the
Office of Environmental Programs' Science and Health Advisory Group. It
is responsible for information gathering, epidemiological studies,
problem identification, development of scientific criteria for toxic
pollutants in discharge permit limitations, conducting special projects,
providing assistance to local health departments, and providing a scientific
and medical advisory service to other programs and other
*See Section II
-54-
-------
agencies. It has two divisions. The Division of Environmental Science
and Technology provides advice and assistance to other programs and
agencies and conducts special projects. Its special projects relating
to toxics include a TSCA Section 28 grant project to develop a Toxic
Substances Registry, a centralized computer system of toxics information
from local, State and Federal sources; a special project to educate and
train State Police to enforce State regulations on the transportation of
hazardous substances; a project funded under a TSCA Section 28 grant to
develop safe containment procedures and engineering technology for
hazardous materials; and a TSCA PCB enforcement grant to ensure safe PCE
storage and disposal practices. The Division of Environmental Disease
Control oversees and evaluates physician reporting of disease relating
to toxic substances, including incidents of tumors, birth defects and
occupational diseases.
The Office of Environmental Programs also has a Planning and Analysis Group
which provides assistance and advice on program and regulation development
to the different media programs. An Administration Services Group gives
administrative support to the different programs and includes a consolidated
laboratories program.
There are also the basic media programs. The State air program is
given broad based authority to monitor emissions and to protect public
health. It cooperated with the Science and Health Advisory Group to
provide information to toxic substances for the Industrial Survey and
Toxic Substances Registry. It is now setting up a special airborne
toxic substances program and has just recently designated a Toxic
Substances Coordinator.
The State water program has monitored toxics since 1974 when it
issued a regulation to prohibit the discharge of toxic materials into
State waters without a permit. The regulation requires reporting of
information on the nature of toxic materials, safeguards and clean-up
procedures. The State also conducts testing of inorganic and organic
toxic pollutants in drinking water supplies. It coordinates with the
waste program in identifying existing and potential problems from landfills
and other waste sites.
Authority for the regulatory management of hazardous waste rests
with the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene's Environmental Programs'
Waste Management Administration. The Waste Management Administration
develops and administers rules and regulations on hazardous waste. It
Issues numerous permits for hazardous waste disposal and conducts a
strong inspection and enforcement effort.
An alternative to local zoning of hazardous waste disposal sites
rests with a special Hazardous Waste Siting Board. The Board consists
of scientists, geologists, environmentalists, citizens, county and
chamber of commerce representatives. This is an automous board appointed
by the Governor. It must conduct hearings and consult with the Council
on Toxic Substances, the Hazardous Substances Advisory Council and the
secretaries of Health and Mental Hygiene, Economic and Community Development,
-55-
-------
State Planning, and Agriculture. Final permitting authority rests with
the Health Department's Waste Management Administration. Staff support
for the Board is provided by Maryland Environmental Service in the
Department of Natural Resources.
The Stats also has a Hazardous Substances Advisory Council which
reports to the Governor. The Council assists the Department of Health
and Mental Hygiene in designating hazardous substances and developing
rules and regulations for the management and disposal of hazardous
waste. The Council has representation from the Department of Agriculture,
the Department of Licensing and Regulation's Division of Labor and
Industry, and the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. In addition,
representatives serve from the University of Maryland, the hazardous
waste disposal industry, a hazardous waste generator, and the public at
large.
The Maryland Hazardous Substances Control Fund provides money to
assist with clean-up activities and emergency response to hazardous
waste spills and contamination. Funds are provided from permit fees.
Although the fund is sometimes as large as half a million dollars, it
not represent the extent of the "Superfund" assessment found in other
states.
The State's primary inter-agency cooperative effort in toxic substances
management and long-range planning is conducted by the Governor's Council
on Toxic Substances. The Council is comprised of representatives from
State agencies, as well as from the private sector. It includes representatives
from the Departments of Natural Resources, Agriculture, Licensing and
Regulation, Transportation, State Planning, and Economic and Community
Development, as well as from the States Fire Marshall's Office, State
Police, Civil Defense and Disaster Preparedness Agency, University of
Maryland, Johns Hopkins University, the AFL-CIO, Chamber of Commerce,
and one member each from the Senate and House of Delegates. The Council
develops plans for common action between agencies; shares resources,
facilities and data; increases cooperation in compliance and enforcement
activities; and has estabished an alert system for handling toxic emergency
situations. It recently held a symposium on the effects of low-level
radiation and also one on risk assessment and health effects of toxic
substances. The Council is also reviewing regulations in response to
the recently passed asbestos containment and removal legislation.
The Governor's Council on Toxic Substances, the Hazardous Waste
Siting Board and the Hazardous Substances Advisory Council are all
required by law and members serve two to six year terms. This structure
insures continuity of the State's integrated toxic management program
and enhances the State's ability to maintain a long-term commitment.
III. Information Management
Maryland has an extensive system of data collection and coordination
centralized into the Toxic Substances Registry. In 1978, Maryland
selected an initial list of 178 chemicals determined by an examination
-56-
-------
of Federal, State, and local information on chemical production, health
effects, imminent hazards, and other toxic substances data. Three
hundred industries, producing the greatest volume of these priority
chemicals, were selected for the State's initial Industrial Survey.
Information was gathered on the number of employees, disposal, manufacturing,
production volume and use. Supplementary information on selected toxic
substances were gathered from Health Hazard Alerts. In addition, the
State has developed Chemical Fact Sheets to alert industries, workers
ana the general public of the possible carcinogenic and toxic effects of
certain substances.
A TSCA Section 28 grant has enabled the State to expand its initial
survey and to systematize other related toxic substances information
into a common data base. The Toxic Substances Registry compiles health
and related data from local, State and Federal sources, including other
agencies, universities, public health schools and cancer centers, into
one centralized data base. Information is searchable by location,
chemical name, CAS and RTEX numbers, occupational and environmental
standards, biological and chemical factors, volume of substance, and
incidents (including spills, occupation disease reports, air quality
alerts, etc.). Data on the Toxic Substances Registry is available to
the environmental programs in the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene,
as well as to other agencies. For example, information on toxic substances,
industrial production volumes and emission data can be utilized by media
programs conducting permitting actions and monitoring activities or by
other agencies carrying out inspections or developing standards.
Also contained in the Toxic Substances Registry are the Occupational
Disease Registry and the Birth Defects Registry. The Cancer Registry System
is separate from the other system, but related. Maryland's tumor registry
program has been redesigned and expanded to help the State determine
possible cause-effect relationships. Reporting is now mandatory, not
only by hospitals and laboratories, but by physicians. A new reporting
form is being developed to include information on patients including
residence, occupation, smoking habits, and origin. A similar reporting
form is being developed for the Birth Defects Registry. In addition,
the State is working with several hospitals in the Baltimore area in a
pilot project to link any clusters of disease with possible toxic exposures.
The two reporting systems, the Toxic Substances Registry and the Cancer
Registry System, will use similar parameters for data description.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
Maryland's integrated management structure and centralized data
system greatly assist the State in providing the various toxic programs
with information necessary to identify problems and set priorities for
remedial action. The Sciences and Health Advisory Group assists in
setting priorities between programs and the Governor's Council on Toxic
Substances helps coordinate priority setting between agencies. Chief
among the Council's goals is long-range planning geared towards preventing
future hazards.
The Sciences and Health Advisory Group conducts several epidemiological
studies to assess possible links between disease and chemical exposure.
The studies are largely in response to problems Identified at the local
-57-
-------
level. A combination of risk assessment criteria is utilized in evaluating
risks by the Advisory Group, which also uses its extensive toxic data
system in order to identify clusters of alleged problems and to predict
potential effects.
Emergency Management in the State is divided among several agencies:
the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene's Science and Health Advisory
Group and Waste Management Administration; the State Fire Marshall; the
Maryland State Police; and the Maryland Civil Defense and Emergency
Preparedness Agency. The Governor's Council on Toxic Substances recently
established an alert system to more effectively coordinate responses to
toxics emergencies. The State has developed an emergency response
brochure to aide local authorities in responding to toxics emergencies
and has conducted training to step up enforcement of regulations on
transportation of toxic materials.
V. Current Status and Analysis
The single, most significant toxic substances problem in Maryland
is the disposal of hazardous waste. Despite a well-established program for
certifying hazardous waste disposal sites and a review of fourteen proposed
areas, only one controversial site remains operative for the entire
State.
Maryland seems to have a well-integrated structure for toxic substances
management. Its centralized Environmental Programs Office in the
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, its computerized Toxic Substances
Registry, an^ its science and technology advisory capabilities greatly
enhance cross-media information sharing and coordinated program efforts.
The Governor's Council on Toxic Substances further improves cooperation
between agencies for coordinated problem-solving, priority-setting and
long-range planning. Maryland uses a combination of specific authorities
(as in the case of the occupation disease and birth defects reporting
requirements) and broad-based authorities (such as that given to the
Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene to secure data) in a problem
solving approach to protect public health.
-58-
-------
iMTMnnra/r of iowmii Atit naimt. iiYcmre
sminrMir
Air Management
Administration
Director
x
I
orricr or tiiYinomuiiAL woghahs
AsshUnt Secretary
Administrative Service? Croup
thief
Planning and Analysis Group
Chief
Science? tnd Health Advisor/ Croup
Clilor
Water llanayement
Administration
Director
Waste Management
Administration
Director
technical
Services
I'royr jw,
Ailm | ti 1 s lr itor
EngineerIng
Prouram,
Administrator
X
f'lannluo &
Evaluation
Prouraw
Administrator
X
Inspection &
Co»w|»l lanco
Prooram
Admin I lira tor
X
Municipal
Construction
Grants and
I'crwlts
Proaraiiv
Administrator
X
Teclinlcnl Services
Pronrain
Administrator
1
enforcement
Program.
Administrator
('Lji. f ('\A- K
Ch.u)et n. liui'k. Jr., Se lf.. SecreThry
CoummKjr Health
Management N«gi»,
Administrator
Pxti^
I
cr>
m
l
vernor
irO
-------
Massachusetts ITM Sunmary
I. Toxics Authorties
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. 1975 State Reorganization Legislation.
2. Massachusetts Clean Water Act.
3. Hazardous Waste Siting Act.
B. Major Departments
1. Department of Environmental Quality Engineering.
2. Department of Public Health.
3. Executive Office of Environmental Affairs.
C. Other Departments
1. Department of Food and Agriculture.
2. Department of Environmental Management.
3. Department of Labor and Industries - Division of
Occupational Hygiene.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. No mandate for inter-agency integration exists in
Massachusetts.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Frequent meeting among top DEQE and DPH officials.
2. Cooperative use of DEQE laboratories.
3. Ftwer of review held by DPH on other agencies' proposed
regulations which may impact on public health.
4. Department of Public Health/Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering, Ad Hoc Advisory Committee.
5. Pesticide Board and Subccxrmittee.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Water pollution and air emissions inventories operated
by DEQE.
2. Hazardous waste inventory (to be implemented by DEQE).
3. Environmental monitoring by DEQE.
-60-
-------
4. Tumor registry operated by DPH.
5. Vital Statistics records computerized fcy DPH.
6. Voluntary birth defects registry.
B. Data Coordination
1. Data are collected and stored by the individual agencies.
There is no centralized storage system.
C. Information Availability
1. Confidentially of Business Information is currently
protected by State Statute.
2. Health data and certain sections of the birth certificate
are confidential.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Input received from monitoring data, industry surveys
and citizens conplaints.
2. Priorities are set according to the seriousness of
the problem,
S. Risk Assessment Models
1. Numerous environmental epidemiology studies including
biological monitoring have been conducted by DPH. Assessments
of human health risks frcm environmental exposures are
also routinely done; however, DPH has not formalized any
single risk assessment model.
C. Emergency Management
1. DBQE has the primary responsibility for emergency response
for toxic chemical or oil spills, all monitoring, on-site
evaluation and coordination of clean-up activities.
2. DFtt has the primary responsibility for making recommendations
in regard to health risks, medical treatment or biological
monitoring and whether to evacuate the area.
3. DPH has the primary responsibility for responding to and
managing all emergency incidents for radiation. Formal
plans exist for these to fulfill requirements of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
4. Department of Labor and Industries is currently developing
an emergency response capability including monitoring
for responding to workplace emergencies.
61
-------
Key State Officials
Governor: Michael Dukakis
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
John A. Bewi ck
Secretary of Environmental Affairs
(617) 727-9800
Department of Environmental (Xiality Engineering
Anthony D. Cortese
Ccnmissioner
(617) 292-5505
Department of Public Health
Commissioner - Alfred L. Frechette, M.D. (617) 727-2700
Department of Food and Agriculture
Ccnmissioner - Frederick Winthrop (617) 727-3002
Department of Labor and Industries
Ccnmissioner - William Ships (617) 727-3454
Program Contacts
Gerald S. Parker
Assistant Ccmmissioner for Environmental
Health Services
(617) 727-2660
Thomas McLoughlin
Deputy Commissioner
Department of Health
(617) 292-5505
Leonard Pagnotto
Director, Division of Occupational Hygiene
(617) 727-3982
Norman Telles, M.D., Director
Division of Environmental Health Assessment
Department of Public Health
600 Washington Street, Roan 770
Boston, Massachusetts 02111
Ms. Yee Cho
Air and Hazardous Waste Division
Department of Environmental Cuality Engineering
110 Tremont Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02108
(617) 292-5630
-62-
-------
Massachusetts ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
The legislative authority over toxics management in the State of
Massachusetts can be divided into two levels. The first level of
authority is defined by the 1975 reorganization legislation which
transferred much of the Department^ of Public Health's (DPH) control in
environmental matters to the•Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
(EOEA). Under the plan, the Secretary of Environmental Affairs acts as
the chief administrator to all environmental policies, including toxics.
In addition, three branches of the EOEA are designed to deal with specific
aspects of environmental management which are pertinent to toxics control.
The Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE) was established
to regulate pollution through its Divisions of: Water Supply, Water
Pollution Control, Air Quality Control, Hazardous Waste Management,
Laboratories, Water Ways, and Wetlands. The Department of Environmental
Management (DEM) was formed as the State's environmental policy organ,
and the Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA) has assumed control of
the pesticides program through its Pesticide Office. This forms the
basis of Massachusetts environmental management.
The second level of authority is the delegation of control which
results from various State statutes such as: The Clean Water Act, the
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act and the Hazardous Waste Siting
Act, in addition to the authority delegated under the Federal Clean Air
Act. As a result of these statutes, control over toxics substances is
distributed somewhat differently than is implied by the reorganization
legislation. DEQE is the dominant body in the field of toxics management
by assuming all monitoring functions, and most enforcement. Through the
Hazardous Waste Siting Act, DEM has assumed a significant role in hazardous
waste facility siting.
In addition, the Department of Public Health has maintained a great
deal of authority in toxics management through its involement in matters
which present a "significant threat to public health." Under the Assistant
Commissioner for Environmental Health Programs and the Director of
Health Assessment, toxics programs are carried out in the Offices of:
Environmental Epidemiology, Environmental Toxicology and Environmental
Hygiene. Moreover, a representative of DPH, as mandated by the Massachusetts
Pesticide Control Act, chairs a multi-agency pesticide review board.
The Department of Public Health is also assisted by the autonomous local
health departments.
No legislation exists which deals with integration of all of the
various agencies and offices just mentioned, and currently no such
legislation is pending. Several joint DEQE-DPH programs are carried
out according to formal memoranda of understanding.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
As previously stated, the statutes which are pertinent to toxics
delegate basic line functions to specific environmental departments and
media divisions, with no explicit concern for integration. Theoretically,
-63-
-------
the 1976 reorganization legislation addresses a major part of this
question by vesting the Secretary of Environmental Affairs with ultimate
control over DEQE, DEM and DFA. However, in practice, this only applies
to the EOEA.
There are several cooperative efforts, both within and outside of
the agencies which were not mandated by legislation but prove to be
significant. Within DEQE, two Deputy Commissioners, one for environmental
media programs and one for water resources, meet quite frequently to
discuss problems and programs under their jurisdictions. In addition,
coordination of Statewide programs are aided both in planning and in
implementation by monthly meetings of the four regional engineers (who
have major local implementation responsibilities), and the various
directors within DEQE. Informal meetings between these officials occur
even more frequently. Partly as a result of this, hazardous waste
enforcement has been singled out as a program which is particularly well
coordinated Statewide. A final cooperative effort within DEQE is the
shared use of laboratories.
The DPH also has a number of cooperative efforts. Within the
Environmental Health Services section of the department, the Assistant
Commissioner, division directors and senior staff all meet on a monthly
basis. There is a significant amount of sharing of services between the
five divisions (Division of Environmental Health Assessment; Division of
Food and Drug; Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention; Division of Radiation
Control; Division of Community Sanitation), as the need arises. The
Environmental Health Assessment program has worked cooperatively with
the lead program to assess human exposures to lead from environmental
contamination by various media (hazardous waste, ambient air, etc.).
Likewise the environmental health assessment program and the food ana
drug programs have cooperated very closely on pesticide registration
issues and contamination of the food supply by hazardous waste or industrial
effluents. The food and drug program has, at the request of the environmental
health assessment program, assigned staff to collect food samples both
in the marketplace and in contaminated estuaries. The environmental
health assessment program provides the technical reviews, risk assessment
and recommendations to the food and drug program for the pesticide
registration process and food contamination incidents.
DPH also works cooperatively with other Departments. Department of
Fisheries and Wildlife has used its staff and boats at DPH's request to
collect fish samples from contaminated waters. DPH has assigned staff
to the DF and A to assist in the pesticide registration process and
evaluation.
The Department of Public Health and the Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering have a cooperative effort embodied in the Ad Hoc
Advisory Committee. This committee includes representatives from industry
and the academic community among others and meets every two months to
discuss a wide range of issues with environmental health significance.
Work within DPH is coordinated by the Assistant Commissioner for Environmental
Health Services.
-64-
-------
The main instances of cooperation among the Departments are centered
around specific toxics issues. The ad hoc Advisory Committee has considered
such issues as 2,4-D, TCE, and PCB's in New Bedford Harbor. In addition
to issue-oriented coordination, there is the power of review that DPH
has over other departments (DEQE, DF&A, DEM, etc.) in the state which
write regulations having impact on the public health, and the approval
of the registration of pesticides by the Subcommittee on Pesticides,
which is chaired by the Food and Drug Director of DPH.
III. Information Management
Data collection with the State of Massachusetts is relatively well
developed. An inventory exists on water, a new air emissions inventory
is being initiated, and one will soon be implemented on hazardous wastes.
Data is also collected and stored from the various media monitoring
efforts across the State. However, there is no formal industry inventory,
and the only mandatory reporting is in the water program.
The Department of Public Health operates a tumor registry in addition
to collecting vital statistics (birth and death certificates). The
death certificate record ds potentially useful because the certificates
list underlying and secondary causes of death and the usual occupation
of the individual; however, the limitation is that it does not provide
an historical record of the individual's occupation or residence. In
addition, information is provided by a partial source, e.g. next of kin.
A voluntary birth defects register is in existence.
Data coordination is not extensive. The majority of the information
that is collected is done so by the individual agency or division, and
currently there is no formal means for transferring the information
between offices; although informally, health information has been
disseminated to DEQE from DPK and DEQE has provided ouch environmental
data to DPH.
IV. Toxics Control
Problem identification comes from several sources. Monitoring data,
industry surveys and permits, and citizen complaints are all used as
very instrumental in illuminating various problem areas. The primary
responsibility for toxics emergency management lies with DEQE. DEQE has
authority over all emergencies concerning oil or chemicals and serves as
the coordinating body for other agencies. Additionally, DPH staffs are
responsible for providing information and guidance concerning health
effects, medical treatment and necessity for evaluation during emergency
incidents. The Radiation Control Program is located in DPH. A nuclear
incident advisory team to respond to emergency incidents involving
radiation releases is located in this program.
V. Current Status and Analysis
Massachusett's first priority in the toxics field is hazardous
waste. However, significant problems are recognized concerning PCB's,
arsenic and herbicides. Such concern has also led to initiatives in
-65*-
-------
waterways pollution control. There is a great deal of public concern
over toxics problems, and support for toxics programs exist in the
legislature and local government.
Massachusetts does, however, have some pending legislation dealing
with toxics management in general which is noteworthy. Currently, the
Department of Health is seeking legislative approval to establish a
separate budget for the Environmental Health Assessment Division. This
could significantly strengthen the programs under this division's
auspices. Other legislation, most notably HB 2463 deals with worker and
community right to know. The bill requires employees who use, transport,
handle, dispose, discharge or process toxic, hazardous, radioactive,
infectious or flammable substances to produce a list of such substances
to which workers, residents or fire personnel could be exposed. The
bill also requires employers to disclose any information on toxics
requested by workers, State officials or the community. In addition,
the bill establishes education and training programs for employees.
Confidentiality of Business Information principles are flatly rejected
by language which basically states, as a summary discloses that "the
avoidance of toxic or hazardous working and living conditions outweighs
companies' concerns for trade secrets". Finally, a State Superfund bill
is also pending.
Due to the distinct functions and managerial styles of the two most
important departments, DEQE and DPH, integration of toxic management
presents some definite challenges. However, there are several aspects
of Massachusetts toxic management which provide a firm basis for integration.
Information on the location of toxic substances, and the study of possible
resulting health effects, are generally quite good. The vide use of
epidemiological studies is also helpful, although no direct cause-effect
relationships have been established. This combined with the level of
public interest in the field of toxics creates a favorable environment
for integration work to begin.
-66-
-------
£*£cu( ivf. o( t irr 11ii A . JiiI¦
I Hi) t'lluu/ I < ,/.(,¦ ¦>' < ( , . f
tiiivfi'ii. Mi \\,icfi \d.' ( ( \ '
Ii '.I \ I I. .'i'ii.' .'i-aii-'ili'
turn ( ¦ I f.V ( (' (' ii
7/7 If
iVili'.'i i'i V. '.ilium-r (<
M(< | if ( /// V. i I */('
/>,{ I »!*• t.'i ijmiit'n ( \
> :'h I (t] I till« HI" ("i Ul.|
1#VII. All f !t~llt/ V.
.Vttc.Si:.r,r..l>:/¦'! ?£:tC
ft t't.i'/fii f'.i Wit f fsm.il/)
'Ji.\ . Jit/I.I ('. ffilllWM
/:'/ •//'";
1 (• < / HU (/lOlllllt'll/it I'
. I.11 i#i |Cm.'mi/'
(jilUM /' ( I' fl<( "((/ f .
Ki'iiiftt 1 i
*';{*¦ A I'ot'/u (.< tin CciU i
ftl. J/U'HKI.l {'. Mt>(il«'lO
/,'/ it','.
V i.I .V //<• ."(i '< ./<•(» \ (:•
t:\t.i--A«;t.t.I'll OlA.
\Ciw.\t.i A. limn)
.... })l
v-f
tiiuj VtA. Rriiftl.
''cCrjcfccu V.'l '
'ft:. John J. Pcfani'if
(' Z t 4 '* • ¦
"l). » . ^ J I *4
Wr / rl f *,'C.
J.
V (A . fifiAi
/y/ u.w
W.o/c Pt',/>/>'it ('
lh-'t. fill i'l'-nun (imitfimn
I'll •//¦/;
"l':' i'.' V J-'.' ll'll ll'l' •,
/'('i. Cii.i\t\'S I . I.i'iii:<"./
• •./
(i/i* f i'ii iii/ \ l.'c i / v tc ( nn J'
/lfftii'1 ('//!. Hhci'ihm
'iii.;;-! i.. . ///
Iiih'c/ IV if (">i ('i <> (
Ci'MC-j, CfldlCi'l S'. /(<•<«/
7^/ JIS',
11*i¦ 11 f. i>f, \jr / .i-j M»r < f.i ii
l|( /'( < i I ( rill in \ lint
Ctwtiii. hut/ A. I it iI/mil1
)'.Ill
I ii<| i lie iVi < ii<) J'< v < \ i . t'/(>
I'd' i <¦(* /'n» c \ ( on
(¦('(<* (. IdiOi'ili'i' J.
( »( I ilf'll ( ft '
/// '.170
'¦i it'Ci | |i ((i i ',i o.i
I'l'I . Aihl'i;-u> I'-l.'.'il
(•' i / i"i fi i' i j i tn
I'i.'i. Chii'tfi'' lltlthriw
IU V>1 I
I inM 'i i ii line ii I'ii ( f'l'ii mi i ii
Vun \ n/i/iiniiiH'iil.;i' "ti.ii'i /i/
y < i/V l«»n . A/' ,y-; i'< i.
7/7 ii'-/
'(•i 'l i lie i < i»' 1
Oct. I'lui'ij) Votitfj
nr H'ji
Hi/i i in- t!cc "i I'd 11 oii.i t'
)'<*/i i r Cc 1 Af^'iC'i/
W.i l ii /'mi <
rn :>'ioo
i \ i ll i ( ¦' Ai -' V S I ii 1 * 11 (/
I ( 5.r.'. I.iia ' i
Ifhiistii lllfl
") i •'<¦00'.
I .i (/( \
I'i.'i. Prmifl J. I Cij.m
ill M)~>l
Pi " (>& A.j'i r t u i
l.t.iS II'. IK * 1 .
I!, ,!!' trfi
n 7
V.< |/ .• f
('< 'l . Il/llll ) . I L (
<1.' i" t '• t 77 - »31 a
('/'ii <*('«.•!/;.•« i > i i ¦
/'(.i. (.'<•<»*i:jr M. 11*'¦'i/
7." 7 i<> ' ;
''t' l.i /'i'i 1 f Ci'ii t
t'c'i . J'cfc'l K'li .''ii < M - I (
11! -ii'H
i*.;i»i:i f < i/ii !u' i ~ .1
I «;• »¦..'>«¦ i' . ( ii 1" i •' '• J .
t'.i .jiiiiii 7 - i t' < •
l\* i ( ii' ti/i' lit id"'*/
'.11/ 'I- 'H' t Wl I I '.l'l i I ¦
I'. i f \ i t /.'/ /;)•
-------
1 7A1 I UAV.I
1)11 | Ji,)()J(
Al)V i MSI li.:
I'.I'AI 11
1,1 vi mo;j ,,f
OH I !>ooil
aihm i i Il i:c
| < o. :*ii nmom i;
I
..j 1/ATiH HI.SOUHCI-S COMMISSION |— -
Ass jf/iMT i <» < ur:/uilium
i.
nnw.H: iwiohmayiom
CINM.AI.
counsel.
m ru i v < orMisslour:n
r,ijki.au .»r
i!'r;fo:iAi. slkvicms
ill tin y co.mmi ss io:.kk
' IIIIKI All of
Administhai I vi; si ?
-------
Division of Hazardous Waste Organization Chart
! G~~ IC £
i MANAuIWi N'T
I
Z L ?*.' ~ A L
! PERSONNEL
1
Dt,= .
j PROGSi
V
| manage
WENT
CTpR
DEPUTY DIP..
TtCHNiCil,
SERVICES
EN Glh'tERINS
a
stawoakcs
DEIOKTiMiNiTiO* :
Southeas:
Ragior.
Weste
-69-
-------
MASSACHUSETTS IWI'AMMNT <>!¦ I'tWI.lC IIIAI.TII
ENV I RONMENTAI, IIf- Al.'l II SERVICES
Alfred I,, lii* el if tie, M.I).
Coinni issi one i
DeparLiiU'iit of I'ubl ic Health
(617) 72 7-2 700
DIVISION OF
FOOD AND DRIJCS
Nancy Ridley, M.S,
Director
(617) 522-3700
Cera Id S. Parker, I'. E.
Ass i st an I C< >111111 i ss inner
Env i rt)iinienLii I Health Services
(lil?) 72 7-2660
Cll 11,1)11001) LEAD
1'OISONINC PREVENTION
Terrell Samuels
I)i rec tor
((>17) 522-3700
ENVJKONMENTAL HEALTH
ASSESSMENT
Norman Telles, M.I).
I) i rector
((>17) 727-2660
RADIATION CONTROL
PROGRAM
Robert Hallisey
L)i rec tor
(617) 727-6214
DIVISION OF
COMMUNITY SANITATION
Howard S. Wensley <*>
Director *7
(617) 727-2660
Environmental Epidemiology
John L. Cutler, M.D., l'h. D
Environmental Toxicology
Elaine Krueger, M.I'.II.
Environmental Hygiene
Elise M. Comproni
-------
Michigan ITT4 Surmary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. The John C. Hertel Toxic Substance Control Commission
Act.
2. The Michigan Water Resources Ccnmission Act.
3. The Michigan Municipal wastewater Treatment Control
Act.
4. The Michigan Safe Drinking Water Act.
5. The Michigan Solid Waste Management Act.
6. The Michigan Hazardous waste Management Act.
7. The Liquid Industrial Waste Haulers Act.
8. The Michigan Air Pollution Control Act.
9. The Michigan Public Health Code.
10. The Michigan Food Act.
11. The Michigan Resource Recovery Act.
12. The Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Act.
13. The Michigan Environmental Protection Act.
14. The Pesticides Control Act.
15. The Emergency Preparedness Act.
B. Major Departments
1. The Department of Natural Resources (MDNR).
2. Michigan Department offPublic Health (MDPH).
3. The Department of Agriculture (MDA).
C. Other Departments
1. Department of Transportation.
2. Department of Commerce.
3. Department of State Police.
4. The Toxic Substances Control Commission (TSCC).
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. Several of the above toxics legislative authorities
promote interdisciplinary coordination through requirements
such as ccrmissions with interagency appointments. The
Public Health Code provides a strong mandate for toxics
integration by designating the Department of Public Health
as the environmental health agency for the State with the
charge "to facilitate a uniform approach to environmental
health by the various public and private entities involved
in the field."
-71-
-------
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Monthly meetings and annual retreats among senior staff
members of major regulatory agencies.
2. Interchange of chemical inventory, exposure, toxicological
and epidemiological data.
3. Ten Memoranda of Understanding (MOU's) produced clarifying
respective agency roles.
4. Cooperative use of CMR and state inventories.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. The Critical Materials Registry, air discharge priority
list, toxic and hazardous waste survey, and chemical
evaluation files.
2. DPH epidemiology, toxicology and occupational health.
3. DNR environmental monitoring of industrial and municipal
point sources, water sediment, soil, air, and
hazardous waste sites, as well as fish studies.
4. MDA data on food, feed and animal health.
B. Data Coordination
1. Data is collected and stored by the individual agencies.
There is no centralized storage yet.
2. Data coordinating mechanisms are being developed under a TSCA
cooperative agreement.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Input received through annual water and air discharge
report files by industry, monitoring data, citizen
complaints.
2. CMR ranking system, surveys, inventories and permit
application combine to identify State problems.
3. Site Assessment System (SAS) is being developed to rank
contamination sites for future attention.
B. Risk Assessment Models
1. A TSCA Section 28 grant funded development of an
interdepartmental risk assessment process.
2. Risk assessment being used in regulation
a. environmental permitting
b. SAS
c. problem evaluation
d. site cleanups
C. Bnergency Management
1. The Governor's Office contracted the development of a
comprehensive Emergency Management evaluation for the
State.
-72-
-------
2. The DNR manages a 24-hour Pollution Emergency Alerting
System and requires Pollution Incident Prevention
Plans from industries.
3. The Department of State Police has overall emergency
response authority for major disasters under authority
of the Bnergency Preparedness Act.
D. Current Character of Toxics Control
1. Responsibility is shared between DNR, DPH and MEA. TSCC
is considered an oversight agency.
Key State Officials
Governor: James Blanchard
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Howard Tanner, Director
Stevens T. Mason Building
Lansing, Michigan 48909
Michigan Department of Health
Bailus Walker, Director
3500 North Logan Street
Lansing, Michigan 48909
Michigan Department of Agriculture
Dean Pridgeon, Director
Lewis Cass Building
Lansing, Michigan 48909
Toxic Substances Control C omission
Dr. Larry Hoicomb
Executive Secretary
8th Floor
Washington Square Building
Lansing, Michigan 48909
Program Contacts
Mr. Richard Powers, Director
Office of Toxic Materials Control
Department of Natural Resources
Stevens T. Mason Building
Box 30028
Lansing, Michigan 48909
(517) 373-2190
Mr. John Hesse
Michigan Department of Public Health
P.O. Box 30035
3500 North Logan Street
Lansing, Michigan 48909
(517) 373-8050
-73-
-------
Dr. Burton Cardwell
Director, Toxics Substances
Emergency Services Office
Lewis Cass Building
Lansing, Michigan 48909
-------
Michigan ITM
I. State Legislative Authorities
1. The John C. Hertel Toxic Substance Control Commission Act -
Act 116, P.A. of 1978, took effect on January 1, 1979. This
Act created a State Toxic Substance Control Commission as an
autonomous entity within the Department of Management and
Budget. The Commission consists of the Directors of the
Departments of Agriculture, Natural Resources, and Public
Health as ex-officio members and seven citizens appointed by
the Governor. This Commission has the authority to declare a
toxic substances emergency. The Commission also has discretionary
authority to receive Federal funds, inspect relevant records,
petition for court enforcement of a Commission order, and
direct a State agency to exercise its authority or conduct
tests. The Act creates a toxic substance emergency fund in an
amount to be determined annually by the legislature to be
available to meet expenses incurred by the State in responding
to a toxic substances emergency.
2. Michigan Water Resources Commission Act - Act 245, P.A. of
1928, as amended, is the basic law creating the Water Resources
Commission and establishing its powers to protect and conserve
the water resources of the State and the Great Lakes. The
Commission is comprised of the directors (or their representatives)
of the Departments of Natural Resources, Public Health, State
Highways, Agriculture, and three citizens of the State one
from groups representative of industrial management, one from
groups representative of municipalities, and one from groups
representative of conservation associations or interests. The
Commission is authorized to regulate the discharge of pollutants
to all surface and groundwaters of the State and the Great
Lakes. They levy fees for wastewater surveillance. They are
also empowered to require permits to regulate water discharge
or storage of any substance which may affect the quality of
the waters of the State and to establish restrictions to
assure compliance with applicable State standards and Federal
laws and regulations.
Act 245 requires the reporting of wastewater and critical
materials use data to the State. The data required is based
on the Critical Materials Register including three main groups:
inorganic materials, organic materials and pesticides. Reporting
data is required for materials used and materials discharged
in wastewater effluent.
3. Michigan Municipal Wastewater Treatment Control Act - Act 8,
of the Public Acts of 1913, as amended, is a broadly worded
act which provides the State Department of Public Health with
the responsibility and authority for control of both water and
wastewater facilities. The authority for control of waste
75-
-------
water facilities was transferred to the Michigan Department of
Natural Resources in 1973.
4. Michigan Safe Drinking Water Act - Act 399, P.A. cf regulat&s
public drinking water supplies.
5. Michigan Solid Waste Management Act - Act 641, P.A. provides
for the licensing and regulation of solid waste disposal
sites.
6. Hazardous Waste Management Act - Act 84, P.A. 1979.
This Act is similiar to RCRA sub title C. The Act provides
the MDNR with the authority to regulate the generation,
storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous wastes. The
legislation also requires the use of a manifest system.
7. The Liquid Industrial Waste Haulers Act - Act 136, P.A. of
1969, administered by the Oil and Hazardous Materials Control
Section of the Water Quality Division, Department of Natural
Resources requires that people involved in removing liquid
industrial waste be licensed. The Act also provides for the
inspection and licensing of vehicles and the control over
disposal of wastes ana provides penalties for violations of
the disposal of wastes and the Act.
8. Michigan Air Pollution Control Act - Act 348, P.A. of 1965, as
amended, establishes the Michigan Air Pollution Control Commissi0n
and creates the program for control of atmospheric discharges
administered by the Air Quality Division of the Michigan
Department of Natural Resources. The Commission is comprised
of the Directors of the Departments of Public Health, Natural
Resources, and Agriculture; and eight citizens appointed by
the governor: two representatives of industrial management,
two representatives of local governing bodies, one full-time
air pollution control officer, one licensed doctor cf medicine,
experienced and competent in the toxicology of air contaminants;
one member of organized labor and two representatives of the
general public. Under the Act, the Commission requires all
new and modified potential sources of air pollution to apply
for and receive an air use permit before installation.
9. Michigan Public Health Code - Act 368, P.A. 'of 1978, provides
the state and local health departments with the authority for
protecting the public health. The Director has broad authoritv
for declaring emergenices or issuing orders to eliminate
exposure to toxic chemicals. The code designates the MDPH as
the environmental health agency for the state.
10. Local and District Health Department Authority - Act 306,
P.O. of 1927 as amended, is a broadly worded act which establish
the authority for the formation of county and district health 8
departments. Local, departments are under the supervisory
control of the Michigan Department of Public Health.
-76-
-------
The act authorizes the county or district board of health to
adopt necessary for the protection and promotion of public
health and safety. Consequently, local requirements may vary
somewhat from one location to another.
11. The Michigan Food Act - Act 39, PA. of 1968, provides for
the inspection of all food production warehousing, manufacturing,
labeling and selling establishments and permits codemination
and destruction of food which is poisonous.
12. The Michigan Resource Recovery Act - Act 366, P.A. of 1974,
was developed to promote the conservation of natural resources
through waste recovery to establish the Resource Recovery
Commission and to provide a coordinated Statewide waste management
and resource recovery program. The statute provides for the
development of financial assistance and contracts between the
State and others for services. It includes the power of the
Commission to issue orders against local operations or governmental
units that have not implemented their solid waste plan especially
if existing operations are causing environmental damage.
13. Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Act - Act .54, P.A. of
1974, as amended, provides authority to regulate exposure to
toxic substances in the work place and requires chemical
manufactures to make available to employees safety data sheets
regarding potentially dangerous chemicals.
14. Michigan Environmental Protection Act - Act 127, P.A. of 1970,
the "Thomas J. Anderson, Gordon Rockwell Environmental Protection
Act of 1970" establishes the right of any person or organization
to bring suit in the circuit courts of the state against any
other citizen or organization"... for the protection of the
air, water, or other natural resources and the public trust
therein from, pollution, impairment, or destruction". The very
broad language of this act has the potential to bring the
actions of any individual, municipality, corporation, or
reviewing agency under judicial review. With respect to any
waste control activity, environmentally sound and technically
feasible actions must be used. Failure to do so could result
in court established programs for environmental protection.
15. Pesticides Control Act - Act No. 171, P.A. of 1976, authorizes
regulation over pesticide distribution, labeling and application.
The act includes the licensing of dealers, certification of
applicators and record keeping requirements. Rules to carry
out the act include provisions for the safe handling, transportation,
storage, display, distribution and disposal of pesticides and
their containers. The act is administered by the Department
of Agriculture, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Plant Industry
Division, effective June 25, 1976.
16. Emergency Preparedness Act - Act No. 390, P.A. of 1976, the
Act establishes a system for emergency disaster planning and
-77-
-------
implementation. The Governor maintains the oversight authority
and responsibility to declare State disaster areas. The
Director of the Department of State Police is designated the
State Director of Emergency Services. The act provides the
Director with coordination duties such as preparing the Michigan
Emergency Disaster Plan, managing the department's Emergency
Management Pre-Disaster Division, and directing disaster
relief forces. Each State agency and county is also required
to designate Emergency Services Coordinators.
II. Organizational Structure of Lead Agency/Office on Toxics Management
Michigan has three Agencies which are primarily responsible for the
regulation of toxic substances: the Department of Natural Resources
(DITR) , the Department of Public Health (DPH), and the Department of
Agriculture. The mission of the Department of Natural Resources' toxic
and hazardous waste program is "to control and reduce the hazards resulting
from the use, discharge, transport, disposal or spillage of toxic materials"
To carry out this mission, the Department is authorized to conduct
toxics research in all media, review and decide upon discharge permits,
establish contamination levels, and utilize regulatory and enforcement
powers. DNR has five Bureaus and it is within the Bureau of Environmental
Protection that the toxic and hazardous waste program is administered.
The divisions within this bureau are currently organized by media (water
quality, air quality and resource recovery).
The Department of Natural Resources is implementating a major
reorganization of its EPB program designed to clarify areas of responsibility
and stream line the organization. Hazardous waste management activities,
now carried out in four separate divisions, will be consolidated into a
new Hazardous Waste Management Division. Groundwater activities, now
spread among three divisions will be consolidated into a new Groundwater
Quality Division. Further, the environmental protection service activities
such as construction grants for municipal sewage treatment facilities,
local planning assistance, permit coordination and resource recovery
will be consolidated into a new division. The present Resources Recovery
Division will be eliminated. The Water Quality, Air Quality and Environmental
Services Divisions would constitute the remainder of the Environmental
Protection Bureau.
The facilitator and Agency focal point for toxics coordination is
the Office of Toxic Materials Control which is located within the Environmental
Services Division (see attached organizational chart). This office
work^ on problem prevention, NPDES permit reviews for toxics, provides
technical support on toxicology and environmental fate and maintains the
CMR. The office is also responsible for inter and intra departmental
communications and coordination on toxic substances issues. The Office
of Toxic Materials Control is divided into two units.
1. The Discharge Evaluation Unit is responsible for review of environmental
permits and development of monitoring and discharge limitation
recommendations for toxics. The unit is responsible for the
Critical Materials Register (CMR) data evaluation analysis and
follow-up, including compliance with CMR reporting requirements.
Municipal pretreatment industrial user surveys are also being
reviewed. This unit is responsible for aquatic toxicity evaluations.
-78-
-------
2. The Hazard Assessment unit is responsible for conducting chemical
evaluations and providing technical assistance on the general
toxicity and environmental fate of toxic substances. The units
other tasks include CMB. and CSARS data base management and the
development of the Hazardous Waste Criteria.
The Department of Public Health addresses toxics substances as a
part of its goal to protect and promote public health. Local health
departments, serving all eighty-three counties, and the State's Department
of Public Health have established programs that include communicable and
non-communicable diseases, hospital licensing and standards, radiation
source regulation, and environmental epidemiology and occupational
health hazards. In the toxics area, the Department has toxicological
and epidemiological information and expertise, and investigates health
related aspects of hazardous waste sites, water supplies, and studies
reporting cluster areas. In the Department of Health, the major task
for inter-intra agency relationships lies within the Center for Environmental
Health Sciences. The Center coordinates toxics activities within the
Department, with local health departments and with other agencies. The
Center staff is chiefly responsible for health related data coordination
within the State. The Center also assists to organize the monthly
meetings and yearly 3-day retreats for top management staff of the
Departments of Natural Resources, Public Health and Agriculture. The
meetings are one of the State's- most innovative methods for improving
inter-agency toxics coordination. The purpose of the meetings and
retreats is to maintain close coordination on issues of an inter-disciplinary
nature. Out of these meetings, ten Memoranda of Understandings have
been prepared and signed while, others are still under development. The
agreements between the three agencies outline policies and procedures on
key environmental problems. The topics have included: agency focal
points, legislative proposals, budget review, hazard assessment, agency
communication, joint enforcement procedures, confidentiality procedures,
and an information data sharing system.
The Department of Agriculture is reponsible for the implementation
of laws pertaining to the environmentally safe production, handling and
distribution of agricultural products. These activities include veterinary
science, animal and plant disease control, pesticide use regulation, and
special substances control. The Department's two toxics related programs
are the Bureau of Agricultural Product Assurances and the Office of
Toxic Substances and Emergency Services. MDA monitors the vholesomeness
and purity of Michigans food supplies and regulates the guideline levels
of chemicals and other additives in food being sold commercially. The
Department also regulates the use of certain restricted pesticides and
their application. The Office of Toxic Substances and Emergency Services
coordinates activities related to toxic substances within MDA.
The Toxic Substances Control Commission was established by the John
C. Hertel Toxic Substances Control Commission Act of 1979. The Commission
serves an oversight function. The Commission has the authority to
declare a toxic substances emergency and coordinate and direct State
agencies in response to the problem. If funds are needed, the Commission
may use money set aside by the State legislature in a special toxic
substances emergency fund or request special appropriations.
-79-
-------
The State of Michigan is very conscious of the need for toxics
integration and has taken steps to insure that intra-agency coordination
occurs. In addition to senior staff meetings and annual retreats,
Michigan has been working on developing criteria for data management and
information sharing between the State agencies. These criteria outline
procedures for information exchange using common terminology for toxic
and environmental effects, geographic locations, industry and chemical
identification, The MDPH and MDNR are planning to develop joint laboratory
facilities. Each department has designated a "focal point" for coordinating
activities with other departments and offices. The Department of Health,
Department of Agriculture and Department of Natural Resources are also
designing one risk assessment process to be used by all three agencies.
This project will be discussed in detail later in this paper. MDPH has
installed specimen bank facilities for use by each of the agencies, but
funds have been unavailable for making it operational.
Ill. Information Management
Michigan has developed five major toxic chemical inventory tools:
the Critical Materials Registry, the air priority chemicals list, toxic
and hazardous waste survey, and the chemical evaluation file. The
Critical Materials Registry is an extensive computerized information
system operated by DNR's Toxic Materials Control Office. As authorized
under a 1972 amendment to the Michigan Water Pollution Control Act, the
purpose of the data base is to help the state decide on those chemicals
and industrial situations of greatest concern and potential for environmental
damage and modify monitoring and permit issuance programs accordingly.
To assemble such a priority list, an advisory committee first reviewed
chemicals which are generally recognized nationally as highly toxic
(PCBs, mercury etc.), as well as chemicals specifically of concern to
Michigan. After initial selection, each chemical undergoes an evaluation,
beginning with literature searches on the physical, chemical and toxicologic^
properties.
The next step involves a hazard assessment process - a priority
ranking system based on the assignment of points to each chemical/mixture
according to seven factors:
1)
acute toxicity
2)
carcinogenicity
3)
hereditary mutagenicity
4)
teratogenicity
5)
persistence
6)
bioaccumulation
7)
other adverse effects, including subacute and chronic
effects, phototoxity and asthetlc damage.
-80-
-------
These seven factors are further broken out into categories which
are assigned a 1-7 point value commensurate with the relative magnitude
of environmental impact; for example, categories under the first factor
of acute toxicity span the spectrum from extremely toxic, to highly
toxic, moderately toxic, slightly toxic and relatively non-toxic, with
an asterisk assigned where insufficient information is available to make
a determination. Top priority for further information gathering and
possible monitoring and investigation is assigned to those companies
utilizing chemicals/mixtures with the most asterisks. The register
contains 250 chemicals which scored a sufficient number of points. Six
hundred chemicals have been assessed to date for possible inclusion on
the register.
Michigan industries are required to report the use and discharge of
the chemicals on the register in annual water discharge reports submitted
to the Department. The chemical inventory created from the reports is
stored on a computer system having various sort and select options to
suit program needs. These options can access data in a variety of
formats (i.e. geographic locations, river drainage basin, industrial
categories, and discharge classifications). This information is shared
with other State agencies and interested citizens. Within DNR, the
Register is used in the following specific ways:
1) All NPDES permits and applications are reviewed by the Office
of Toxic Materials Control in light of environmental and
health related information from the CMR in order to avert
potential damage from a particular toxic substances;
2) All chemicals listed must be considered in a pollution incident
prevention plan developed by each facility using or storing
any of the listed materials;
3) The Department of Public Health uses the data to identify
potential impacts on human health through exposure to water
contamination by listed materials;
A) The Air Quality Division currently utilizes the data to investigate
possible fugitive emissions from critical materials storage
facilities and processing facilities; and
5) Selective survey/questionnaire mailings are made to obtain
information from industry on manufacturing, distribution and
disposal practives, and regulation and warning notices are
issued to businesses which have listed materials in use and
discharge patterns similar to a known problem, In order to
rectify, abate or prevent potential environmental/health
hazards associated with such industry practices.
The air discharge priority list is authorized under Michigan's
administrative rules promulgated under the Air Pollution Control Act.
The air list is assembled in the same way as the Critical Materials
Registry. Commercial, industrial, or governmental entities which disperse
emissions to the air are required to report use and emissions data for
all substances on the air priority chemicals list.
-81-
-------
The purpose of the toxic and hazardous waste survey is to obtain
information on the identity, quantity, generation rate and location of
hazardous wastes in Michigan. This information equips DNR to consider
existing and future needs for hazardous waste disposal and treatment
facilities as well as determine environmental control strategies.
The DNR Office of Toxics Materials Control is also responsible for
conducting chemical evaluations based upon literature on the physical,
chemical and toxicological properties of chemicals and for maintaining a
reference file summarizing the hazards and environmental fate associated
with compounds investigated. These evaluations are provided upon request
to other DNR Divisions, and to other federal, state and local government
agencies. Chemical evaluations are used for NPDES permit reviews, air
pollution control permit reviews, hazardous waste disposal recommendations,
problem evaluations, environmental emergencies (e.g. chemical spills)
and the Michigan Critical Materials Program. Approximately 2,000 chemical
evaluations have been completed.
In addition to the above mentioned research tools, DNR and DPH have
developed a monitoring program. The goal of the program is "to measure
the levels of toxic materials in discharge and in the receiving environments
for determination of necessary remedial or preventive actions and to
evaluate the effectiveness of completed programs." Monitoring is perceived
as an interdependent activity with standard setting and enforcement.
Monitoring information is needed to set standards and limits as well as
to determine what enforcement actions are necessary. Once standards and
enforcement actions are established, they serve to guide the monitoring
program. The monitoring program is divided into three categories:
monitoring of discharges, monitoring of the receiving environment and
miscellaneous monitoring. Monitoring of discharges includes major and
minor municipal water discharges, municipal sludge disposed on land,
industrial water dischages and industrial dischages to municipal systems,
as well as air discharges. Monitoring of the receiving environments
involves streams and lakes, groundwater, Great Lakes open water, air
inputs to the Great Lakes and terrestrial animals. Miscellaneous is
defined as food, human monitoring, medical surveillance and special
studies.
In order to provide funding for air/water monitoring and surveillance
activities, two surveillance fee programs have been established. The
Water Resources Commission estimates an "administrative and graduated"
fee for each industry discharging waste water into the sewer system or
State waters. The Air Pollution Control Conmission takes the same
action, and levies an annual surveillance fee. The surveillance fee
system is currently being phased out by the State.
Michigan has been grappling with how to make technical information
and non-technical information available to the public. Although not
functioning yet, the Department of Health has developed a comprehensive
public information proposal regarding toxics and is interested in obtaining
practical assistance from other States.
IV. Toxics Control
The State perceives its first line of defense in toxics control to
be the issuance and enforcement of surface and groundwater discharge,
-82-
-------
air emissions and solid and hazardous waste permits and licenses. Under
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the State has been granted the
authority to administer its own National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES). for all surface waters. This responsibility has been
directed .to the Water Quality Division of DNR's Environmental Protection
Bureau.
State groundwater standards regulate wastewater discharges to State
groundwaters. Essentially, these statutes do not allow any discharge of
toxic substances or wastewaters to the groundwaters that would impair or
degrade a "useable" aquifer. These statutes also provide for establishment
of special studies (hydrogeological evaluations) and monitoring requirements
(monitoring well installation, sampling and monthly reporting) in State
groundwater permits. Permits are developed by the Water Quality Division.
Office of Toxic Materials Control staff reviews State groundwater permits
as they are developed to assure that toxic substances, which could pose
public health problems, or that would impair or degrade a useable aquifer
are properly controlled and, to assure that special conditions and
monitoring requirements are adequate to address critical material concerns.
Air emissions standards for criteria pollutants are mandated under
the Federal Clean Air Act and the State's Air Pollution Act which was
amended to adopt these sane standards. The Air Quality Division has
also been concerned with non-criteria pollutants of toxic substances
including toxic organic compounds. All new sources of non-criteria
pollutants installed since 1967 have been subject to the permit requirements.
Any staff recommendation to issue the permit has been made only after
assurance that the proposed action is environmentally acceptable. Then
permit review process results in the establishment of emission standards
and/or equipment and operating specifications.
For compounds that have a major but more localized impact on the
public, (Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977) the
National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESP.APS) sets
emission limits, equipment specifications, and/or operating procedures
for sources that emit specific hazardous air pollutants.
Additionally, (Section 111 of the Clean Air Act) New Source Performance
Standards sets emission limits and/or equipment specifications for many
new sources. Some of these sources are required to continuously monitor
In-stack emission concentrations.
In the past, there has been no formalized process in Michigan to
determine the degree of risk associated with chemical substances in the
environment. The risk assessment process was largely intuitive and
depended on the values of the individual and/or State agency conducting
the study. In March 1981 EPA's OPTS/OTI awarded a TSCA Section 28 grant
to Che DNR in order to develop an interdepartmental risk assessment
program. The Department of Agriculture and Health are the two other
agencies involved. The goals of the project are to:
1) establish an extensive data base on environmental fate of
chemicals in the environment,
2) establish criteria for evaluating and utilizing this information
in a formal risk assessment process.
-83-
-------
V. Analysis
Michigan has had major pollution problems leading to considerable
media attention, public concern and Executive and Legislative Branch
response. A major toxic substances problem in Michigan is the contamination
of the State's groundwater. The Department of Natural Resources has
identified 900 sites where groundwater is either known or suspected of
being contaminated. The DNR published a compendium of these sites in
1979 and has recently updated the list. A Site Assessment System "prioritization
model" has also been developed in order to assist the State select which
areas require immediate remedial action.
As this example and the material presented in the body of the
report reveals, Michigan has developed an extensive toxics information
gathering system by media, industry, and geographical locations. The
information is, for the most part, computerized and accessible by the
relevant State agencies/offices. This information is then used in the
Issuance of permits, standard setting and regulation development. The
State has developed a chemical prioritization process which helps to set
the goals and directions for each agency/office dealing with toxics,
while the unusually sophisticated intra/inter-agency communication
strategy makes the whole approach workable.
Michigan appears to be a "model" State. However, the State is
working under dire financial restraints (recently cutting back approximatelv
10,000 State employees). Consequently, there is some question as to the
future of the State toxics programs.
-84-
-------
ftic h m^EPA^rrnvTwr^^ ^
Qr- B a tlus-UlOL I k*r, JjLi
ltdl.ic MC4L1II
/OtASofty COUNCIL
tUUrf II.M. !;•
itnl
I.UCAL HI.AI.TII
IJKIWHTMKNTS
Inn ctiunticn,
10 «l«:|itn.)
i) i u r. c t o u
n r |i u t y 0 I t «! C. I 11111:1111 ic.ili(in Scrvii:usi
•il.ili .lics Hr.icnrcli ft Kvntunliun
Vitiil ft IIl'iiIIh SlMtihlicu
| llt'l'ICK til-
siuiiiTANt:!-: amu1;!-: s!'.kvick.«>»
I.iudi^inp,, KvaliiuMnn
HAit ()u|:t S.:fvii;i:ti
OjiitCllimi'l
t'fn:;i'.iiii l)i:vi:lii|iini:iit
~ AuI'hiiihii.ii:i uxccpl far
liiitlj-.t'L procurement ond
li.itisf:keu|)|ii;j.
OlSKASK CONTROL fc
LAIIOUATOItY CKftVICKf.
^ Kjtitliiwiiiliiijy
' K:ivlfOnini:nhi1 ^ IflOVCd
KjHilumiotia'y ~ to
i/i:ill!N:ill ifi:lc 11 u 1; CEllS
ImtntmixHlian
('hronii: lljiiviiHc
Dunlin try
Lub Sorvlcc
Microbiology
Virology
Lttbnrutury
IniprLi voiik-iiI
lllolojjic Product*
Concur Proitucla
l)CVuU)|i::il!lll
ASSOC I ATI-: IJIUI.CTOU
I-OK I'liOC.ftAM
OPERATION'S
llmti;cl
L(>i;iuhitifin
Loj; al
I'rnj;!iini OiivcI Evaluation
Environmental Ileal tli Research,
Toxicology & Epidemiolooy
.sse.
00
1
IICALTII CAliK
AtJUI.VISTIlA YION
Pliiuiiiii); t'j
Cunul rue lion
l.icfnrtinj; ft
Ccilifutation
F.nn:r«ancy Mcdicnl
Si:rvi<:i:u
I left llli M.iiiiletiinw.o
Ori;iini^;illond
Veteran?!' I'ac.ility
l-'umtly t't-iiclicti
Mlltllcul UcvitMV Si
Mur-uiit; I"v;tln:i)lon
Program
t'CKSONAL IIKALTII
Si: It VI CCS
Program Strviix-n
I'In mi in ^
Nunliij;
Null iliuii
f>ii<:iiil |'/oil<
IliMiltti 1'ilucotlim
Crippled Children
Survicitti
llnullli ('tiro SyiilouiH
Maternal ,"j 1111.1111
lleullli
Cl.ll.l Ilea lilt
_L
CNVIIiOWIIATAt. fi
OCCUPATIONAL I IMA!
IYjiIi.t ';n|i|i!y
Community I!iiviroiiit:i !il
lie;.llli
I'miil
Oi l. 11 pr< I iniiii I I Ic.i || li
l(.lili(j|oj;i<;;tl 111: :i 11 li
Technical Supporting
Si!/vii:i;u
-------
AIR
WATER
R-SOURCE RECOVERY
NATURAL
RESOURCES
COMMISSION
WATERWAYS
MACKINAC ISLAND
DIRECTOR
RECREATION
ENFORCEMENT
MANAGEMENT
SERVICES
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
RESOURCES
ADMINISTRATION
OATA CENTER
BUDGET
PERSONNEL
SAFETY
FNGINEERING
EDUCATION
LANDS
SPECIAL FIELD
SERVICES
PARKS
RECREATION
SERVICES
MACKINAC ISLAND
FAIRGROUNDS
ENVIRONMENTAL .
ENFORCEMENT
LAW ENFORCEMENT
AIR
WATER
SOLID WASTE
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES
FISHERIES
WILDLIFE
FORESTRY
GEOLOGY
LAND RESOURCES
WATER MANAGEMENT
WATERWAYS
-86-
-------
Montana ITM
I.
Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics Relate
d Legislation
1. Clean Water Ac
t.
2. Clear. Air Act.
3. Pesticides Act
k. Hazardous Wast
e Management Act.
3. Major Departments
1. Department of
Health and Environmental
2. Department of
Military Affairs-Disaster
and Snergsncy
Services Division
3. Department of
Agriculture.
C. Other Departments
1. Department of
Livestock.
2. Department of
Highways.
3. Department of
Justice.
Department of
Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
5. State Fire Mar
shall 3ursau.
6. Department of
Lands.
Organizational Coordinat
ion in Toxics Management
A. No mandate for interagency integration exists in Montana.
3. yajor Cooperative Efforts
1. Advisory committee vith representatives from four
agencies.
2. I? A - proposed integrated toxics strategies I not
yet implemented)
3. Agreement between Department of Agriculture and TEES
regarding pesticides management,
4. State- appointed toxics coordinator vithin DKES.
Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Required reporting of hazardous waste disposal and generation.
2. Cooperative effort betveen Departments of Agriculture
and livestock involving milk monitoring.
3. Montana Air Pollution Study (MAPS) - Completed in 13Sl.
L. Comprehensive biological monitoring performed by
many agencies.
B. Data Coordination
1. Centralized data base vithin DHSS.
-87-
-------
IV. Toxics Control
Emergency Response System.
I. Hazardous Materials Response Plan.
DHES effort to address contamination problem fro- a lead
smelter in East Helena.
Hazardous waste Management Program.
Cooperative DHES - Apartment of Lands effort to address
energy-related, i.e. mining, problems.
DH2S technical assistance to schools regarding asbestos.
Cooperation with SPA on Superfund activities.
Key State Officials
Governor - Ted Schvinden
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
Director - John Drynan C-Oc)
Department of Military Services - Disaster and Emergency Services
Division - Director - D. L. Gilbertson Uo6) 4^9-303^
Department of Agriculture
Director - Gordon McQmber (i*06) li49-31^4
Field Services 3ureau Chief - Robert LaRu-e (<*06) tU9-29k*
Prceraz Contacts
Donald Willens (State Toxics Coordinator)-
Administrator, Environmental Sciences Division
Department of Health Environmental Sciences
Cogswell Building
Helena, Montana 59620
li+Oo} £*9-39^3
Roger Thorvilson
Solid Waste Management Bureau
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
Cogswell Building
Helena, Montana 59^20
(i»G6) 1*9-2321
Jan Henry
Disaster and Emergency Services Division
Department of Military Affairs
P.O. Box ^39
Helena, Montanta 59&01
(106) uu9-303l+
-88-
-------
Ken Alkena
U.S. SPA
Drawer 10096
301 South Park Street
Helena, Montana 59^26
CU06) U9-5U1U
-------
Montana ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
When one views the lavs of Montana, one sees very little mandate
for toxics integration. However, underneath this surface lies
a burgeoning, vibrant system of coordination and integration. Whereas
much of this integration traditionally has been infornal and ad hoc in
nature, a growing effort is taking place to establish more "concrete"
mechanises.
The major relevant enabling pieces of legislation for the Department
of Health and Environmental Sciences are the State Clean Water Act and
the State Clean Air Act, vhich are quite similar to their Federal counte^-Q^
and the Hazardous Waste Management Act. The primary implementer of
the Hazardous Waste Management Act, the Solid Waste Management Bureau
within DHES, has continually grown in responsibility and is strongly
concentrating on hazardous wastes. The Hazardous Waste Management Program '
discussed below, is implemented through the Bureau. '
The relevant enabling legislation for the Department of Agriculture
is the Pesticides Act. In its implement ion of the Act, the Department
has emphasized preventive, rather than reactive, measures. The ?esticides
Act has proven very successful in this large, rural State.
One of the most positive aspects of Montana's integrated toxics
management is the involvement of many agencies. By encouraging cooperat ioc
and input from a broad variety of agencies in fora such as the Advisory
Committee and the Emergency Response System, the State has recognized
the fact that toxics problems have the potential to affect many different
elements of society.
II. Organizational Cooperation in Toxics Management
The major inpetus for formal toxics coordination and integration in
Montana involved the contamination of feed with ?CBs which occurred ir.
Billings in 19T9. This feed was not discovered to be contaminated until
it had been shipped to several states and two foreign countries. The
manner ir. which this incident was addressed opened the eyes of State
officials to the fact that more formal mechanisms of cooperation were
needed.
One of these mechanisms is the Advisory Committee set up last year
to study problems connected with endrin, an insecticide. The Committee,
made up of representatives from the Departments of Health and Environmental
Sciences, Agriculture, Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and Livestock, has
since expanded to coordinate efforts to deal with other environmental
problems, including toxics. The Committee places strong emphasis on
preventive, anticipatory actions, and is reported to have had a success**^
first year.
-90-
-------
Montana is a large, predominently rural state in which large volumes
of pesticides are used. In order to more efficiently address the potential
problems connected with these pesticides, DHES and DOA have recently
proposed a cooperative agreement which explicitly spells out the role
each is to play regarding pesticides management. Under the agreement,
DOA has full licensing and regulatory authority while DHES is responsible
for the determination of which landfills are to be utilized for the
discarding of pesticides containers, etc. The proposed agreement calls
for cooperation between the two agencies whenever possible.
Additional efforts being made in the State towards more integrated
toxics management include the appointment of a toxics coordinator within
DHES. The major duties of this official are to review situations and
materials in order to determine where integration could be most useful.
Furthermore, the U.S. EPA Region VIII office, as well as the branch
office located in Helena, have proposed a series of toxics integration
strategies. The strategies were drafted upon consultation with State
officials who provided suggestions for areas of concentration. None of
these strategies, however, has yet to be Implemented.
III. Information Management
Montana's largest information gathering effort to data was a four-
year $1.5 million study of air pollution - health effects correlations,
conducted by the Air Quality Bureau within DHES. This Montana Air
Pollution Study (MAPS), completed in 1981, resulted in the compilation
of important data which should be used in the future.
Among the other methods of data collection utilised in Montana is
the mandatory disclosure of any hazardous materials generated or disposed
of within the State. (Some materials are exempted from disclosure,
however, under the provisions of the Hazardous Waste Management Act.)
There also exists a cooperative effort between the Departments of Livestock
and Agriculture involving the monitoring of milk. All of this monitoring
data is openly shared between the two agencies.
Comprehensive biological monitoring is performed by several State
agencies in Montana; however, the information sharing among these agencies
is somewhat limited. Information sharing does exist on an informal
basis, but no permanent mechanism currently is utilized. However, there
are efforts at coordination and integration of data within the agencies
themselves; DHES's centralized data base is example of such an effort.
IV. Toxics Control
The most ambitious endeavor towards toxics control and integration
currently existing In Montana is the Emergency Response System. Whereas
the entire system is designed to meet problems ranging from flood to
plague, the Hazardous Materials Response Plan within the System, completed
approximately eight months ago, Is particularly relevant to toxics
control. Under the Plan, all efforts are coordinated under the auspices
of the Disaster and Emergency Services Division of the State Department
-91«
-------
of Military Affairs. Other agencies involved in the Plan include DHES,
DOA, Department of Highways, Department of Justice, State Fire Marshall
Bureau and Department of Pish, Wildlife and Parks. The Disaster and
Emergency Services Division maintains a 24-hour a day reporting hotline.
Once the true nature of the emergency has been determined, the DESD
contacts the relevant agencies and assigns their respective roles. The
Plan has had a short, but positive, track record, and it was once again
successfully put to the test a short while ago when a gasoline pipeline
leak occurred in Missoula County.
Last year approximately 200,000 tons of potentially hazardous
materials were generated in Montana. The possible environmental effects
resulting from these materials necessitated the establishment of the
Hazardous Waste Program within the Solid Waste Management Bureau. Onder
the Program, the Bureau has initiated transporter requirements as well
as the licensing of treatment and storage facilities. The Bureau is
also in the midst of a comprehensive investigation to determine the
extent of the hazardous waste problem and to establish the mechanisms
to prooerly deal with the problem. No licensed hazardous waste disposal
site currently exists within the State. Historically, some small
generators of hazardous waste have conducted on-site•disposal while
larger volumes of waste are transported to disposal sites in neighboring
states, particularly Idaho. It is now being determined whether the
growing amount of hazardous waste in the State should warrant an "in-
house" disposal site.
Montana is one of several Western states possessing rich coal, and
other energy, reserves which are just beginning to be extensively tapped.
Strong efforts are being made to establish anticipatory policies to
address the potential environmental effects of energy source extraction
and refining before they begin to truly burgeon. Among the formal
attempts is a DHES -Department of Lands cooperative effort to address
energy-related environmental problems, particularly those connected with
surface coal mining. (Note: Increased energy extraction and refining
within Montana will undoubtedly result in greater volumes of hazardous
waste and may, therefore, necessitate an in-state hazardous waste disposal
site.)
Other noteworthy toxics control programs currently being implement^
in the State Include a DHES effort to address a contamination problem
from a lead smelter in East Helena, and DHES's providing of technical
assistance to schools regarding asbestos.
-92-
-------
V- Current Status and Analysis
Until the occurrence of the PCB incident in 1979, Montana's integrated
toxics management predominantly consisted of an informal network in
which all relevant actors knew one another on a first-name basis. After
discovering that more formal mechanisms were needed, the State has gone
to work in order to "plug up the holes" where needed. The informal
coordination is still highly evident, but it is now firmly coupled with
the formal, resulting in a cohesive system.
An area of environmental concern which will require greater integrated
efforts in the future is energy-related wastes. The State's anticipatory
policy has gotten off to a strong start, but it oust grow concomitant
with expanding energy development. It is hoped that fiscal constraints
will not render this growth stagnant.
-93-
-------
BOARD OF IIIALTH AIID
ENVIRONMENT/ L SCIENCES J"
Advlsory\
Councils \
GOVERNOR
Director
IPERSOMIEL 1*11 Tj
CIEHISIRV LABORATORT
BUREAU
1ICHOBIOLOGV LABORATORY
BUREAU
Chief
rvj
roR |
w
PLANNING AID EVALUAIION UN T
Deputy
Director
jlustness Iwirger |
PUN. C INFOWAT ON UNIT
IIOSP. AND MEDICAL FACILITIES
DIVISION
Adminislralor
CENTRAL SERVICES
UIVISIOH
Administrator
LICENSING 8
CERTIFICATION
emlrginc* medical
SERVICES
BtKEAU
BIKEAU
Chief
Chief
RECORDS AND
STATISTICS
BIKI1AU
thlel
HWWiEKNT
SERVICES
BUREAU
Chief
LEGAL
DIVISION
"Administrator
I HEALTH SEPVICES
I DIVISION
• Xdmfril siralor
nvtVfWIVE
HEALTH SERVICES]
BUREAU
TRleT—
WTE"HAL *
CHILD ll.'ALTII
BWEAU
CRIel—
I
cr>
I
HEALTH PLAN &
RESOURCE DEVELOP.
BUREAU
"IhliF
ENVIRONMENTAL SCiENCES
DIVISION
AdmliVT s CriTor
Air Pollution Control
Advisory Council
Water Pollution Control
Advisory Council
Emergency Medical Services
Advisory Council
AIR DUALITY
BUREAU
"1
Chief
FOOD R nniSU-tR
SATETY
BUREAU
Chief
/ H5Ter~J~Waslewatc? 7
/ Operators Certification Biard A-
HflTER QUALITY
BUREAU
ZZZJJKlfitZZZ
DENTAL HEALTH
BIHF.AU
TfiTer
occi«tat law.
HEALTH
BIKEAU
~ thiir
SUBDIVISION
bijulau
Chief
SOLID HASIE MIGHT
IHJNCAU
Chief
ORf.AHIZAT I OH CHAR T
Dept. of Health * Invfromrental Science*
~ BTrecti
(hvci^Of
"June, I'JOV
-------
ORGANIZATION CHART
•BOARD ol
HAIL
INSURANCE
RURAL
DEVELOPMENT
UNIT
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
GRAIN STANDARDS
BUREAU
FIELD SERVICES
BUREAU
SPECIALIZED
SERVICES
BUREAU
HAIL
INSURANCE
UNIT
PLANT INDUSTRY
DIVISION
WHEAT RESEARCH
MARKETING UNIT
md
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT
DIVISION
CHOP ltd LIVESTOCK
REPORTING
UNIT
CENTRALIZED SERVICES
DIVISION
Ol
I
-------
Central lied
Services
01vf sIon
Wheat Research
and
Hi rioting Unit
Crop and Livestock
Report fng
Unit
Hall Insurance
Unit
Personnel
Services
Marketing
Servtces
Supervised
Inspection
Services
Federal-State
Inspection
Foreign
Promotion
Federal-State
Sampling/
Grading
Technical
Inspection
Regula tory-
Enforcemcnt
Apiculture
Protein
Analysis
State and
County
Agriculture
Statistics
Quarantine
Fiscal and
Accounting
Services
Exclusion
and Detection
Crop Hall
Insurance
Program
Marketing
Production
Research
Plant Industry
Division
Specialized
Services
Bureau
Grain Standards
Bureau
Commodity
Services
Bureau
Freight
Service
Freight
Rate
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FUNCTIONAL CHART
November 1977
MONTANA
Inspection
and
Enforcement
Accident
Investigation
Field
Training
Analytical
Consultation
Environmental
Management
01 vision
Laboratory
Bureau
Field
Services
Bureau
Technical
Services
Bureau
-------
New Jersey ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. Major Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act 1981.
2. The Hazardous Waste Discharge Bond Act 1981.
3. New Jersey S.W.M.A. 13:1D-1 et seq. - The Environmental
Protection Act of 1970.
4. New Jersey S.A. 26:2C-9 et seq. - The Air Pollution Control
Act (1954).
5. New Jersey S.A. 58:10A-1 et seq. - The Water Pollution
Control Act.
6. New Jersey Administration Code NJAC 7:1F-1.1 et seq.
7. The Spill Condensation and Control Act 1977.
8. The Landfill Closure and Contingency Fund Act 1982.
9. Executive Order No. 40 1976.
B. Major Agencies
1. Department of Environmental Protection.
2. Department of Health.
C. Other Agencies
1. Department of Agriculture.
2. Department of Transportation.
3. Department of Labor and Industry.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. No catprehensive ITM legislation exists although a memorandum
of understanding is being written to improve DEP and DOH
cooperation on toxics.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. AB 280 would establish an inter-agency Health Asssesament
Group on drinking water quality standards.
2. DEP utilizes the Department of Health Laboratory and toxics
data is nutually exchanged.
3. SB 1670 Worker and Community Right to Know Act is supported
by various State agencies.
-97i-
-------
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. The DEP/OCTSR does extensive environmental testing and
monitoring of air, water and hazardous waste sites.
2. The industrial survey project provides crucial data
as does the Department of Health's Health Assessment
Division.
3. The DEP is about to initiate a Pretreatment Survey
which will generate substantial data on liquid discharge
and characteristics of pretreatment wastes.
4. All significant sources of air pollution in New Jersey
are required to obtain permits from the Bureau of Air
Pollution Control. Permit data relating to air pollution
characteristics is computerized on the Air Pollution
Ehmission Data System (APEDS).
5. New Jersey has received delegation from EPA to administer
the NPDES Program. Substantial monitoring and data
collection is required by this program.
6. Hazardous waste generated, transported or disposed
of in New Jersey nust be accompanied by a State
manifest. The qualities and quantity of hazardous
waste are recorded and maintained. (The new manifest
data handling system allows immediate access to all
data on hazardous waste generated transported and
treated or disposed of in New Jersey.)
7. Routine air and water quality monitoring provides a
substantial quantity of information related to toxic
pollutants.
B. Data Coordination
1. OCTSR in managing the CEQ UPGRADE data base and the New
Jersey Environmental Health data base.
2. All toxics data is coordinated in the DEP Geographical and
Statistical Analysis Unit or the Information Resources Center.
C. Information Availability
1. The DEP Information Resource Center.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Problem. Identification and Ranking
1. Input received from local health departments, citizens,
DEP and DOH data.
2. The Governor's Cabinet and Science Advisory Board in
addition to DEP and DOH Executive staffs set priorities
for the State and their individual agencies.
-98-
-------
1. New Jersey uses the Department of Health guidelines, tends
to place less emphasis on risk assessment as a decision
tool.
C. Emergency Management
1. The State has developed an Qnergency Management plan.
D. Current Character of Toxics Control
1. Coordination between the DEP and DOH tends to be informal
but there are efforts being made to formalize toxics
camunication.
-99-
-------
Key State Officials
Governor: Thomas Kean
Department of Environmental Protection
Robert E. Hughey
Commissioner, New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection
Trenton, N.J. 08625
Department of Health
Allen N. Koplin, M.D.
Commissioner NJ State
Department of Health
John Fitch Plaza
Trenton, N.J. 08625
Program Contacts:
Mr. George J. Tyler
Assistant Ccmmissioner for
Environmental Management
Department of Environmental Protection
CM 402
Trenton, N.J. 08625
{609 > 292-2885
Dr. Thomas Burke, Director
Office of Cancer and Toxics Substances Research
Department of Environmental Protection
P.O. Box CN 402
Trenton, N.J. 08625
8-284-6070
(602) 984-6070
Dr. Dhun P. Patel
Chief Environmental Health Hazard Evaluation
Program State Department of Public Health
John Fitch Plaza
Trenton, N.J. 08625
(609) 292-4046
Mr. Donald Graham
Assistant Cormissioner
Department of Environmental Protection
Trenton, N.J. 08625
(609) 984-3588
-100-
-------
New Jersey ITM
I. State Authorities Directing Toxics Control
Existing authorities governing toxics are:
1. The Major Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act 1981 - The Act
creates a Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Commission and a
Hazardous Waste Advisory Council. The Commission is responsible
for developing and managing a Hazardous Waste Siting Plan.
2. Hazardous Waste Discharge Bond Act 1981 - The act establishes
a §100 million fund to pay for identification, clean-up and
removal of hazardous wastes.
3. Hew Jersey S. A. 13: ID-1 et seq. - The Environmental Protection
Act of 1970 - This act provides the Department of Environmental
Protection with the authority to administer all of the State
statutes pertaining to natural resource management and protection
of the environment.
4. Hew Jersey S.A. 26:2C—9 et seq. The Air Pollution Control Act
(1954) - Specific authorization is provided for the Department
of Environmental Protection to regulate sources of air pollution
in the state.
5. New Jersey S.A. 58:LOA-l et seq. - The Department of Environmental
Protection is authorized to control discharges to New Jersey's
waters.
6. S.J. Administration Code KJAC 7:1F-1.1 et seq. - Authorizes
the Sew Jersey Industrial Survey Project. (Mentioned later in
the paper)
7. The Spill Compensation and Control Act 1977 - The Spill Conpensation
and Control Act (similar to the Federal superfund) is currently
undergoing legislative revision. A State court recently decided
that the State could use the taxing scheme designated in the
Act despite the existence of the Federal Superfund.
8. The Landfill Closure and Contingency Fund Act 1982 - The Act
ensures proper operation and closure of State landfills.
9. Executive Order No. 40 1976 - This order created the
Office of Cancer and Toxic Substances Research. The
Executive Order allows the Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) to conduct research and public integration
programs, monitor, inspect premises, conduct registration
programs for selected pollution activities, enforce statutes
and regulations and clean-up chemicals.
-101-
-------
The New Jersey legislature was very active in 1982, introducing
a number of toxics related bills. Listed below are the major
bills.
1. NJ AB 280 - The Safe Drinking Water Act - Introduced by Assemblyman
Lesniak. The bill would require that the DEP sample potable
water supplied once a year and, with the creation of an inter-
Agency Health Assessment Group, establish Environmental Health
Standards for State drinking water quality. The bill has been
assigned to the Senate Energy and Environment Committee.
2. N.J.S.B. 1670 Worker and Community Right to Know Act -Introduced
by Senator Dalton. This bill requires employees at facilities
where chemicals are stored, handled, or emitted to prepare
information sheets on the chemicals indicating the nature of
the chemicals and the health risks which they pose. These
information sheets would be kept on file at the facility,
where employees would have access to them, and at the offices
of the Department of Environmental Protection and at county
health departments, where members of the community could have
access to them.
This bill also requires employers to label containers of
chemicals indicating the chemical's health dangers, and to
provide employees with education and training programs concerning
the safe handling of dangerous chemicals. In addition, this
bill establishes procedures to protect employees who exercise
the right to information concerning chemicals provided by this
bill.
3. NJ AB 901 - Solid Waste Management Act - Introduced by Assemblyman
Lesniak. The bill would require that a person "seeking approval
to collect, transport, treat, store or dispose of solid waste
or hazardous waste file a disclosure statement with the Department
of Environmental Protection..." The bill is pending an Assembly
vote after legislative recess.
Several other waste related bills are still pending in New
Jersey. One such bill would authorize county health departments
or certified health agencies to issue complaints pertaining to
environmental health laws. Another proposal would make it a
crime to generate, transport or dispose of hazardous waste
without completing a manifest. This bill would also establish
criminal penalties for those who make false or misleading
statements to others in the toxic waste field.
II. Organizational Structure of Lead Agency/Office on Tozlcs
Management
The DEP is currently undergoing reorganization and this will not be
completed for a few months. The attached organization chart is still
the most recent arrangement. Robert E. Hughey is the new DEP Commissioner
and Arbesman, the Deputy Commissioner, will retain his position.
-102-
-------
Several units in the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)
are involved in the study and control of toxic substances. The Office
Of Cancer and Toxic Substances Research (QCTSR) is the lead research
group and is charged with identifying the sources, levels and effects of
toxic substances in New Jersey. The Office of Hazardous Substances
Control is charged with on-site response to hazardous substances spills
and other emergencies, as well as ensuring the integrity of facilities
using large quantities of dangerous substances. The operating DEP line
divisions develop, implement and enforce the Department's control efforts
in the various environmental media.
The Office of Cancer and Toxic Substances, is composed of six
units, each with its own "unit manager". The six units are:
Industrial Investigation
Information Resource Center
Geographical and Statistical Analysis Unit
Water and Biota research
Industrial Investigation
Information Resource Center
Many of the projects being conducted by these units are funded
through the TSCA Section 28 grant program.
There seems to be more informal than formal coordination and exchange
of information within DEP and between other State agencies. Formalized
integration activities within DEP take place in advisory committees or
task forces, of which there are many. One such committee is the Laboratory
Advisory Committee which includes representatives from each DEP division
and meets once a month. Informal communication consists of memos and
phone calls. Inter-agency communication on toxics occurs primarily
between the DEP and the Department of Health. Currently, the Department
of Health does most of the laboratory analysis (particularly water
quality) for the DEP. However, the DEP has just completed construction
of a Pesticides/Toxics Laboratory which in 1983 will begin doing most of
DEP's analytical work. DEP has worked with the Department of Health on
human monitoring studies on (cancer clusters), organic compounds analysis
(vinyl chloride), and abandoned hazardous waste sites. DEP has had very
little contact with the Department of Agriculture or the Department of
Labor and Industry. However, this summer DEP and the Governor's Science
Advisory Committee's Subcommittee on Quality Control/Quality Assurance
will sponsor a meeting on lab testing and quality control guidelines.
The Departments of Transportation and Agriculture, plus industry and
academia representatives will attend. In addition to the intra and
inter-agency activities, the DEP has established sixty or so "public
councils". A selection of these councils include the Clean Air, Clean
Water and Solid Waste Advisory Councils. The councils report directly
to the DEP Commissioner and are composed of representatives from government,
industry, academic and citizen organizations.
The New Jersey Department of Public Health (DOH) works with other
State agencies both informally and formally. Its divisions usually
telephone other agencies or divisions to report new epidemiological data
ot other important findings. Interaction occurs on a case-by-caae
basis. Formal interaction occurs on various task forces created for a
specific issue or problem.
-103-
-------
The Governor's Science Advisory Committee meets at the direction of
the Governor's Cabinet to discuss priority environmental concerns. In
the past, the Advisory Committee has arranged and coordinated a number
of intra-agency task forces on priority environmental issues. One of
the most successful was the Governor's Task force on Asbestos. The
Departments of Treasury, Education, Health, Environmental Protection.,
and Labor and Industry participated in developing a State policy on
Asbestos. By the time EPA's asbestos regulation on Asbestos in Schools
was published, New Jersey had gathered and analyzed data on 60% of the
schools in the State.
III. Information Management
In the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, the
Office of Cancer and Toxic Substances Research performs the majority of
toxics research. According to OCTSR's annual report this program has
"assembled the Nation's most comprehensive data base on environmental
toxics." Under the direction of the six research units, OCTSR has
established environmental testing and monitoring programs in each media
utilizing a variety of information gathering methods and analytical
models. For example, concerning water, New Jersey is studying sublethal
effects of toxic pollutants on aquatic organisms. The major objective
of the study is to develop early warning biomonitoring techniques which
can be implemented by the State as future monitoring tools. The State
has also used the Ames test as a general screen for toxics as a part of
their water sampling program. A number of air monitoring projects are
also being conducted such as the Toxic Substances Investigation and
Integration Unit's (TSII) study on ambient lead levels and the mobile
laboratory unit.
Like many states, New Jersey DEP information gathering is both
reactive and preventive. The State places a great deal of attention on
identifying which environmental contaminant(s) maybe linked to public
health problems. OCTSR has investigated cancer and birth defects clusters,
as well as utilized their Industrial Survey data to identify areas in
the State which are subject to an increased disease risk. OCTSR studies
are exchanged with other DEP offices and are often used as evidence in
enforcement actions.
The DEP Information Resource Center is one form of Information
Management. The Resource Center has three main projects: library services,
public information and public participation. The Center has an extensive
collection of reference materials including texts, government research
reports, periodicals, pamphlets, maps and microfilms. In addition to
the Center, the DEP Geographical and Statistical Analysis Unit coordinates
all data collected by OCTSR and oversees all data processing requirements.
This unit is managing the NCI-funded Environmental Health data base and
the CEQ UPGRADE data base. The Environmental Health data base contains
all available information on toxic substances in the New Jersey environment.
IV. Toxics Control
As mentioned, the State is making efforts to be both reactive and
preventive. Historically, the State has been reactive in response to
toxic problems. If a toxic problem becomes controversial enough because
-104-
-------
of a public or local healch department concern, the Governor usually
responds. Taking a more preventive approach, when divisions vithin the
DEP discover important data on potential environmental problems, this
data is presented at DEP Executive Staff meetings. (The data is derived
from testing, monitoring, citizen complaints, and the industry survey
etc.) The DEP Commissioner and staff will then decide on environmental/chemical
priorities.
The DEP (OCTSR) relies on the Department of Health for "internal
guidelines" rather than risk assessments. Using a complicated set of
formulas, the Department of Health extrapolates from testing and monitoring
data, occupational exposure information and safety factors to develop
these guidelines or standards.
The Department of Health is first alerted to public health problems
through the local health departments (which are autonomous), residents
and the DEP. Investigation and testing then takes place. In deciding
which public health problems are highest priority, the Department
determines the level of toxicity and the number of people possibly
exposed. The Department is skeptical of risk assessments and tends to
rely more on the "straight data" assembled and the internal guidelines
established by the DOH.
One of the more innovative programs established by the Department
is the Health Effects Public Clinic. If a citizen suspects that he/she
has been exposed to a chemical, the clinic will conduct a free series of
tests on the individual. This information is then reported back to the
individual and could possibly be utilized later by the State in determining
disease clusters and identifying problem chemicals.
V. Analysis
New Jersey has long recognized the need for a throughly integrated
approach to controlling toxic substances. New Jersey is one of the
leading centers of the petrochemical industry and currently ranks second
in the nation in industrial chemical output. The state is well aware of
the causal relationship between environmental pollution and health
effects.
Over the last ten years, New Jersey has developed and implemented
progressive legislation and programs to deal with toxic pollution problems.
In addition, the State has improved its testing, monitoring and analytical
capabilities in order to upgrade the State's toxic information base.
The strongest aspect of New Jersey's program appears to be the
combination of a concerned Legislature and administration coupled with
tough enforcement of toxics regulations and an Intensive toxics research
program.
-105-
-------
9/32
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
M*PARTMI'.NT OF tNVIRONMI'-NTAL PROTECTION
(ihw and
Toxic Sut/:7V Met.bt.LAN
ASSISIANI COMMISSI*>NER
H>R NATURAE RESOURCES
Iff / UN ( . hh.NSK f
foi-l-H'E OF ENVIHONMINI Al. ANAI VSISJ-
|nfw jkhsiy ohiihhws]
[imtk ir 6t- iiisTOKH'Tiosr Rvaii
parks &
lORI.S'lNY
K Mrert
Stale l*:irk^A f *»»»"«Us
M^ritius
I "it-ilry
l-ofcvl I he Stivitv
loresi
I rtu-rly St;»li' t'ink
Nahir;il Aias M^>|
(.WIN A< RES&
RH Kl AtlON
If Woil
i 4»»\»|«iiants
I and Ai<|imiiii>ii
litx I' Kt'mpiion 1'iogiam
l.filSt'S
Itci tl'.liillll
X
HSII. GAME «
WIIIHIH
AV * >ktn%liunt
Wiltllilc Mitn^t'iiiniI
Mnline I itliciK-it
Mh-IIJ isltrt H's
I intiwaicr l-Ytlinks
l ltlljIljTH'tJ A
Nott-^me S|k!c»c%
I iiloiicinent
I m>ii»I Srrvircv
1
(OASfAl
RISOOKCES
J. H.
titlri.iiMK
I nlon rim-Ml A
I jrltl Svr\*» in
.V
I' hj'.hh''' i
COMMISSIONER
KOflt.KTI t/lfiJIf-Y
DMMri Y COMMISSIONER
VAVI AKlHSM.iN
MANNING
group
/>. kiHsev
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
HW KM4KAIORY AND
iiOVE RNMI NTAE AEEAIRS
OONM h T UK AII AM
K^tiblwy Allah*
Inlci - ptn'mmciitiil
Opcraltom
fublit
Eii>«,r^
PERSONNEL A
IMTA SERVICES
(. tHtl'IfHlHI
lVi«nincl
I tain
AMmtiiiiiw At lMHi
ljh»r KHaiN»ni
I nviioitninilal ami
SMI
l .St*rvh «*s
McilK itl SuiviltiiKt
ASSISTANT O
manaumin
SWMY
MMISSIONER
lAmUM.H
J TfilN
EISCAl A
Sim NT! SERV
H' i ll'/ith
1-ts.Ml A Aril.
AimIiIiii^
( jfnt.il Iim|>t• >vt*mt'iils
Mum A I it onsifti;
St-IVIiCN
N|*vul I ttmh
ASSIST ANT tTJMMISSIONER EOR
ENV MANAGEMENT & CONTROL
cioKiH j imj:r
WATER
RKSIM IRCES
J. Gaston
Mointmittf, A l1:it*.ilitv M|'i.
ENVIRONMENT!.
OIIAI »I V
SM. Kuhn:
Aii IN'MhIhui
Not a- I 'I'lltiol
iv \i»* i
I nfim cmcitl A
I ickl
S»M'S
IV« i«nl;iniiMalH»n AJhi
-------
New Mexico ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxic Related Legislation
1. Environmental Improvement Act.
2. State Governmental Reorganization Legislation of 1978.
3. New Mexico Water Quality Act.
4. Mew Mexico Clean Air Act.
5. New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act.
6. New Mexico Occupational Health and Safety Act.
B. Ma j o r Dep artments
1. Health and Environment Department
- Environmental Improvement Division
- Health Services Division
- Scientific Laboratory Division
C. Other Departments
1. Department of Agriculture.
2. Department of Transportation.
- Motor Transportation Division
3. Department of Energy and Minerals.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxic Management
A. Legislative Mandate for Integration
1. The Environmental Improvement Act pfovides a broad
mandate which may be considered as integrative
in nature.
B. Cooperative Efforts
1. The Environmental Improvement Board.
2. The Water Quality Control Commission.
3. New Mexico Department of Agriculture Pesticide^
Advisory Board.
4. Cooperation between EID and EPA on the regulation
of Hazardous Waste Transport.
5. M.O.U's are being developed on (3) and (4).
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Permitting, monitoring.
2. Tumor Registry.
-107-
-------
B. Data Coordination
1. Each office coordinates its own data.
2. Interdepartmental sharing of office space
facilities communication.
3. An "Integrated Management Information System" is
being developed.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
A. Problems Identification and Ranking
1. Problem identification comes chiefly from citizen
complaints and state monitoring.
2. No formal priority-setting process has been
established.
B. Risk Assessment Models
1. Risk Assessment models are not used in New Mexico,
although epidemiological studies are conducted.
C. Emergency Management
1. A 24-hour emergency response team, with an emergency
response coordinator.
—108~
-------
Key State Officials
Governor - Toney Anaya
George S. Goldstein, Ph.D.
Secretary
Health and Environment Department
Post Office Box 968
Sante Fe, New Mexico 37504-0968
(505) 984-0060
Mickey Stewart
Administrative Assistant
Health and Environment Department
Post Office Box 968
Sante Fe, New Mexico 87504-0968
(505) 984-0060 - Ext. 273
Program Contacts
Russell Rhoades
Director, Environmental Improvement Division
Health and Environment Department
Crown Building
Post Office Box 968
Sante Fe, New Mexico 87504-0968
(505) 984-0020 Ext. 200
Cubia L. Clayton
Assistant Director for Technical Services
Environmental Improvement Division
Health and Environment Department
P.O. Box 968
Sante Fe, New Mexico 87504-0968
(505) 984-0020 Ext. 200
Roy McKeag
Assistant Director for Operational Services
Environmental Improvement Division
Health and Environment Department
P.O. Box 968
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504-0968
(505) 984-0020 Ext. 200
Lee Lockie
Chief, Air Quality Bureau
Environmental Improvement Division
Health and Environment Department
P.O. Box 968
Santa Fe, Sew Mexico 87504-0968
(505) 984-0020 Ext. 370
-109-
-------
David Marble
Chief, Occupational Health and Safety Bureau
Environmental Improvement Division
Health and Environment Department
P.O. Box 968
Santa Fe, New Mexico, 87504-0968
(505) 984-002Q Ext. 250
Charles Nylander
Chief, Water Pollution Control Bureau
Environmental Improvement Division
Health and Environment Department
P.O. Box 968
Santa Fe, N'ew Mexico 87504-0968
-110-
-------
New Mexico ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
Toxics management and all environmental affairs in the State of New
Mexico are guided principally by the Environmental Improvement Act of
1971, as amended. The Act established an Environmental Improvement
Agency and gave it the broad mandate to "insure an environment that in
the greatest possible measure: will confer optimum health, safety,
comfort and economic and social well being on its inhabitants..."
Towards this end the agency was delegated regulatory and enforcement
authority on those standards promulgated by the Environmental Improvement
Board, and the Water Quality Control Commission. In addition, such
State statutes as: the New Mexico Water Quality Act, New Mexico Clean
Air Act, Hazardous Waste Act, and the Occupational Health and Safety Act
empower the various environmental offices with specific authority.
Through 1978 legislation, the State reorganized the structure of
its environmental management. All environmental and health offices were
placed within a Health and Environment Department. Currently, the vast
majority of toxic authority is vested in the Environmental Improvement
Division of HED. Through EID's Air Quality Bureau, Occupational Health
and Safety Bureau, Radiation Protection Bureau and the Water Pollution
Control Bureau, the regulatory and enforcement functions outlined in the
Environmental Improvement Act are maintained. In addition, the Environmental
Improvement Board continues to promulgate regulations and standards in
the area of environmental management and consumer protection. The same
is true for the Water Quality Control Commission.
In addition to EID, the Health and Environment Department also
houses the Health Services Division and the Scientific Laboratory Division,
as well as four other divisions. The Scientific Laboratory Division
does all lab work for offices both within and outside of HED. The
Health and Environment Department also has 22 environmental field offices
arranged in four districts which report to EID, and 44 health services
offices which are under HSD supervision. The local services do play a major
role in the program implementation stage.
As was stated earlier, the majority of authority in toxics management
lies with the Health and Environment Department. However, some program
control has been delegated to other departments. Most notably, the New
Mexico Pesticide Control Act grants the Pesticide Division of the Department
of Agriculture with full program responsibility. In addition the New Mexico
Motor Carriers Act grants the New Mexico Department of Transportation authority
to regulate the transport of hazardous materials.
II• Organizational Coordination
The Environmental Improvement Act, combined with the 1978 reorganization,
serves as a mandate for integration. The fact that the reorganization
placed everything from water quality management to occupational health and
safety under one department, coupled with the broad directive already
stated in section I, "sets the state" for integrated management. However,
-111-
-------
with a few notable exceptions, the present mode of coordination and coopera-
tion is primarily informal.
The chief "formal" coordinative mechanisms in New Mexico are the
Environmental Improvement Board (EIB), Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC)
and the Agriculture Pesticide Advisory Board. All environmental regulations
promulgated by the offices within the Environmental Improvement Division
must be approved by the EIB and WQCC. The Pesticide Advisory Board is
composed of representatives from the Department of Agriculture and the
Health and Environment Department, and acts as a technical advisory for
the Pesticide Division on the formulation of pertinent regulations. In
addition, Memoranda of Understanding are currently being developed between
Agriculture and HED, to formally define their respective roles in toxic
management. A final cooperative mechanism is the centralized laboratory
system in HED which conducts all laboratory work for offices in and outside
of HED.
The majority of the integration between offices in New Mexico is,
however, rather informal. The interaction between EID bureaus is facilitated
by the sharing of common office space. Therefore, communication is
generally on a less structured but more personal level. The same holds
true for contacts outside of EID. The "task force" style of management
is not used in New Mexico.
III. Information Management
Information gathering activities primarily center around monitoring
and permitting activities. Much of this information is not yet computerized
although New Mexico is beginning the development of an "Integrated
Management Information System" which will incorporate epidemiology,
health and environment data in computerized files.
Currently, each office coordinates its own data. The sharing of
information between programs is purely ad hoc; but, the sharing of
common offices does facilitate this type of communication. Health data
is not presently used in setting environmental priorities. New Mexico
does, however, maintain a tumor registry at the University of New Mexico.
The registry information is made available to those who visit the University
in Albuquerque.
The general accessibility of data is not addressed by any specific
legislation.
IV. Toxic Control Strategies
Toxics problem identification comes chiefly from monitoring/surveillance
and citizen complaints. There have not been a greater number of serious
toxic incidents in the State, primarily because of New Mexico's low
concentration of industrialization. Uranium contamination has required
some inter and intradepartmental action. However, no formal strategy
for dealing with toxic problems has been formulated. As a situation
arises, a strategy is developed to meet the individual needs of the
-112-
-------
time. It was reported by one State official that the implementation of
Superfund has drawn individual programs together in order to determine
possible priorities and to determine jurisdictional duties. So, there
has been some movement towards a more formal policy.
In the area of emergency management, an emergency response system
has been developed for New Mexico. A trained emergency response team is
available on a 24-hour a day basis, the emergency response coordinator
in EID directs activities by notifying and requesting assistance from
the relevant programs. Currently, however, there is no staff to deal
with hazardous incidents; all such work would have to be done through
private contractors.
In short, toxic control is centralized largely within EID, but the
methods for dealing with other agencies or departments on specific
incidents is primarily informal.
V. Current Status and Analysis
The priority problem in New Mexico is carbon monoxide and ozone
pollution from automobiles in Albuquerque. Another air problem did
center around the Four Corner's Power Plan, but the plant is now on a
compliance schedule. New Mexico also is particularly concerned about
contamination of their water resources, due to the scarcity of supply
within the State. The primary pollution problem up until this point has
been mine drainage, however, any possible source of contamination will
continue to be of utmost concern to New Mexico State officials. It
should be noted, however, that this problem is less severe in the Albuquerque
area due to a large and pristine aquifer which runs beneath the city.
Problems common to other states, such as hazardous waste, are not
as significant in New Mexico due to an environmental protectionism sentiment
shared among the populace, which guides their selection of "cleaner" industries
to locate within the State. This sentiment cannot be fairly characterized
as "anti-business" but rather one of extreme "environmental protectionism".
This attitude appears to be a dominant in New Mexico politics and
policy making. This, combined with an organizational structure which is
amenable to coordination, whether formal or informal, places New Mexico
in a very favorable position for the management of any toxic substances
problems.
In general, however, it must be stressed that given the lack of
any overriding toxic problem in the State of Nev Mexico, the current
environmental management structure seems to be in a good position to
adapt to make the necessary improvements. New Mexico's organization
may be of particular interest to states seeking more integrated
management.
-113-
-------
til W Ml XK:i) III Al III AIJI> I MVIIK tlJMI.K I III I'AH I Ml (1 I
.1 (.
10:1
ci *-
• rNvyy»fj^ HI
(H tlMIHHAl MHMI
< iiinj*
<*f Ml (M (I Wit MllilHS
A»«M»
MlMHHSinAIIVI
M'-HVICI'S I1IVI&IOM
Hny 4*wmct«« Chwl
CIHIIIKN VM(IIMIIS
III Mil All
Ill A IIVI A* M'. I AMI
IIKHU IIUdllMMIOllUlIK I
III Al III I'l AllMIIMi •~»«!
I»l VfMM'Mftll IHVI'.tOII
thufnlh* ttVum AM. Ihfffhu
I'lM M.IIAM MM'I OM I
III till Alt
.!*»**% tlotlm,<•„»!> At', t it,
r,tAir in ai in i'i Amurmi
!>|| |M W| t (ll'M( Ml |l|NM A|
Uft't O Uwuttm < h mt
I'll! HillAKI I III >111 MIIA III III
III till All
,f,.«•»>'» 1i Hp.,M Wit l.h.mt
!.< II >1111 M! I AIM >11A T Oil r
ihvi'jioii
A .»(<»»« | llo'iif A It'll ()|f«cloi
mm im;h ai r* if »m.i •;
iiimi Ati
At* t.m-l #•#.!) (<..•!
i Ml MiMlir
III Mil All
flfSllirH|IA( IDfAIMINI
|KVr.lOH
A MA. littactar
•l«»l»»» OfffH'lf (»««
f OniMtlC IMI'.l'IIAl
Um«« Gonu'vi. AifxiitMi'r
fOltf IIAVAIHl
miincai r.niM n
Aft s*f*t Arf«NMM|NMo<
m«v mi ««co
niAif iioscmai
|l»M fiiluM** Arlwf Ad*
(::•)
fll A|
l«OI>|
A'alOfi Ail'i'irt'»'«»lSI'HAI
mil IIIANmim; M'IMMH
H«« M-..**
M*H» l<«tpN«l
M»i4*o«
I *<>••••
*«r < > m if"*. Atf'—
I v*l SM
• •~»! In
V.M» f.»UMi
I'dH)! A<«*
AUt»t *«!«••
j
l«»*»«f«. Co*fAfUii ONMNitiintii uwl ('oi'imiiirri:
If ICC — Pfh|«NMrni flo»»l
0t?,nC. - H*«4lf» *«•! Sjfrly Mrvtrw
»#f AC - W#Jm|hvi In'mn Mi A>t*inny (ttumtintr
nntAvKMiAt urAi im
r.rnvirrrs invir;iori
linlxi'l A fl.i«r»* Al A Atfttnf (*n
V»p.l ilriuilc l>fi«>iliM
riHHSNAll MHtllHI
RIHlf At*
Ci'xi It 4»*>r a> ihi0 fri«<«r
n At#"H*V I VAI IIAIIIIK
lirsi Alien inmf All
CriM> Chit f'tumt
IMVM(H*M|NIA|
IHr.Afllt Mil S fHMM All
I l +'»f1iy llH4 f.h'mt
lOllfN'iNl r.»siiws
IMHM Al t
MfiNlM l'4lll<«iv« #«*ft
MIIIIAI III Al Ml
mini ah
Al Al I'll, itu
Adi A II#0mI«Hm
ft|.|.v<| | | A«f*A
( III Miil m.\ Ml OM'.AI
M IWM I r, ftlMII All
n»»«V n«*#N» ! »••#*
• If Al III « Al.n IIIf S
r.i iivk r *: mini aii
riolNirl | I o-»*a Al PA Cft
IK.f.lH'AhlMAI
I I. Iir.lllli lit MM All
AflkiirilMIIAtlVf
**.1 HVH | S HI Mil All
»40,i
I i »
("") (;:::5) ("')
f riVIMOHMI III Al
IMI'HOVI Ml til Division
/••mh.M I f'*r <* kit'ft (iini, loi
A*.liUol lllorl*. Il««lt*»
I'lnwillon t (>!>¦¦•• Inn
liKimidii «l »~»<.<• AU» Atl'M
ritii(; dim am
f tiriMUH IMIIll All
IV n.,««.w>'oir Aili cu,mt
I AMM V tir Al |M
r.iitvici r; mini aii
J Ail». **rn < <««#
I Ml II 4 ha t||*t«s
III Mil A||
»«» I ••<> •».<«.<>r/ AIA f r.
HI till All
«i urn n> o i f... #
I'fM vi ruivi in ai mi I
f,l llVli I IMNN All I
/ 1 »t,tmi„„m ft/tt <<•'•//
I'fM tr.llAM MftTOtH
IM Mil All
ii^ti r«i>.i i *k» it 11.,0»
At.l.Uf.l III,.<~<>< •»<
'.l»l« »l.la <.*>.!«*•
(.•>'«'« I 1 / *,r"
AIM IMIAI II *
lit Mil All
i»« i.><•'« »~«; An,,
OCCIII'AIII MIAI III Al III
• SAI f IV (MI'll All
kt.r hm*t CihIm Alr.|M I li.«l
II A|Ma Mi ««| I'llllli f i n»»i
IMIMI All
A||.| I At'. At I 4 «••*!
waii ii n n i ii i it iti
COtlllMN IMXll All
httmfth f'tM'f * h>al.nn P.i
(HMf.l <»|
IlliM *i€ IIVll ,1 S
U.,.1* >|t |
( S ••*!(»•
ttwM""' «'•»A>f7t
t.nMMUIHI t MHMMMII
'.I t|tf|| | •; IMItll All
lll'tl I
ims»mh;i ii
Hm,! AI5
I MS IIIM ! ( III
llor At, A »«9 nrn
ki$(nrj»>
Or. I MM. IIV
Jliltlt (ilMWI *1/7#
A#«n»y*«
-------
New York ITM Summary
Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. New York Public Health Law.
2. New York Labor Law, 1980.
3. State Occupational Safety and Health Act.
4. New York Environmental Conservation Law, 1978.
5. Industrial Hazardous Waste Management Act of 1978.
6. New York State Sanctuary Code, Part 22.
7. Environmental Disease Registry Act, 1980.
B. Major Departments
1. Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC).
2. New York State Health Department - Office of Public
Health (OPH).
C. Other Departments
1. Department of Labor.
2. Department of Transportation.
3. Department of Law. (Attorney General)
4. State Disaster Preparedness Commission - Office
of Disaster Preparedness.
5. Department of Agriculture and Markets.
Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Agency Mandate
1. Delegation Memorandum - written in May 1979 by Commissioner
of the Department of Environmental Conservation. Directs
major Department reorganization on toxics management.
2. Office of Public Health Reorganization - January 1982.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Inter-agency intergovermental effort to identify
hazardous waste dump sites. Frequent meetings on
cooperative DEC/OPH hazardous waste site investigations.
2. Advisory committee on Right-to-Know.
3. DEC use of OPH laboratories.
4. OPH provides review of permits, recommends standards
to DEC.
5. OPH/DEC and Department of Law cooperative efforts on litigation.
6. 0GS/0PH/DEC Task Force on PCBs in public facilities.
7. OPH conducts risk assessment for DEC.
-115-
-------
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Air and water source control inventories.
2. Industrial chemical survey and the registry
of inactive hazardous waste sites.
3. Computerized manifest system tracks generation
of hazardous wastes.
4. OPH and DEC sampling and monitoring data.
5. OPH epidemiology studies.
6. OPH registries include cancer, congenital malformations,
industrial exposure, heavy metals and occupational
lung disease.
B. Data Coordination
1. Data is collected and stored by the individual agencies.
OPH has a centralized system and DEC prefers decentralized
system.
C. Information Availability
1. Right to Know law.
2. N.Y. Registries protect health and industrial secrets.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Input received from county health departments, DEC
Regional offices, local citizens, and OPH/DEC data.
2. The DEC environmental quality programs do establish
priorities for toxics control through DEC division
workplans, the annual EPA/State environmental quality
agreements, and the annual Department Executive Program
Planning and Budget System.
B. Risk Assessment Models
1. The Department of Health performs risk assessments;
using such models as Global, Mantel Bryan,
and One-hit, recommends guidance for the State.
C. Current Character of Toxic Control
1. In general, toxics management is divided between DEC and
OPH.
-116-
-------
Key State Officials
Governor - Mario M. Cuomo
Robert Flacke, Commissioner
Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233
Eldred Rich
Assistant Commissioner for
Environmental Quality
New York Department of Environmental
Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233
518-457-6934
David Axelrod, M.D.
Commissioner
New York State Health Department
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12237
518-474-2011
William Leavy, Director
New York Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12237
518-474-0130
Program Contacts
Ron Miller, Chief
Policy and Toxic Coordination
Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road Room 108
Albany, New York 12233
518-457-6610
Dr. Nick Viana, Director
Division of Health Risk Control
New York Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12237
518-473-3793
Dr. Nancy Kim, Director
Bureau of Toxic Substances Assessment
Division of Health Risk Control
New York Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza'Tower
Albany, New York 12237
518-473-3793
-117-
-------
Alice Stark
Chemical Information Section
Bureau of Toxic Substances Assessment
New York Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12237
518-473-3793
Dr. Bea Kovaszny, Director
Bureau of Environmental Epidemiology and
Occupational Health
Division of Health Risk Control
New York Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12237
518-474-2219
Tom DiCerbo
Bureau of Environmental Epidemiology and
Occupational Health
Environmental Disease Registry Section
New York Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12237
518-474-2219
Dri.Dwight Janerick, Director
Division of Community Health
and Epidemiology
Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12237
Vito Logrillo, Director
Bureau of Vital Statistics
Division of Community Health and
Epidemiology
Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12237
Dr. Richard Rothenberg
Director
Bureau of Chronic Disease Prevention
(Cancer Registry)
Division of Community Health
and Epidemiology
New York Office of Public Health
Empire State Plaza Tower
Albany, New York 12253
-118-
-------
New York ITM
I. State Legislative Authorities
New York State agencies involved with toxics management function
broad statutory and regulatory authority as well as specific legislative
mandates. Legislation enacted in the early 70's tended to broadly focus
on air and water pollution concerns while the late 70's was a time for
more specific legislation. Listed below are laws which address toxic
substances issues in New York.
1. New York Public Health Law - October 1979 This is an all
encompassing law which addresses worker right-to-know, medical
record maintenance, confidential business information, employee
toxics training, and authorization to inspect facilities.
Specifically the law states that:
-Employers may register trade secrets with the Department of
Health and the Department will not release the data;
-The Department of Health will record all inquiries received
from chemical manufacturers and employers regarding toxic
effects;
-All workers are to be provided information concerning the
nature of toxic substances in the workplace; and
-Employers must provide copies of employees' health/exposure
records to the Department of Health.
2. New York Labor Law 1283 (Supp. 80-81) as amended L. 1974
C. 1046 3 effective June 15, 1974. This labor law provides
authority for the Industrial Commissioner/and the Public
Health Commissioner to regulate chemical company employers
regarding trade secrets. Employers are required to keep the
names, addresses and the records of employees exposed to
toxics substances.
3. New York Environmental Conservation Law 27-0919 (Supp. 80-
81) "Propriety Information" L. 1978 C. 639, 7, effective
September 1, 1971T This law is one of the State's major
environmental lavs. It encompasses the State Superfund act
(Chapter 857), Financial assurance (Chapter 855) and a number
of other provisions.
In addition to the above-mentioned legislation, a Delegation Memorandum
was written in May 1979 by Robert Flacke, Commissioner for the Department
of Environmental Conservation. The Memorandum directed a reorganization
for toxics management within the Department and established the Policy
and Toxics Coordination Unit. This unit was created to coordinate the
Department's toxics control effort. (The reorganization will be discussed
in more detail later in this profile.)
The New York State Legislature was very active in 1982. The total
number of relevant toxics bills with a high probability for passage is
eight:
-119-
-------
two toxics management, two community right-to-know, one workers' right-
to-know, one data reporting, one data collection and one bill broadening
the definition of environment. A brief description of each of these
bills follows, although their fate is unknown at this time:
NY AB 11543 - This bill would amend the Environmental Conservation Law
concerning environmental impact on schools and health care facilities.
The definition of "Environment" is expanded to mean both "physical
conditions" and conditions which have an effect on the health and
welfare of all those working in school systems and health care facilities.
NY SB 8540 - This bill would amend the New York statutes concerning
State and local natural and man-made disaster plans. The amendment
authorizes each city, town and village to develop disaster preparedness
plans and specifies how and which officials should carry out the plans.
NY SB 9813 - This bill would require the Public Service Commission to
direct all gas and electric corporations possessing capacitors, transformers
or other equipment containing greater than 500 parts per million of PCBs
to place a warning label on the pole houses.
NY AB 12488/SB 9629 - The bills would require the Fire Administrator to
consult with fire fighting and code enforcement personnel to establish a
specialized hazardous material emergency response training program for
employees responsible for providing emergency response following accidents
involving hazardous materials.
NY AB 7743/SB 5774 - These bills are concerned with art supplies' labeling.
The manufacturers of art supplies whose materials contain hazardous
substances, would be required to supply labels stating potential toxic
hazards and methods of avoidance.
NY AB 11917/SB 10120 - The bills would authorize the permanent establishment
of an Industrial Chemical Survey requiring manufacturers, storers,
transporters, etc. of raw chemical materials to notify the State Department
of Environmental Conservation of the names and amounts of such substances.
Such a policy is now voluntary. The bills would make disclosure mandatory
with a maximum penalty of $25,000 a day for non-disclosure. These
surveys would be implemented in coordination with a compilation done by
the DEC of all hazardous wastes dumped in the State over the past three
decades. All of this information would be disseminated throughout the
State to local health officials and would be made available to the
public.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
The major responsibility for toxics substances control in New York
State has been assigned to the Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) and the State Health Department's Office of Public Health. Working
under the overall authorities and mandates of major Federal and State
-120-
-------
legislation enacted in the 70's, the Department of Environmental Conservation's
mandate is to prevent and control contamination of the State environment.
The Department has regulatory, resource management and enforcement
powers; the State Health Department possesses the toxicological, environmental
health and laboratory expertise which often supports DEC.
The Department of Environmental Conservation's Office of Environmental
Quality has the major responsibility for toxics control. The Office
is organized by media (air, water, and solid waste divisions). Under
the direction of an Assistant Commissioner, the divisions provide technical
expertise.
Under the reorganization plan toxics vas placed under the Assistant
Commissioner for Environmental Quality. Each DEC program division was
also directed to assign a toxic substances coordinator and "develop
priorities and objectives, including budgetary needs, for inclusion in
the overall toxic substances program strategy..." The toxic substances
coordinators are most often section heads within the Divisions who have
toxics related functions. In addition, each of the eight DEC regions
designates a toxics coordinator and directs all regional toxics control
activities including remedial and emergency response. Considerable
authority is provided to the DEC regions to implement regulatory and
enforcement program elements.
The Policy and Toxics Coordination Unit in the Office of
Environment was created in 1979 in an effort to assist the Department's
ability to focus on toxics and improve the Department's toxics coordination.
Improved toxics information flow through the Department and the decentralized
management scheme is facilitated by the Policy and Toxics Coordination
Unit. This Unit aids the Assistant Commissioner for Environmental
Quality in coordinating inter-media toxics programming activities,
responses to incidents and other high priority situations. Specifically,
the Unit:
1. Coordinates activities, communications and status reports on
toxics incidents and emergencies;
2. Coordinates the development of policy and procedures to provide
a more consistent response to department-vide toxics problems;
and
3. Leads ad-hoc work groups to develop new department management
initiatives such as improved toxics monitoring strategies in
all media areas and comprehensive employee toxics safety
programs.
In January 1982 the New York Office of Public Health was reorganized
into four major divisions: Health Risk Control, Environmental Protection,
Community Health and Epidemiology, and Health Manpower. The Division of
Community Health and Epidemiology houses the Bureau of Vital Statistics
and the Bureau of Chronic Disease Prevention. The Bureau of Chronic
Disease Prevention is responsible for managing the State's Cancer
Registry, among other activities. A selection of these activities
-121-
-------
include a breast cancer program which provided screening services to
approximately 4,000 women in 1981, birth defects epidemiology studies
and cancer epidemiology studies. The Division of Health Risk Control is
most directly responsible for toxic substances. This division is divided
into the Bureau of Toxic Substances Assessment and the Bureau of Environmental
Epidemiology and Occupational Health. Listed below are the "Section
Offices" under each Bureau and each sections' toxics activities.
I. The Bureau of Toxic Substances Assessment
A. Indoor Air Quality Section - This office responds to citizen
requests for OPH sampling and analyses of asbestos and formaldehyde
in homes, schools etc.
B. Special Studies Section - This office provides technical
information to the New York Attorney General on environmental/public
health cases under litigation. Presently, the office is
working on Love Canal and contamination of Niagara Falls
area.
C. Surveillance and Investigation Section - The office samples
and monitors hazardous waste dump sites and public wells.
D. Health Effects Assessment Section - This office establishes
drinking water standards and reviews air, water and soil
discharge permits by testing and assessing contamination limit
levels. (DEC makes the final decision on the permits).
E. Chemical Information Section - This section is responsible for
implementing the New York Right-to-Know law. This office has
also developed chemical fact sheets and organized a major
public information program.
II. Bureau of Environmental Epidemiology and Occupational Health
A. Health Hazard Evaluation and Special Study Section - This
office conducts the Epidemiology Studies.
B. Radiological Medical Assessment. This one person office
has the responsibility for Radiological Disaster Preparedness.
C. Environmental Disease Registry Section - This section is
responsible for managing and computerizing the information
obtained from recently established registries. The registries
are:
1. Elevated heavy metals levels registry - Laboratory staff
and physicians are required to report blood test results
if heavy metal content is present.
2. Occupational lung disease registry - Laboratories and
physicians are required to report all cases of lung
disease.
-122-
-------
3. Adverse pregnancy outcomes registry - Physicians and
hospitals report congenital malformations up to two years
of age. This information is to be included in the
New York vital statistics information base.
4. Exposure registry - Employers must identify employees who
have used, made or been exposed to 45 chemicals listed by
the OPH.
In general terms, the Office of Public Health is responsible for
researching and assessing environmental and public health problems,
determining the seriousness of a specific problem and determining acceptable
levels. The Department of Environmental Conservation on the other hand,
makes the final decision on air, water and disposal permits and possess
regulatory and enforcement authority. The Department of Environmental
Conservation interacts with the Office of Public Health on State employee
safety training programs, hazardous waste site investigations, human
health monitoring guidelines, setting of permit standards for toxic air
and water discharges, and laboratory analyses.
The Division of Laboratories and Research is located within the
State health department. The division investigates risk to human health
from diseases and environmental contamination. The program operates
patient screening programs, regulates clinical and other laboratory
studies and conducts research into the causes and detection of human
disease. Seven institutes focus on birth defects, environmental health,
infectious diseases, kidney disease, laboratory medicine, radiologic
sciences and toxicology.
DEC has also worked with the Department of Labor on Right-to-Know
issues, the Department of Transportation on oil and hazardous waste
spills, and the Disaster Preparedness Commission on disaster preparedness
plans. On occasion, the Departments will form an advisory committee on
a particular problem. Such was the case with the Right-to-Know issue.
OPH chairs this inter-agency committee. Close communication seems
to be the norm between agencies, especially parts of OPH and DEC. If an
issue is considered a priority, such as litigation, a formalized telephone
network is developed.
The Office of Public Health also vorks with the Department of
Education on the asbestos in schools program, and Agriculture on pesticides
issues.
III. Information Management
New York's toxic research program includes the monitoring of disease
incidents, mortality and morbidity trends, the evaluation and identification
of health hazard sources, and the study of disease problems among high
risk groups and data correlations with the Industrial chemical survey.
The basic foundation of the State's environmental data base is
the air and water inventories, the registry of inactive hazardous waste
sites and the Industrial Chemical Survey. The hazardous waste registry
is a list assembled in 1979 of all the dump sites in the State. A new
computerized manifest system will provide data on generation, transport,
and disposal of hazardous waste. The Industrial Chemical Survey, conducted
-123-
-------
during the 1976-1978 period, involved over 5,000 industries throughout
the State. The results of the survey were catalogued and computerized
according to industry, county and water shed. The survey is water
oriented and has been valuable in the permit writing process. However,
the 1976 survey had two basic problems. The survey was based on industries'
volunteer response and failed to gather information on chemicals that
had been previously deposited. Pending legislation, NY AB 11197 and AB
1Q120, has addressed these two problems.
The intensive State effort to identify hazardous waste dumps has
been a joint project between the Office of Public Health and the Department
of Environmental Conservation since 1978. At that time, an inter-agency
Task. Force on Hazardous Wastes formed to investigate the industrial
dumping practices in Erie and Niagara Counties. A DEC - OPH task force
also initiated a survey to identify hazardous waste sites outside the
Niagara area. Approximately 700 sites were located. The State has
conducted air, soil and water sampling and monitoring programs in or
near many of the hazardous dump sites.
Aside from the hazardous waste dump sampling, extensive tests have
been conducted on the State's drinking and ground water supplies.
Surface water analyses are routinely conducted, including sediments in
Lake Ontario. The analysis revealed Mirex contamination (a pesticide)
from past discharges dispersed by industries located on the Niagara
and Oswego Rivers. A State-wide fish monitoring program has also been
underway to analyze a variety of fish species for the presence of heavy
metals as well as a monitoring program for chlorinated organic chemicals
in New York's major waterways.
The Air Division at DEC has also been extremely active. The Division
has developed three major program goals. These are:
the identification of toxic emissions and establishment of
safe air levels;
the development and implementation of a program to regulate
toxic emissions and;
the monitoring of significant inplace toxic problems.
A major new initiative to develop real time toxics ambient monitoring
is the use of a mobile lab. This lab can also be used for source control
permit enforcement.
As toxics data is gathered by the DEC divisions, it is basically
coordinated and kept within each division on a separate data base.
However, in the last two years the DEC has moved towards a centralized
data base, the Division of Management Planning and Information System.
The DEC prefers to maintain distinct data bases because the Department
is concerned about "unwieldy data systems". The State Health Department
data, on the other hand, is centralized and managed by the Department's
Computer System Management and Data Processing Group and the Bureau of
Vital Statistics. The information is stored on a case, or investigation
basis, and divisions are able to program and access their own data bases,
as well.
-124-
-------
Additional resources include the State Health Department Library
and OPH's own library. DEC and OPH information is available to the
public by simple request or by using the Freedom of Information Act.
The DEC and OPH also refer public information requests to their respective
Public Relations Offices.
The Environmental Disease Registries, established by Part 22 of the
New York State Sanitary Code, provide the State Health Department with
the capacity to monitor the health outcomes of a wide variety of occupational
and environmental exposures. Forming an interlocking surveillance
network, the four registries provide objective human data for problem
identification and assessment. Directed analysis, in turn, provides a
firm foundation for the development of clearly delineated, goal oriented,
intervention programs to deal with specific problems.
The Heavy Metal Registry was the first of the four registries and
was implemented on December 1, 1981. A concerted and intensive developmental
effort was mounted during the first half of 1982 preparatory to bringing
the remaining three registries on line. Input was solicited from more
than 5,000 physicians and 200 pulmonary function laboratories in the
development of the registry forms for the Occupational Lung Disease Registry.
The first actual report of occupational lung disease was received from a
physician in early August, 1982. During the spring and summer of 1982 a
survey of some 5,000 New York State employers was conducted gathering
information on the numbers of New York State employees occupationally
exposed to the potentially dangerous substances. This Exposure Registry
Industrial Survey Profile was the first mandated survey of the usage of
specific toxic substances conducted in New York State and reporting was
received without formal follow-up from better than 95% of the employers
contacted. With this information and the assistance of a Scientific
Advisory Committee, composed of top scientists representing industry,
labor, government and academia, plans are underway to develop the criteria
for employer reporting of employees exposed to potentially toxic substances
on the job. These cohorts of workers at risk will then be followed
prospectively to gain a better understanding of occupational risk factors.
Finally some 6,000 pediatricians, obstericians, gynecologists and
neonatologists were asked to participate in a review of the draft
reporting form the Congentlal Malformations Registry. Response to the
proposed registry was overwhelmingly positive and particularly helpful
were the encouraging comments and suggestions from many of the major
teaching hospitals. Mindful of the suggestions received to keep the
form short, a simplified form was designed and distributed In late
summer to physicians and hospitals across the State. Although the
official start up date for this registry was October 1, 1982, reporting
from some sources began In September.
The New York Department of Health (Bureau of Health Statistics) and
Health Research Inc. has received a grant from EPA to enhance New York's
birth defects data base. The Bureau of Health Statistics is located
within the OPH Community Health and Epidemiology Division.
-125-
-------
Information on congenital malformation which is diagnosed up to one
year of age will be coded and added to the vital records. Current
reporting occurs only for readily discernible malformations within the
five day reporting period for the birth record, rhe data base will be
used for analyzing, screening and monitoring of selected or suspected
environmental problem areas.
IV. Toxics Control
In New York, specific chemical problems are identified by county
health departments, the nine Regional DEC offices, local citizens, DEC
monitoring data, industry survey, and the hazardous waste, air and water
inventories. When chemical problems are identified through either the
State Health Department or Department of Environmental Conservation each
agency determines its own priority concerns in senior staff meetings.
The State does not appear to have a specific set of criteria to
determine which problem chemicals or situations are a priority. However,
New York seems to be well equipped to address problems as they arise.
Love Canal served as a valuable training ground for the State;
it considerably strengthened its environmental and health capabilities.
The State has been working to encourage companies to show initiative ir.
preventing, controlling, and, if necessary, cleaning-up problems.
New York has done considerable work in the area of risk
assessment. Generally safe levels for toxics are recommended by OPK
which utilizes risk assessment models. The Office of Public Health has
worked with three models: Global, Mantel Bryan and One-hit. The Agency
has just bought four additional models from Canada which have not been
used yet. These models are Probit, Logit, Weibull, and Gamma Multi-hit.
The models have been used to help assess risk in all media.
V. Analysis
New York State is very involved in the nation's chemical business.
The State ranks fourth among the States in number of manufacturers and
importers reporting for the TSCA inventory of chemicals in commerce and
second in the number of different substances reported. Consequently,
the State has experienced a number of toxic substances incidents such as
chemical waste in Niagara and Erie Counties, mercury contamination of
fish in Lake Onondaga, PCB contamination of the Hudson River and contamination
of sole source aquifers on Long Island by various chlorinated hydrocarbons
The State has the highest cancer mortality rate in the country for white
females and among the highest for other race/sex groups. In essence,
all indicators reveal that the need for toxics control is there.
It is clear that the State is progressing well to meet the challenge.
Attempts are being made, particularly by the Office of Public
Health, to establish a logical and in-depth approach to fulfilling
research and standard-setting responsibilities. The initiation of four
new environmental disease registries and the Agency's effort to improve
its birth defects data base are two good examples of this.
-126-
-------
The Department of Environmental Conservation's reorganization and
creation of the Policy and Toxics Coordination office reflects a concern
for department management of toxic problems. The department has developed
a well coordinated system of procedures and staff responsibilities.
New York.' s Integrated Toxics Management style is more intra-agencv
than inter-agency. Both the DEC and DOH exchange technical information
and toxic plans within their own Agencies but this exchange is less
frequent between the two Agencies. This contributes to the State's
reactive rather than preventive approach to toxics control. New York is
definitely moving towards a preventive approach, however.
127-
-------
New York State Department of Enviionnwntat Conservation
S|>iu i;il AhV>t.inls
Alliiniiitivc Action
Aviation
x:
OHir.e of
i)y Ji Meynl.iloiy
Allans
; i~ Co»v.
ision Ol
:«i'.nory
l'a»S
:i
Olltcu ol
Natural Hcvhjicos
Ah I"
Uivisloris
Msh ft Wildiilo
I ands a forests
M.ulnn Husouices
Cooiinir.sionri
I n:.I l>(r|Xily
CoillllllVjIollcl
r
ilivlllillllli lll.il I .n lllllfj J
I Iivlliil>ll>rltt;il i!i».lo? |
*>1.11cvi.'lo|»i»«v<.u ii,
Division:
Air
Waltir
Solid Wa:.lc
CoMslnu.ltoii
M
I oxics
Hull
Oil,. ,, of
Mctfli'li.il AU.IliS
Ai( j .*in»»i 1
()|u!< tillof*:,
I clW t llli III
bnvit 4»unriti.t(
Wuilrt It<*i:i• ,»|l.>n
& I lll» H|< Hi y
i(i< 'i ,
( Hltt.« ii
CO
Olhci: ol
Administration
IK\\ I lo'>\>vnji !»•>»
Divisions
Fiscal
M.in.iijDiiiiMil
Mom.in Diisouicii:
M.in<«|)Uiiii:iil
lnluHM,i(ion Syfrt«i*n*
Ou.tlh)|]lMttlt|
uiiiy|
1
Ollld! <)|
Gi!Mi!ial Counsel
IX ,K,I^ («»»*» •v|l)V^,k'"
IMvtstuii «i(
I
Alt.iii
C t
C I
Offtcn ol Mudlii
Allans
Dii;« «n
|)lvlil(|i f'j"
|lA*AKt>/A>5
VVASTt'-
rwi^Rccf^eM)
/ , i • ,r ih'J
-------
/V m/ ' V iW)K
Orftimt 7.«l. Ion for . rtibiiliinir'i Control Klioi'l
Anal dlont CoikiiI ii.ilonci
for
Hal.urnl Heyourcua
l.nnJ:i A IoiciiLm
Di vi al o:»
I OKI CD
Cooi il) ii.itl on
Ki nli A Wil.llifi;
l)i vl ;i i on
To>. i < ;i
('oorriinn!. ioit
I'm i m:
l!f:io^r( «:i
l)i v i •. i <>r»
0KK1CK OK (XXIfltfilUIIKK
CoilHlll fl.'l I OIHW
Pirnl Deputy Cotwiil :i:iloit<:r
A;i:i1;ilfi'u A'""
K"v"' Af j //c i ^ jjn
"I
I
I
Toxi cs
Coortlinnllou
Water
Di vl nlon
To/i <:>
Coonl)ll,ll ton
A:i:i1 :it.nnt, CoikiiI3:1 loin:r
for
01 »nI Affnir.'i
lll:|*,lui 1:1
» V
. i c :>
('moil i 11;.t. i mi
I»ol id I.'iimI <:
Di vl :>i on
To a i « :i
Coord i 11.il. ion
Cons'.rue I »on
l-v,.
I>i V i IM.II
-------
OPH r —r
Organization I 1-
Chart [nr.- , j
x
-130-
-------
North Carolina ITM Summary
Toxics Substances Authorities
A. Major toxic substances-related laws.
1. Waste Management Act of 1981.
2. Consolidated Emergency Management Act
of 1980.
3. North Carolina Pesticide Law of 1971.
4. Occupational Safety and Health Act of
North Carolina.
5. North Carolina Drinking Water Act.
6. North Carolina Food and Drug Act.
7. Air Pollution Control Law, General
Statutes, Article 21(b).
8. Water and Air Resources Law, General
Statutes, Article 21(a).
9. Oil Pollution and Hazardous Substances
Act of 1978.
B. Major Agencies
1. Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development.
2. Department of Human Resources.
C. Other Agencies
1. Department of Agriculture.
2. Department of Labor.
3. Department of Crime Control and Public
Safety.
4. Department of Transportation.
5. Department of Administration.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxic Substances
Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. Governor's Waste Management Board.
2. North Carolina Pesticide Board.
3. Pesticide Advisory Committee.
4. North Carolina Hazardous Materials
Emergency Management Plan.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Governor's Toxic Substances Project.
2. Office of Regulatory Relations.
3. Department of Natural Resources and Community.
Development Mapping Project.
-131-
-------
4. Memoranda of Understanding.
5. Governor's Toxic Substances Project.
6. Pesticide Emergency Response Team.
7. Agricultural Task Force.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Voluntary inventory of hazardous waste.
2. North Carolina Toxic Substances
Management Guides.
3. Cancer Control Registry.
4. Limited birth defects and occupational
disease reporting.
B. Data Coordination
1. Though much data is computerized, each is
housed by own separate agency.
2. Development of data over-lay system for
greater information sharing underway.
3. Wide access to published data bases and
among agencies.
4. Catalogue of lists.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Voluntary inventory of hazardous waste.
2. North Carolina Toxic Substances Management
Guides.
3. State/EPA agreement to study airborne
toxics.
4. Environmental Management Commission's
standards for 30 toxic pollutants
in waste water.
B. Risk Assessment Models
The Governor's Toxic Substances Project
is developing a risk assessment model for
use by the Governor's Office and other
State agencies.
-132-
-------
C. Emergency Management
The State has a comprehensive, inter-agency
toxic substances emergency response plan.
D. Current Character of Toxic Substances Control
Toxic substances coordination is carried
out by the Governor's Toxic Substances Project,
several inter-agency boards, task forces and
advisory committees, the Division of Emergency
Management in the Department of Crime Control and
Public Safety, and informal mechanisms.
-133-
-------
Key State Officials
Governor: James B. Hunt, Jr.
State of North Carolina
Office of the Governor
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dr. Sarah Morrow, Secretary-
Department of Human Resources
325 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Joseph Grimsley, Secretary
Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Program Contacts
Dr. Donald Huisingh
Toxic Substances Project Leader
16 West Martin Street - Suite 810
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
(919) 733-2770
(919) 737-2470
Dr. Ouentin Lindsey
Science and Policy Advisor
Office of the Governor
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
(919) 733-6500
Mr. H.E. Mew, Jr. Coordinator
Enforcement and Emergency Response
Division of Environmental Management
Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
(919) 733-5291
O.W. Strickland, Head
Solid and Hazardous Waste Section
Department of Human Resources
306 N. Wilmington Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
(919) 733-2178
Buck O'Shields
Governor's Waste Management Board
325 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
-134-
-------
Dr. Ronald Levine, Director
Division of Health Services
225 N. McDowell Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dr. Alvis Turner
Department of Environmental Sciences
and Engineering
School of Public Health
University North Carolina
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514
Dr. Sarah Morrow, Secretary
Department of Human Resources
325 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North.Carolina 27611
John L. Smith, Jr.
Pesticide Administrator
Food and Drug Protection
Dept. of Agriculture
1 West Edenton St.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
-135-
-------
North Carolina ITM
I. State Authorities Regulating Toxic Substances
Legislative authority over toxic substances management
in North Carolina rests primarily with enabling legislation
for the implementation of Federal programs administered by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration
Department of Labor, Department of Transportation, and others.
Chief among these acts are: North Carolina Drinking Water
Act, Air Pollution Control Law, Water and Air Resources Law,
Oil Pollution and Hazardous Substances Control Law,
Pesticide Law of 1971, Occupational Safety and Health Act of
North Carolina, and North Carolina Food and Drug Act.
In addition to enabling legislation for Federal programs,
North Carolina has passed a number of laws which expand the
State's role. In 1978, largely in response to rising public
concern following a PCB spill along State highways, the
North Carolina Civil Preparedness Act was passed to improve
State capabilities and coordination in responding to emergency
situations. In 1979, the Toxic Substances Task Force
and the Incident Response Procedures Act created an inter-
agency task force headed by the Department of Crime Control
and Public Safety to make recommendations for handling of
toxics emergencies. In 1980, the Civil Preparedness Act was
amended as the Consolidated Emergency Management Act, and a
comprehensive inter-agency emergency management plan was
developed for the State.
The Waste Management Act of 1981 strengthened North
Carolina's hazardous waste management procedures and created
an inter-agency advisory board, the Governor's Waste Management
Board, which consists of representatives from state agencies,
universities and the private sector. Both were the result of
recommendations of the Governor's Hazardous and Low-level
Radiation Waste Task Force. The Board is involved in public
education efforts and is developing an in-depth report. The
report is due to the North Carolina Legislature by January
1983 and will address State organizational structure and make
recommendations.for changes. The Waste Management Act also
gave the State override power in siting of hazardous waste
facilities.
The North Carolina Pesticide Law of 1971 established two
inter-agency committees to assist the Commissioner of Agriculture
in carrying out the act, the North Carolina Pesticide Board
and the Pesticide Advisory Committee.
-136-
-------
In spring of 1981, the Natural Resources Study Commission
Act was passed to study and make recommendations on coordination
of environmental health programs between the Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development and the Department
of Human Resources; however no funds were appropriated. Since
then, the Waste Management Board has been assigned responsibility
for recommending improved mechanisms for dealing with interagency
coordination of toxic materials management.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxic Substances Management
Primary responsibility for toxic substances management
in North Carolina is shared between two agencies, the Department
of Human Resources and the Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development. Solid and hazardous waste programs
are carried out within the Department of Human Resources,
while the air, surface water and groundwater programs are
carried out within the Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development.
Inter-agency coordination in the State began largely
as a result of the illegal dumping of PCBs along 210 miles
of North Carolina highways. In response to the incident,
the Governor appointed an informal Toxic Substances Task
Force. As concerns in the State grew over hazardous wastes,
the Governor created a Task Force on Hazardous and Low-level
Radiation. This inter-agency coordinating committee was
comprised of representatives from existing State agencies
involved in toxics substances management, legislators, citizens,
and representatives from academia and local government. The
Task Force was supported by advisory groups concentrating on
hazardous wastes, low-level radioactive wastes, public information
and research. In February of 1981, the Task Force issued a
report containing 19 recommendations on ways the State could
improve management of hazardous and low-level radioactive
wastes. These recommendations went to the State legislature
in Spring of 1981.
In June 1981, the legislature passed the Waste Management
Act. The Act mandated a comprehensive system for managing
toxics wastes and established an inter-agency board, the
Governor's Waste Management Board. The Board consists of
fifteen members one each from the Department of Human Resources,
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development,
Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, Department of
Agriculture and the Department of Commerce. The Board also
contains eight members appointed by the Governor, including
-137-
-------
representatives from the environmental community? higher
education, research or technology; private industry; and
county and municipal governments. In addition, there are
members from the General Assembly one appointed by the Speaker
of the House and the other by the Lieutenant Governor.
Members serve one to three year terms.
The Waste Management Act assigned the Board a broad
role in studying and evaluating hazardous waste management in
the State.
The Act did not provide methods or funds for monitoring
or cleaning up hazardous waste, but it did give the Governor
substantial pre-emptive powers over local ordinances in
hazardous waste facility siting.
The Department of Human Resources provides the staff
assistance to the Governor's Waste Management Board and is
required to enforce any rules adopted by the Board; however,
the Board reports directly to the Governor.
The solid and hazardous waste programs in the Department
Human Resources are carried out in the Environmental Health
Section with the Health Services Division. The Health Services
Division also includes the Laboratory Section and the
Epidemiological Section. In addition to working with the
Governor's Waste Management Board, the Solid and Hazardous
Waste Branch works on an ad-hoc basis with the Environmental
Management Division in the Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development and the pesticides program in the
Department of Agriculture. Two Memoranda of Agreement have
been issued between the Department of Human Resources and the
Departments of Commerce and Transportation to formalize safety
inspection of vehicles carrying hazardous waste.
The hazardous waste program has conducted a comprehensive
voluntary hazardous waste survey, does investigative monitoring
of toxic wastes and is responsible for hazardous waste disposal
permitting and enforcement. There is a large technical
assistance program for industry which will be expanded into a
waste information exchange program under the Waste Management
Act.
Also in the Environmental Health Section is the Water
Supply Branch which monitors drinking water and initiates
enforcement actions under the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act
and the North Carolina Drinking Water Act.
-138-
-------
Primary responsibility for air and water programs in
the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
rests with the Environmental Management Division. In 1980, the
Division was reorganized into a functional approach to improve
cross-cutting coordination between air and water programs.
Since North Carolina has had a water quality program since
the 1940's, changes were difficult to make. In 1982, the
program was reorganized again, returning to the media approach,
but retaining the importance of informal inter-media
coordination. The Division is now divided into four areas:
air, surface water, ground water and grants management. Each
media program conducts its own permitting, monitoring and
enforcement actions, while laboratory analysis is conducted
in an administration unit.
The Emergency Response Program in the Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development is developing a comprehensive
mapping effort to help in assessing potential environmental impact
from toxic substances incidents.
Overall policy and standards for the Division of
Environmental Management are developed by the Environmental
Management Commission. Technical Assistance to the Commission
is provided by two advisory boards, the Air Quality Council
and the Water Quality Council, with membership from local
governments, industry, environmental groups and scientists.
The Air Quality Section operates primarily under enabling
legislation for the Federal Clean Air Act; the North Carolina
Water and Air Resources Act, the Air Pollution Control Act
and the Oil, Pollution and Hazardous Substances Act. The
program has worked with the Department of Human Resources in
developing an inventory of non-regulated chemicals in the
State and will continue working with them in the implementation
of RCRA. In the upcoming State/EPA Agreement, North Carolina
will study airborne toxics and develop recommendations for
managing these pollutants.
The Environmental Management Commission developed
standards for thirty toxic pollutants, including fourteen
pesticides" in waste water. In a cooperative effort with
the Department of Human Resources the Groundwater Section
conducted a survey of over six hundred waste disposal or
storage sites in the State and ranked them for potential
groundwater pollution.
-139-
-------
The Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development also contains a special program that reports to
the Deputy Secretary, the Office of Planning and Assessment.
This office is responsible for assisting the public in
coordination of the permitting process, as well as developing
alternatives to regulation, and conducting economic and
cost-benefit analyses of regulatory programs.
The North Carolina Pesticide Law of 1971 set up two
inter-agency committees. The North Carolina Pesticide Board,
together with the Commissioner of Agriculture, is responsible
for carrying out the provisions of the Law. Its seven member
board is appointed by the Governor and has representation
from the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Human
Resources, a State conservation agency and the agricultural
chemical industry, as well as a person engaged in agricultural
production and two at large members. In addition, the
Pesticide Advisory Committee assists the Board with technical
questions and the development of rules and regulations.
It's seventeen members are appointed by the Board and include
representatives from the Departments of Agriculture and Human
Resources, from a State conservation agency, farming, the
pesticides industry, environmental organizations, academia
and the public at large.
The Pesticides Division of the Department of Agriculture
has had several informal and ad hoc coordinating mechanisms
for working with toxics programs in other agencies. Its
Agricultural Task Force has been working with the State water
program in studying non-point sources of water pollution from
agricultural operations and is presently conducting a study
to identify illegal pesticides dumpsites across the State.
The Pesticides Section has worked with other agencies in
emergency management and has designated a special Pesticide
Emergency Response Team with representation from other
Departments. The Pesticides Division works informally with
the Department of Human Services' epidemiology section and
the Solid and Waste Management Branch, and the Food and Drug
Protection Division within the Department of Agriculture.
Several other State Agencies touch on toxic substances
work. Occupational health advice and monitoring are carried
out within the Occupational Health Branch in the Environmental
Health Section in the Department of Human Services.
Inspections, enforcement activities and problem identificatio
work is primarily carried out within the Occupational Safety n
and Health Division of the Department of Labor. The Health
Department's epidemiological follow-up of toxic substances
related problems is limited to asbestos and silicon.
The Department of Crime Control and Public Safety has
been designated the lead agency for emergency management for
-140-
-------
the State, though the Department of Transportation is
responsible for overseeing inspection and enforcement activities
for the transportation of toxic substances.
The Department of Administration has some responsibility
for hazardous waste disposal siting and coastal disposal
policy decisions.
The Governor's Office, primarily under funding through a
TSCA Section 28 gr^nt, has set up the Toxic Substances Project.
Together with the Governor's Science Advisor, the project
conducts informal inter-agency meetings on several topics.
The Project's activities include a toxics education program for
industry, teachers and health professionals, several case
studies on management of specific toxic problems, a priority
assessment of toxic chemicals produced and used in the State,
and the development of profiles on the top 51 toxic chemicals,
a pilot project utilize and evaluate the Chemical Substances
Information Network (CSIN) for State government agencies, and the
development of economic and risk assessment models for the State.
A major conference for industry and government officials
was held in May, "Pollution Prevention Pays," on pollution
reduction technologies. Following the conference the North
Carolina legislature adopted as its chief objective: "prevention,
recycling, detoxification and reduction of hazardous waste,"
and followed through with legislation to encourage research
and information exchange to promote this concept.
The project has also conducted several workshops and
developed curricula materials to educate science, art and
vocational teachers about toxics substances. Further workshops
are planned to educate doctors, nurses and other health
professionals about occupational disease and other toxic
related health problems.
Ill. Information Management
North Carolina conducted a comprehensive voluntary
inventory of hazardous waste generated, stored, treated or
disposed of in the State. In July 1982, it released its first
Annual Report of Hazardous Waste which categorized the information
by type, location, storage or treatment method and transportation.
Non-confidential information will be computerized and made
available to other State programs. Although reporting was
voluntary, the State's Solid and Hazardous Waste Branch
estimates that it is 95% complete. The State worked
cooperatively with industry and other agencies in gathering
the information. It plans to encourage the non-reporting
companies to participate. The State takes little enforcement
action, but does provide industry with technical assistance
to help them in clean-up efforts. This role will be further
expanded under the new Waste Management Act to include
development of studies and information on recycling and
-141-
-------
recovery technologies.
The Governor's Office's Toxic Substances Project has
developed a list of toxic chemicals produced, used or stored
in North Carolina. It reviewed information on toxicity and
production of and selected 100 of these priority chemicals.
The Project has produced the North Carolina Toxic Substances
Management Guides on 51 of these chemicals, which include
a summary of the health effects, routes of human exposure,
environmental significance, first aid and emergency response
information for each chemical, as well as a detailed profile
on the substance's physical and chemical properties, human
and environmental properties, human and environmental
toxicity, manufacturing data, and research and regulatory
information. The Guides have gone through extensive State
and research institution review and will be released to relevant
government agencies, industry and the public soon.
The State has recently passed legislation to expand it
Cancer Control Registry. The new law strengthened reporting
procedures and provides funds to update, expand and computerize
data which will enable epidemiologists to research data and
identify possible sources of exposure. The State plans to expand
its Epidemiology Branch to cover environmental health. Presently
the State has a limited birth defects registry and occupation
disease reporting only for asbestosis and silicosis.
Each agency houses its own data. Much is computerized,
but data sharing between agencies presently is on an informal
and ad hoc basis. Plans to develop a data exchange system
are presently being developed. There is wide access to
published data banks. North Carolina is presently the only
state user of the Chemical Substances Information Network (CSIN).
Over 40 personnel from key State agencies and regional offices
have been trained, and an auto-tutorial training program has
been developed for additional personnel. The Governor's
Office has also developed a Catalogue of Lists of toxic
chemicals designated and/or regulated by international, Federal
and state agencies and the private sector. Information on
the Catalogue of Lists is computerized and available to all
State agencies.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
Although the impetus for much of North Carolina's toxics
program sprang from rising public concern from the PCB
incident, the State is developing mechanisms for managing its
toxic substances problems to set priorities and develop plans
to prevent future problems. Its recent inventory of hazardous
waste in the State will enable the State to establish categories and
priorities for sources of concern. The North Carolina Toxic
Substances Management Guides indicate the State's toxic
substances of major concern. Several programs in air,
water and pesticides have identified key toxic substances
-142-
-------
and are developing long-range mechanisms to.control problems.
The Governor's Toxic Substance Project is also developing
an exposure and risk assessment methodology that will assist
State programs in setting priorities. The Project is working
with the University of North Carolina's Department of Environmental
Sciences and Engineering under a TSCA Section 23 grant and
has developed a preliminary model that will be used in
preparing detailed human exposure and adverse health effects
assessments of three to five key substances; as well as in
assisting other State agency toxic programs.
The Department of Human Resources Epidemiology Section
does do studies of pesticide and some occupational related
toxic health problems. Although the State presently does not
have the capacity for doing epidemiology studies on other
toxic related problems, it does plan on creating an environmental
health program in the Epidemiology Section.
In 1981, North Carolina developed a comprehensive inter-
agency emergency response system, the Hazardous Materials
Emergency Response Plan, which gives primarily responsibility
for emergency management to the Department of Crime Control
and Public Safety. The plan outlines responsibilities for
eight different State agencies and coordination procedures
between those agencies and the private sector. The Division of
Emergency Management is within the Department of Crime Control
and Public Safety. In an emergency the Division activates
the State Emergency Operating Center and sets up a State
Emergency Response Team to coordinate action from appropriate
State agencies.
-143-
-------
V. Analysis
North Carolina ranks twelfth in the country in the
number of manufacturers and importers reporting under the
TSCA Inventory of chemicals in commerce. The State is highly
agricultural and a center for the dye, textile and furniture
industries. North Carolina is also the southern center for
the chemical trade which is a burgeoning fast-growing industry in
the State.
After the PCB incident in 1978, public concern about
toxics in North Carolina rose sharply. New laws and programs
to address toxics problems in the State mushroomed. Several
toxic substances management programs have been developed
with excellent integrating mechanisms or potential.
Chief among these are the North Carolina Hazard Materials
Emergency Management Plan, the Governor's Waste Management
Board, the North Carolina Toxic Substances Management Guides,
State-wide training in CSIN, the Hazardous Waste Inventory,
Toxic Substances Project educational program, the Catalogue
of Lists, the Office of Planning and Assessment permitting
assistance for industry and economic analysis for other
programs, and other informal mechanisms.
North Carolina's toxics programs are still evolving.
Although the State has no overall comprehensive toxics
strategy; informal, ad hoc inter-agency and inter-program
meetings have been held on key issues by the Governor's toxic
Substances Project and Science Advisor. In addition, new
programs are being developed or planned, including a formal
risk assessment model, an environmental health capability in
the State's Epidemiology Section, a more comprehensive cancer
registry program and a data overlay exchange mechanism.
North Carolina's pesticide program does have several
interagency management mechanisms that have been in existence
since the early 1970s and might serve as a model for other
states. These include the North Carolina Pesticide Board,
the Pesticide Advisory Committee, the Pesticide Emergency
Response Team and the Agricultural Task Force.
Toxic integration management in North Carolina is fast
growing, but still in the formative stage. The State's toxics
programs are backed by support from the Governor's Office, the
Legislature and the public. There is a considerable State
effort to implement programs to prevent future problems that
might occur from North Carolina's rapidly developing chemical
industry. The driving force behind toxics integration in
the State has come from the Governor's Toxic Substances
Project, primarily funded by a TSCA Section 28 grant. Although
the Project has developed many formal mechanisms and instilled
in State officials a commitment to toxics integration, there
is no overall formal inter-agency toxics coordinating committer
-144-
-------
or toxics substances management strategy that will maintain
this commitment in the future. The lack of these overall
toxics coordinating mechanisms may be even more important
when the TSCA Section 28 grant funding for the Governor's
Toxics Substances Project ends, or if toxics programs continue
to be divided between the Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development and the Department of Human Resources.
-145-
-------
Oklahcna ITM Surmary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxic Related Legislation
1. Oklahoma Clean Air Act.
2. Pollution Remedies Act.
3. Oklahoma Controlled Industrial Waste Act.
4. Hazardous Substances Labelling Act.
5. Oklahoma Pollution Control Coordinating Act.
B. Major Departments
1. Department of Health.
Environmental Health Service.
Personal Health Service.
2. Water Resources Board.
3. Department of Pollution Control.
Pollution Control Board - conposed of Directors of:
Department of Health.
Water Resources Board.
Corporation Commission.
Department of Wildlife Conservation
Department of Agriculture.
Department of Mines.
Conservation Counission.
4 Citizen Appointees of Governor
4. Department of Agriculture.
5. Corporation Commission.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate for Integration
1. The Pollution Control Coordinating Act provides
a mandate for integration.
B. Cooperative Efforts
1. Monthly meetings of the Pollution Control Board.
2. Task forces have been established on various topics.
3. Many informal, ad hoc interactions.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Environmental monitoring of media.
2. Hazardous Waste Disposal Plan.
-146-
-------
3. Agent Orange and T.B. registries are being developed.
4. Local Health Departments.
B. Data Coordination
1. Each office coordinates its own data.
2. The Environmental Toxicology Division in the Environmental
Health Service is coordinating environmental health
information with the Epidemiology Sen/ice.
C. Data Acessibility
1. Confidentiality of business information is protected
under the Controlled Industrial Waste Act.
2. Environmental information collected by the government
is public record.
3. Health data accessibility is sporadic.
TV. Toxic Substances Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Problem identification canes chiefly frcm citizen complaints
and State monitoring.
2. No formal priority-setting process has been established.
B. Risk Assessment Models
1.. Risk assessnent models are not used.
C. Emergency Management
1. Coordination of Emergency Management is handled on
a 24 hour-a-day basis by the Radiation and Special
Hazardous Service in the Department of Health.
2. Emergency Spills are handled under the lead of the
Department of Pollution Control.
Key State Officials
Governor: George Nigh
Joan K. Leavitt, M.D.
Commissioner
State Department of Health
1000 N.E. Tenth St.
Oklahoma City, Ok 73152
-147-
-------
Program Contacts:
Mark Coleman
Deputy Conmissioner
for Environmental Services
State Department of Health
1000 Northeast Tenth
P.O. Box 53551
Oklahoma City, OK "73152
(405) 271-7363
Dwain Farley
Chief, General Environmental Services
State Department of Health
1000 Northeast Tenth
P.O. Box 53551
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
(405) 271-5217
Mark Roberts
State Department of Health
Epidemiology Service
1000 Northeast Tenth
P.O. Box 53551
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
(405) 271-4060
Ron Jarmen
Chief, Water Quality Division
Water Resources Board
1000 Northeast Tenth
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
(405) 2541
Larry Edmison
Director
Department of Pollution Control
1000 N.E. Tenth
P.O. Box 53504
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
-148-
-------
Oklahoma ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
Jurisdiction over toxic pollutants under Oklahoma statutes comes
from the following definition in Title 63 Section l-1601(b); "The term
'toxic' shall apply to any substance (other than a radioactive substance)
which has the capacity to produce personal injury or illness to man
through ingestion, inhalation, or absorption through any body surface."
Oklahoma's management strategy for toxic substances involves the interaction
of a number of State agencies including: The Oklahoma State Department
of Health (OSDH); the Oklahoma Water Resources 3oard (OWRB); the Oklahoma
State Department of Agriculture (OSDA); The Oklahoma Corporation Commission
(OCC); and the Department of Pollution Control (ODPC).
The Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH) fulfills duties
under State law and carries out the. mandates of several Federal laws
relative to toxics management. This is accomplished through a number of
Administrative Service units within the Environmental Services section
of the Stace of Health Department. OSDH maintains a staff of field
personnel through the the State's system of 62 local county health
departments. Each county health department has field sanitarians assigned
to them. OSDH's Air Quality Service oversees potential air quality
toxics problems. The Waste Management Service oversees sanitary landfills,
hazardous waste disposal 3ites, and has been delegated authority over
non-petroleum related Underground Injection Control (UIC) system activities.
The Water Facilities Engineering Service has oversight over municipal
waste treatment and precreatmenc facilities and public water supply
facilities. The Radiation and Special Hazards Service oversees public
health aspects of exposure to radioactive materials and x-ray equipment.
It also has authority in the area of industrial hygiene in workplaces
and public areas. This service coordinates with the Highway Patrol and
Civil Defense in natural emergencies as well as accidents involving
hazardous substances. The State Environmental Laboratory Service provides
routine and special analyses for all environmental media and supports
activities of the OSDH as well as other State agencies. The Environmental
Health Service of the State Health Department is also the State's designated
"superfund" agency.
The State Health Department also uses the concept of environmental
epidemiology to address various toxics problems in Oklahoma. This
involves the use of an interdisciplinary approach which addresses both
environmental and medical aspects of exposure to toxic materials.
Assistance is given to problem evaluation design and data collection.
These data are then used to prepare reports, fact sheets, and to assist
with the preparation of public information materials and news media
information items. Environmental epidemiology provides the mechanism
for environmental and medical interface and maintains a toxics reference
library and resource contact persons in both State and Federal agencies.
Oklahoma Water Resources Board (OWRB) has primary responsibility in
defining water quality standards, including toxics standards, for the
waters of the State. It also Issues State permits for Industrial discharges
into the waters of the State and handles complaints involving industrial
pollution.
-149-
-------
Oklahoma State Department: of Agriculture (OSDA) acts to prevent
toxics problems from pesticides through programs to insure correct
labeling of pesticides and certification of any persons doing business
as commercial, non-commercial, or private pesticide applicators. OSDA
also oversees programs regulating levels of pesticides in foodstuffs and
other materials used as animal feeds.
Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC) has exclusive jurisdiction in
the areas of toxic pollutants resulting from the oil the gas industry.
It regulates petroleum industry activities from "cradle to grave" except
in the area of refinery facility effluent discharges to waters of the
State. These discharges are under the jurisdiction of the QWRB. OCC
regulates all aspects of oil and gas exploration and production, vastehaulers
of oil, and petroleum-related UIC system activities. OCC's "exclusive
jurisdiction" over some issues is currently the subject of litigation.
The Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH), the Oklahoma Water
Resources Board (OWRB), the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC) , the
Oklahoma State Department of Agriculture (OSDa), the Oklahoma Department
of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC), the Oklahoma Conservation Commission
(OCC), and four citizen members comprise the Pollution Control Coordinating
3oard (PCCB), of which the Department of Pollution of Control (ODPC) is
the executive arm. The PCCB, with ODPC as their administrative arm,
coordinates the pollution control activities of the separate environmental
agencies. ODPC acts on behalf of the Board in cases vhere a single
member agency lacks clear authority to act or when a member agency has
not adequately performed its statutory duties. ODPC also acts on a
routine basis to receive citizen complaints, refer them to the appropriate
agency, and monitor the effectiveness of the response.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxic Management
The Oklahoma Pollution Control Coordinating Act of 1968, as amended,
provides a legislative mandate for the integrated management of all
environmental pollution. The Act serves as an umbrella statute, with
its primary goal being to "coordinate all pollution control programs of
the State carried on by all State agencies" ( 932.2 - 4). The comprehensive
nature of the law is further enhanced by broad definitions given to
"environment" and "pollution". The purpose of the Act was not to reorganize
the structure of environmental management, but rather to create greater
cooperation within the existing organizational structure through the
work of the Pollution Control Coordinating Board, and the Department of
Pollution Control. In practice, the Board has served as more of a forum
for inter-agency discussion of major problems and issues. The Board
and the department have not made great use of their power to assume
control in special circumstances. Its main goal has been to identify
problem areas and to foster better communication among agencies.
In addition, multi-agency task forces have been established on a
number of specific issues, concerning PCB's, two instances of heavy
metal contamination, and a hazardous waste incident. In the case of Ft.
Gibson Lake and Tar Creek the Governor's Office assumed the role of
"project coordinator" by establishing the task force, appointing agency
liaisons and managing the operations. This effort has been characterized
by State officials as a successful undertaking.
-150-
-------
The third major example of cooperation and coordination in Oklahoma
is the existence of an office, and specifically one person within the
Environmental Health Service of OSDH, which coordinates health and
environmental information. The office, the Local Environmental Health
Service, works in close cooperation with the Epidemiology Service under
OSDH's Personal Health Service to gather and disseminate information.
The final form of cooperation in the State is through informal
exchanges. Personal contacts are made on an ad hoc, day to day basis.
State officials have characterized this type of exchange as perhaps the
most important and effective form of cooperation.
III. Information Management
The primary means of data gathering in Oklahoma is through environmental
monitoring done by State Department of Health offices, Water Resources
Board and the Department of Agriculture There are no reporting requirements
for either the- manufacture or the use of toxic substance within the
State. Oklahoma does, however, have a hazardous waste disposal plan
which requires industry reporting, as well as restricts such waste from
being brought into the State without the submission of detailed reports
concerning the handling of the waste. In addition, the Corporation
Commission operates a manifest system.
In the field of health data gathering, no tumor registry currently
exists, although an Agent Orange and T.B. registry are in the development
stages. Morbidity and mortality data are available, although they are
not frequently used. Data is gathered from physicians, but availability
of such information is somewhat sporadic, depending upon the source and
type of Information requested. Finally, local health departments, with
the exception of two, report directly to the Department of Health, and
therefore serve as valuable data gathering sources.
Coordination of data is not extensive in Oklahoma and is primarily
informal. Monitoring data is computerized; hovever, health data is not
stored in computer data banks. There is no central indexing system for
either data file. Therefore, the channels by which information is
shared between environmental media offices, and between environmental
and health offices tends to be informal.
Information dissemination Is guided by varying policies which are
dependent upon the type 'and the recipient of the data. In general, all
data is public record, but this pertains largely to the monitoring data.
Health data are not available for public review and are only available
to State officials with reasonable cause for inquiry. In addition, the
confidentiality of business information is protected under the Controlled
Industrial Waste Act.
IV. Toxic Control Strategies
Toxic problems in Oklahoma are identified chiefly by monitoring
activities and citizen complaints. There Is not, however, any uniform
approach for dealing with those problems that are Identified. No Integrated
-151-
-------
priority setting process is evident, and although the State has dealt
with a number of incidents Camong them 2,4,51, arsenic, vinyl chloride,
PCB and herbicides), no standardized management strategy has been developed.
Task forces have been established and the Epidemiology Service his
responded to a number of incidents based on available environmental
data, but this process is ad hoc. Risk assessment models are not used
in the State.
In the area of emergency management, the Oklahoma State Department
of Health has developed an "Emergency Response Plan". The Department of
Pollution Control also maintains the Oil and Hazardous Materials Spill
plan. Under the OSDH plan all emergencies of an environmental health
nature, including toxics, are coordinated by the Radiation and Special
Hazards Service (RSHS). RSHS provides the following services: maintains
a 24 hour-per-day telephone service, notifies the appropriate Environmental
Health Service offices and all other offices deemed necessary, in specific
cases acts as the news media contact, and finally, acts as liaison to
the Oklahoma Civil Defense, which carries out the majority of the necessary
emergency operations. Therefore, Oklahoma does maintain an on-going
coordinated emergency response system.
V. Current Status and Analysis
The priority problems in Oklahoma, as indicated earlier, center
around PCB's (Ft. Gibson Lake), heavy metals (Tar Creek and Bartlesville),
and hazardous waste (Pryor Creek). In all of these cases, task forces
have been formed to deal with the problems, however, no permanent solutions
have yet been formulated. In addition, air pollution in and around the
highly industrialized city of Tulsa is becoming an increasingly important
area of concern for environmental planners. Finally, due to the predominance
of the oil and mining industry in the State, there is some concern about
potential problems of environmental pollution.
Oklahoma has tended to give greater priority to growth than environmental
concerns in State policy planning; nonetheless, the State has chosen to
fund a substantial portion of programs which had previously been under
EPA funding. This, combined with the strong desire for greater coordination
and elimination of duplication, places Oklahoma in a relatively favorable
position for future integrated toxics management.
Future areas for concentrated State efforts in toxic management
could possibly center around the development of a more extensive data
base and greater coordination of data, in general. This is particularly
true with respect to health data. Discussions with other states who are
now developing various data systems might provide useful assistance for
Oklahoma.
-152-
-------
Pennsylvania ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics - Related Legislation
1. Solid Waste Management Act of 1980 (Act 97).
2. Hazardous Substance Transportation Act of 1978.
3. Air Pollution Control Act of 1960, as amended.
4. Clean Streams Act of 1937, as amended.
B. Major Agencies - Agencies having major regulatory responsibilities
1. Department of Environmental Resources.
2. Department of Agriculture.
3. Department of Health.
4. Department of Transportation.
5. Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency.
6. Pennsylvania State Police.
C. Other Agencies - Agencies that impact certain areas of toxics management
1. Fish Commission.
2. Game Commission.
3. Department of Ccrminity Affairs.
4. Public Utilities Commission.
II. Organization Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate -
No comprehensive ITM legislation exists in PA.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Newly established State-vide cancer registry -
to be initially established in Southcentral Pennsylvania.
B. How is data coordinated
1. Data collection is conducted and stored by individual agencies,
agencies, with no central index.
C. Information Availability
1. Statewide - Confidential Business Information is
well protected by the State.
2. The City of Philadelphia has landmark right-to-know
legislation.
-153-
-------
IV. Toxics Control
A. PEMA is the State agency responsible for coordinating activi
activities during all emergencies.
Key Pennsylvania Officials
Governor: Hon. Dick Thornburgh
Governor
Roan 225 Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 787-2500
PEMA: DeWitt C. Smith, Jr.
Director
Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency
Roan 8-151
Transportation & Safety Building
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 783-8150
Program Contacts:
Hon. Peter S. IXincan
Secretary
Department of Environmental Resources
P.O. Box 2063
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 787-2814
William Middendorf
Deputy Secretary for Environmental Protection
PA Department of Environmental Resources
P.O. Box 2063
Harristxirg, PA 17120
(717) 787-2657
Jack Knauber (contact concerning current programs)
Toxicology Coordinator
Office of Deputy Secretary for Environmental Protection
PA Department of Environmental Resources
P.O. Box 2063
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 787-4686
-154-
-------
Walter A. Lyon (contact concerning Integration Program)
Deputy Secretary for Planning
PA Department of Environmental Resources
Ream 315, Executive House Apts.
P.O. Box 2357
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 733-3940
George D. Burns, Chief (contact concerning Integration Program)
Division of Environmental Policy Planning
Bureau of Environmental Planning
PA Department of Environmental Resources
Room 319, Executive House Apts.
P.O. Box 2357
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 787-3137
<-155-
-------
Pennsylvania ITM
I. State Authorities
The primary responsibility for Pennsylvania's toxics management lies
with the Department of Environmental Resources (DER). The 1970 enabling
legislation mandated DER, through its various bureaus (Water 'Quality Management
Air Quality Control, Solid Waste Management, and Radiation Protection and
Toxicolgy) to act to protect the environment. Currently three major statutes
define the scope of DER's mission and authority: The Solid Waste Management
Act of 1980; the Air Pollution Control Act of 1960, as amended; and, the
Clean Streams Act of 1937, as amended.
Although DER has a major role in the control and management of toxics
substances, a great deal of authority is also maintained outside of the
agency. Pesticide management was delegated to the Department of Agriculture
in 1972 legislation; toxics transporation authority has been given to the
Department of Transportation through the Hazardous Substance Transportation
Act of 1978, In addition, minor authority in toxics management is delegated
to the Public Utility Commission in the area of rail transport of hazardous
substances. The Department of Health has the responsibility to protect,
detect, treat and prevent illness and diseases within the Commonwealth.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
No formal legislative plan concerning integrated toxics management
exists within Pennsylvania. The only cooperative efforts are:
(1) The Toxics Integration Strategy Committee which is an interagency
working group. This group is developing a unified approach to
dealing with the problems of toxics that enter the environxient.
Agencies represented on the Committee include: DER, Health,
Agriculture, Transportation, Public Utility Coitmission, Fish &
Game Cemissions, Carrnunity Affairs, and PEMA. Key DER bureaus
represented are: Air Quality Control, Community Environmental
Control, Laboratories, Solid Waste and Water Quality.
(2) Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA) is the State's
emergency preparedness and response agency which was created by
Act 323, November 26, 1978. The Agency's principle power and
duty is to develop and keep current a comprehensive emergency
management plan and program for the defense of the Conmonwealth,
(3) Department of Environmental Resources adopted its first Emergency
Management Plan covering departmental responsibilities to respond
to 18 different types of emergencies in 1981. The Plan was develoDed
to meet the Department's general obligations under Act 323 requirina
the Department to have a plan to accomplish the tasks assigned to it
by PEMA.
-156-
-------
2
A few non-legislative agreements do exist in Pennsylvania whicn serve
to facilitate cooperation. A protocol has been established airong the various
bureaus within DER which deals with the principle of data and general information
exchange. DER has a toxicology coordinator to aid in this process. A similar
protocol exists between the main offices of DER and other responsible agencies.
No such agreement is in place among the county and municipal authorities. A
memorandum of understanding exists between DER and the Department of Health
which not only expresses intentions, but also establishes contact points
within the agencies to facilitate the process.
It should be stressed that these arrangements deal with cooperation on
a case-by-case basis and do not constitute coordination of general policy,
as would be implied by "umbrella" statutes.
Interaction among the agencies appears to be extremely limited; it is
therefore, informal among the main offices, and according to DER officials,
sporadic or nonexistent at county and municipal levels.
III. Information Management
A new enacted cancer registry under the Department of. Health constitutes
a major reporting mechanism relating to toxics in Pennsylvania. Regular
accident reporting is acccmplished through the permitting process under
specific program areas (i.e. water, air, solid waste, etc.). The cancer
registry has. begun in southcentral Pennsylvania. It is anticipated that the
registry will serve as an epidemiological tool for understanding incidences
of cancer within the State. Beyond this, all information gathered on toxics
is through voluntary reporting or through State-initiated surveys. Any
information that is obtained is stored by the relevant agency in a combination
of computerized and card files. Hcwever, no central index exists for inter-agency
use and information rrust therefore be accesssed through special requests.
A "right-to-know" law exist in Philadelphia which: 1) imposes reporting
requirements on manufacturers and transporters, and 2) makes public record
of any information pertaining to the presence of toxic substances in the
city and the resulting health effects. Proprietary information is, however,
guarded by the bureaucracy.
IV. Toxics Control
As in most states in the U.S., toxic control strategies are developed
on a program by program basis. Priorities and standards are set by the
Federal government, and the program is then administered by the State.
Therefore, the main functions of problem identification and ranking are
primarily the responsibilities of the individual bureaus.
PEMA has the major responsibility of coodinating all activities during
an emergency. PEMA is currently developing a plan to coordinate the response
of all state agencies to hazardous substances incidents in line with directions
they received fran the Emergency Management Council, and along the requirements
of S. 65, now pending in the Legislature. This Hazardous Substance Qnergency
Response Plan will involve county emergency management agencies. PEMA
will also maintain a 24hour "hotline" for reporting hazardajs substances
incidents through which State agency responses will be coordinated.
-157-
-------
3
v. Current Status and Analysis
The toxic substances problem in Pennsylvania encompasses a wide range
of concerns. The single biggest problem area in Pennsylvania is the management
of hazardous waste. Pennsylvania has been identified as the third largest
generator o£ hazardous waste in the nation. The State has also placed a
high priority on comprehensive emergency management which enables the
State to qualify for aid under Superfund.
Existing levels of cooperation both within and outside of DER seem to
provide a good foundation for integration. Present exchanges between the
bureaus and departments create a favorable environment from which to expand.
-158-
-------
DEPARTMENT 01 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
0
f nvironrnental
Hearing Board
QlhwvAfciiiie'SiiuHisL
( htef Counsel
Of Ft ft Y f OR ADMINtc, TRA J ION
Affirmative Action
BureJuof Personnel
Personnel A Organization Mtjrnt
Employee Relation* & Safety
Employee Benefits A
Personnel 5yitems
liaming A Recruitment
Bureau of f ittal M
budget Analysis
Program Planning A (valuation
Bureau of Office Systems A
Services
Office Support Services
M.itrnals Management
Wo»ff Piocessmg
Bureau of information 5y s (~•'»»$
Systems Development
Information Processing
Management Sciences
secretary]
Press Offtce
"J
in rut yjon 1 NvmoNMtNtAt pro 11 ciiom
Office of Environmental Energy
Management
Bureau of Deep Mine Safety
Bituminous Deep Mine Safely
Anthracite Deep Mine Safety
Bureau of Oil A Gas Regulation
Per milling
Compliance A Monitoring
Bureau of Mintng A Reclamation
Surfare Mine Reclamation
Planning A Environmental Analysis
Mine Subsidence
Birreju of Radiation Ptotntion
Radiation Control
Environmental Radiation
Nuclear Safety
Office of Environmental M.mjnement
Bureau of Ah ie\t Development
Project Oesign
Operations A Maintenance
Stream Improvements
Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation
Acid Mine Drainage Abatement
M">e Ha?aids
DIPUTYf OH PLANNING
Bureau for tnvironmenlal
Planning
environmental Policy Planning
Boardtand
Commissions
CHiieni Advisory
Council
Environmental
Quality Board
Coal and Clay Mine
Subsidence Insurance
Board
State Board for
Certification of
Sewage Treatment
Plant A Wit«rvi^i
Operator j ^
Stat* Board for
Certification of
Sewage enforcement
Officers
State Conservation
Commission
Advisory Committee
on Atomic Energy
Development A
Radiation Control
Water facilities loan
Board
-------
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
OFFICE OF
COMTTHOUIR
•vffif m
MfiiH rmeim
NfVT! fit IMKtritlHl
SECRETARY
YHVIIONMfNVAl MAIWO tOAtO
omct or
FUflUC mFOMMATIOM
rrct irtMir csmi
>» mmc
-------
Utah ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics - Related Legislation
1. Hazardous Waste Act of 1979.
2. Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility Siting Act of 1981.
3. Pesticide Control Act.
4. Utah OSHA, 1973.
B. Major Departments
1. Utah Department of Health (UDH).
2. Department of Agriculture (DOA).
3. Department of Public Safety - Division of Comprehensive
Emergency Management.
4. Department of Transportation.
5. Utah Industrial Commission.
C. Other Departments
1. Department of Natural Resources.
2. State Fire Marshall.
3. State Highway Patrol.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. No mandate for inter-agency integration currently exists
in Utah.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. UDH - DOA joint project regarding the disposal of pesticide
containers.
2. Inter-agency pre-design conference.
3. Memorandum of Agreement between UDH and Department of
Transportation regarding hazardous waste transportation.
4. The UDH Office of Epidemiology and Surveillance is
beginning to work on a cooperation effort to develop a
State Epidemiology Plan.
5. The agencies have established numerous advisory committees,
sane of which are statutorily authorized.
6. UDH Bureau of Radiological Control - Department of
Public Safety effort to develop radiological emergency
response plan.
-161-
-------
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. On-going inventory of hazardous materials within the
State formulated by UDH.
2. Collection and study of industry-illness correlation
information dene by Depart-nent of Public Safety.
3. Completed project by the University of Utah studying
the environmental and health effects of pesticides.
4. Inventory of all hazardous waste movement within the
the State perforrted by the Hazardous Materials Enforcement
Development Program within Department of Public Safety.
5. Environmental monitoring programs.
6. The Rocky Mountain Center for Environmental and Occupational
Health at the University of Utah researches and provides
information on occupational and environmental health
problems.
3. Data Coordination
1. Small data base within Department of Public Safety
pertaining to occupational safety and health.
2. Proposed computerized data base for the UDH Hazardous
waste Bureau.
3. Utah Cancer Registry.
IV. Toxics Management
A. Chemical Emergency Response Program
1. Involves Department of Public Safety, UDH, Department
of Natural Resources, CCA, and State Fire Marshall.
B. Hazardous Materials Enforcement Development Program
1. involves Departrrent of Public Safety, Department of
Transportation, and State Highway Patrol.
C. Recently established Office of Epidemiology within UEH addressing
occupational and environmental related disease.
-162-
-------
Key State Officials
Governor: Scott M. Matheson
Utah Department of Health
Executive Director - James E. Mason (801) 533-6111
Department of Public Safety
Canmissioner - Larry Lunrien (301) 965-4461
Department of Agriculture
Canmissioner - Steven Gillmore (801) 533-4108
Program Contacts:
Mr. Marvin Maxell
Acting Director
Division of Environmental Health
Utah Department of Health
150 W. North Temple
P.O. Box 2500
Salt Lake City, Utah 84110
(801) 533-6121
Richard Johns, M.D.
State Epidemiologist
Office of Epidemiology and Surveillance
Division of Ccrrunity Health Services
Utah Department of Health
P.O. Box 2500
Salt Lake City, Utah 84110
(801) 533-6129
Ms. Lorayne Tempest, Director
Division of Ccnprehensive Emergency
Management
Department of Ccnprehensive Emergency
Management
1543 Sunnside Avenue
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
(801) 533-6121
-163-
-------
Dr. Dale Parker, Director
Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Wast
Division of Environmental Health
Department of Health
P.O. Box 2500
Salt Lake City, Utah 84110
(801) 533-4145
William N. Rem M.D., MPH
Associate Professor and Director
Rocky Mountain Center for
Occupational and Environmental
Health
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112
CDr. Fran Urry, Director
State Health Laboratory
Department of Health
44 Medical Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah 84113
(801) 533-6131
-------
Utah ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
Utah's integrated toxics management found its beginning with the
passage of the Hazardous Waste Act of 1979. The Act's major function was
the establishment of the Hazardous Waste Conmittee, a nine-member body
made up of a member of the manufacturing industry, one representative of
the mining industry, two members of the general public, a State Department
of Health official, a registered professional engineer, a representative
of the solid waste industry, and two county or local officials. Among the
Cawnittee's duties includes the recording and monitoring of the activities
of generators of hazardous waste, transporters of operators of hazardous
waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities. Despite its diverse
representation, the Conmittee has proven very effective, and meets on a
regular basis at least once a month.
A related piece of legislation, passed in 1981, is the Hazardous
Waste Disposal Facility Siting Act. Hie Act grants UDH's Hazardous Waste
Management Bureau the power to decide which landfills are suitable for the
disposal of hazardous wastes. Once the site is decided, the Act pre-empts
all local ordinances; however, local officials 'work very closely with the
UDH before the final decision is made (Note: There are currently 70 hazardous
waste disposal facilities within the State, 67 of which are low-level,
on-site facilities. Of the remaining three, two are used predominantly
for recycling while one is used exclusively for the disposal of hazardous
waste brought in from around the State. All other hazardous waste, that
is, all waste known by the State government, is shipped to neighboring
states. The number of disposal facilities licensed to receive hazardous
waste frcm outside sources should dramatically increase in the near future
due to the fact that Colorado will soon be shipping much of its waste into
the State.)
Utah does not possess its own versions of the Clean Air Act, the Clean
Water Act, or TSCA, bat rather it simply adheres to the Federal statutes
themselves. The State does have a Pesticide Control Act which is very
similar in nature to FIFRA. Utah passed an Occupational Safety and Health
Act in 1973.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
Major toxic control activities take place within the Utah Department
of Health. There are eight programs within the Department and twelve
local health departments. The Division of Environmental Health has
the major responsibility for the regulation, inplementation and oversight
of Utah and federal environmental programs. The Division is composed
of air, water, solid and hazardous wastes, general sanitation and radiation
bureaus. A second program, the Division of Conrrunity Health Services, is
responsible for public health disease investigations and services, including
overseeing the activities of the State Epidemiologist's Office. The State
Health Laboratory handles all human health laboratory tests for the Department
of Health and frequently other departments, such as Agriculture, when
human health concerns are involved.
¦165-
-------
In addition, the Department of Agriculture is the lead agency for
pesticides and the Industrial Commission for Occupational Health and Safety.
Although no mandate for inter-agency integration currently exists in
Utah, several major efforts are being made in that direction. One such
effort is the UDH-CCA joint project regarding the disposal of pesticide
containers. State officials are attempting to address this potentially
serious problem by arranging separate areas of landfills designed specifically
for the disposal of pesticide containers. Although efforts have not yet
borne fruit, the interaction between the two agencies has served to improve
their relations.
One particularly innovative program is the State's pre—design conference.
This conference calls for industries entering the State, or those wishing
to expand, to meet with officials from pertinent State agencies before the
initiation of construction. This conference facilitates and clarifies the
permitting process while improving relations between government and industry.
Other inter-agency cooperative efforts include a Memorandum of Agreement
between UDH and the Department of Transportation spelling out the roles
each is to play 'regarding the transportation of hazardous waste. Further
efforts are being made between UDH's Bureau of Radiological Control and
the Department of Public Safety to develop a radiological emergency
response plan.
III. Information Management
One of the most extensive individual projects is the UDH Hazardous
Waste Management Bureau's attenpt to inventory all hazardous wastes within
the State. This monumental effort has resulted in the revelation that
nmch more hazardous material is being generated, stored, etc. in the State
than had previously been thought. The Bureau has requested a computerized
data base to better store this information, but, due to fiscal constraints,
the prospects of obtaining the base do not appear to be promising.
Another data collection project was performed by the Industrial Conmssion
of Utah involving correlations between worker illness and the industries
in which they were employed. The study, using data compiled between i960
and 1970, identified certain "hotspots" which required special emphasis.
The project has continued on a smaller basis, and still provides valuable
information.
The Department of Agriculture sponsored a project, performed at the
University of Utah, dealing with the environmental and health effects of
pesticides. The University study, which has been completed, provided
useful information which- has allowed the Department to better license the
manufacture and application of pesticides.
Furthermore, the Hazardous Materials Enforcement Development Program
within the Utah Industrial Commission which was formally initiated July
20, 1982, has begun "phase one", the data collection phase, of a three
phase program. "Phase one" will involve an inventory of all hazardous
materials movement within the State. This already difficult task will
beccme even more Herculean once shipments of waste begin to arrive fran
Colorado. (The Hazardous Materials Enforcement Development Program will
be discussed below at greater length.).
-166-
-------
The Utah Cancer Registry is a comprehensive computerized system which
has been funded by the National Cancer Institute. In the larger hospitals,
trained registrars abstract cancer cases for the registry; Cancer Registry
staff trains the registrars, abstracts data from smaller hospitals and
checks information held by pathological laboratories. A Cancer
Registry law was passed requiring that doctors and hospitals report incidences
of cancer. Since reporting occurred before the law was passed, the major
new benefit was to protect doctors who report proprietary patient information.
Although the data includes current residential information, the report
form does not include occupational or residential history. The
State has applied for a NIOSH grant to enable the State Epidemiologist
to obtain an historical record to help link possible occupational and
environmental causes to cancer cases. Currently the staff organizes
the data in a variety of ways: geographically, by year of incident,
or according to incidence rates. Unless requested, the Cancer Registry
staff does not survey or analyze the data. The resources
are just not available.
Since 1977, the Rocky Mountain Center for Occupational and Environmental
Health (RMCOEH), University of Utah, has had an active teaching, research
and service program. The Center offers degree ccurses in Occupational
Medicine, Industrial Hygiene and Safety and Ergonomics, as well as continuing
education programs. Research has been done on pulmonary functions among
coal miners, and on various adverse health effects resulting in workers
exposed to heavy metals, sulfur dioxide, beryllium, oil shale and other
toxics.
The State Epidemiologist's office has recently been established and
is developing a comprehensive plan for its future activities. Currently,
it is working with the Division of Environmental Health, State Laboratory,
Department of Agriculture, RMCOEH, University of Utah Medical Center and
Cancer Registry, Bureau of Health Statistics and local health departments,
as well as Federal Drug Administration, on a number of epidemiology studies
and surveillance projects, such as a miscarriage study in a pesticide
spraying area.
IV. Toxics Management
Like many states around the country, Utah has developd a response plan
for toxics-related emergencies, namely the Chemical Emergency Response
Program. The coordinating body of the Program, the Division of Environmental
Health operates a 24-hour hotline/ and decides which agency, or
agencies, are to address the emergency. Agencies participating in the
Program include UEH, DQA, the Department of Natural Resources, and the
State Fire Marshall. In addition, if county or local officials require
assistance, the Department of Public Safety acts as the on-scene coordinator.
As mentioned earlier, the Department of Public Safety has developed
the Hazardous Materials Enforcement Development Program in order to
address problems corrected with the transportation of hazardous materials
within the State. The aforementioned "phase one" aspects of the Program
-167-
-------
is being implemented simultaneously with phases two and three, namely
the training of State Troopers to be hazardous materials inspectors.
The Troccers will conduct inspections at the State borders and through
spot-checks, (In addition, DOT will continue to conduct inspections at
the point of destination). Phase three involves the actual enforcement.
In order to assise in this enforcement, the Program will utilize data
bases which will contain lists of industry contacts, records of past
the training of State Troopers to be hazardous materials inspectors.
The Troopers will conduct inspections at the State borders and through
spot-checks. (In addition, DOT will continue to conduct inspections
at the point of destination). Phase three involves the actual enforcerent.
In order to assist in this enforcement, the Program will utilize data
bases which will contain lists of industry contacts, records of past
inspections, and the inventory listing of hazardous materials movement
within the State. The director of the Program believes that it is
imperative that all three phases be initiated at one time, and he does
not feel that the enforcement phase will unduly suffer frcm the
incompleteness of the other two phases.
A final example of efforts towards toxics control is the recent
establishment of an Office of Epidemiology within UCH. This Office
will allow for a more expanded and formal epidemiology prcgram within
the State and will help to coordinate health effects and environmental data.
V. Current Status and Analysis
With the exception of a few refineries and shelters, there is little
major manufacturing or processing of chemical substances in Utah; however,
major toxicity problems in the State are associated with hazardous wastes.
The State has made progress in addressing problems through coordinating
activities and continues to enhance its data bases. In time, it is possible
that a cross-media problem solving and control strategy could be shaped.
An area which warrants close scrutiny is the future increase of
hazardous waste coming into Utah due to the closing of the sole hazardous
waste disposal facility in Colorado. The State seems to be taking many
of the necessary precautionary measures, and its officials should not be
caught having underestimated the severity of the situation. While an
effort is underway to identify the hazardous materials in the State,
iaich more work needs to be done. The two states may well find joint
planning of use regarding hazardous material transportation emergencies.
Finally, all proper steps should be taken to make the new
Office of Epidemiology as effective as possible and encourage the integration
of this Office's activities with those of the Division of Environmental
Health. U.S. EPA can provide useful technical and logistical assistance
in the attempt to obtain this goal.
-168-
-------
GOVERNOR
DCrAVITMCNT Of
HEALTH
V
UTAM NMKTMCIIT WIKUTH
-------
Vw\\ \VV>V"V\ VVVW3\\W
Organ!;»ilon Chart - poiltloni
TIL b7
9/1/82
OE'AATHtNr or HEALTH
HKtCTO*
mmrAU or
MAHACWKNT SKHVICES
Kgt. Service* Coord.
Sccretury
STATE HEALTH LASOIMTOnr
01 factor (Envapt)
Stcritiry
CUBICAL OFFICE
Office Manager
Typljl
Typl»t
SrORES/SlltrriNG/R£CEIVlNC
futchjulng Citric
Lab Aaalatant
.X
uURF.AU or MICROBIOLOGY
Director
r.\TIIO(»F,NIC MICROBIOLOGY
r.l'.CT ION
Microbiologist
Microbiologist
Microbiologist
Microbiologist *j
Lnl» Technician
Lab Ifflmlclin
VlROtWV SECTION
Microbiologist
Jllrroblolofclst
Lob Tcfhnlclnn
UROLOGY SEC1IOH
Htcroblolo|(!it
HlcrcMologint
Lah Iecho Iclan
I LOIN ICAL SERVICES SECTIO!
Microbiologist
ln(> Technician
Lab Assistant
L«b Assistant
Lnb Assistant
BUREAU OK CLINICAL
CHEMISTRY
Director
Typist
HF.UBORN SCREENING
sr.crioN
Met. Screening Spv
Microbiologist
Clieniiit
Lab Technician
BUREAU or
LABORATORY IMTROVD1EJIT
Director
Secretary
CERTIFICATION AND
APPROVAL SECTION
Microbiologist
Microbiologist
BUREAU OF
FORENSIC CHEMISTRY
Director
Typist
MEDICAL EXAMINER AND
CORRECTIONS SECTION
Chealat (Toxicology)
Chemist (Toxicology)
Lab Technician (13)
PUBLIC SAFETY SECTION
Cheat at (Toxicology)
Cheatst (Toxicology)
Cheatat (Toxicology)
1
QUALITY ASSURANCE SECTION
Cheatit (Q.A.)
Microbiologist ' • « '' • /
RAOIOCHEMISTKY SECIION
Chealat
Chealat
Lab Technician
Lab Technician
-------
Virginia ITM Summary
I. Toxics Substances Authorities
A. Major toxic substances-related laws.
1. Virginia Toxic Substances Information Act.
2. State Water Control Law.
3. Air Pollution Control Law.
4. Hazardous Waste Management Act.
5. Virginia Occupational Safety and Health Act.
6. Virginia Pesticides Law.
7. Virginia Household Substances Act.
B. Major Agencies
1. State Health Department.
2. State Air Pollution Control Board.
3. State Water Control Soard.
4. Department of Labor and Industry.
5. Office of Emergency and Energy Services.
6. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
7. Department of General Services.
3. Department of State Police.
C. Other Agencies
1. Department of Commerce.
2. Department of Conservation and Economic Development.
3. Department of Health Regulatory Boards.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxic Substances Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. Virginia Toxic Substances Advisory Council.
2. Annual Report on the Status of
Control of Toxic Substances in the Commonwealth.
3. Council on the Environment.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. Consolidated Laboratories.
2. SEA Agreement to conduct research and develop
strategies for reducing the effects of toxic
substances on the Chesapeake Bay.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Information reporting requirements under the Virginia
Toxic Subst-ances Information Act.
2. Occupational disease and injuries, tumor and birth
defects reporting requirements.
-171-
-------
B. Data Coordination
1. Virginia Chemical Inventory.
2. Other toxic substances data collected by
each separate agency.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Class I priority chemical identification approach
rejected for Health Hazard Alerts.
2. Department of Health conducts toxicological evaluations
for other agencies upon request.
B. Risk Assessment Models
The Department of Health conducts several epidemiological
and short-term follow-up studies on key toxics related
problems, rather chan using a formal risk assessment model.
C. Emergency Management
Coordinated training and response program conducted by the
Office of Emergency and Energy Services and the Department of
State Police.
D. Current Character of Toxic Substances Control
Coordination is chiefly carried out through the Virginia
Toxic Substances Advisory Council and the Office of
Emergency and Energy Services.
--*172-
-------
Key State Officials
Governor: Charles S. Robb
Dr. Joseph L. Fisher
Secretary or Human Resources
Ninth Street Office Building
5 eh Floor
Richmond, Virginia 23219
804 786-7765
James B. Kenley, M.D.
State Health Commissioner
State Health Department
109 Governor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Mr. Robert V. Davis
Executive Director
State Water Control Board
P.O. Box 11143
Richmond, Virginia 23230
804 257-6384
Mr. William R. Meyer
Executive Director
State Air Pollution Control 3oard
1106 Ninth Street Office Building
Richmond, Virginia 23219
804 786-2378
Program Contacts
Dr. John A. Hilcken
Toxic Substances Director
State Eealth Department
1Q9 Governor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
804 786-1763
Robert B. Stroube, M.D.
Office of Health Protection and
Environmental Management
State Health Department
109 Governor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
804 786-6029
Mr. William F. Gilley
Division of Solid and Hazardous Wastes
State Health Department
109 Governor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
804 786-5272
-173-
-------
Dr. Woladmir Gulavich
Bureau of Hazardous Waste Management
State Health Department
109 Governor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
3C4 736-5271
Mr. Charles E. Harrigan
Bureau of Occupational Health
State Health Department
109 Governor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
8OA 786-6235
Mr. Harry K. Rust
Supervisor
Pesticide and Paint Section
Division of Product and Industry
Regulation
Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services
Washington 3uilding
1100 Bank Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
3OA 786-3798
-174-
-------
Virginia ITM
I. State Authorities Regulating Toxic Substances
Legislative authority over toxic substances management in Virginia
rests primarily wich enabling legislation for implementation of Federal
programs administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Food
and Drug Administration, Consumer Products Safety Commission, Department
of Labor, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Transportation
and others. Chief among these acts are the State Water Control Law, the
Air Pollution Control Law, che Hazardous Waste Management Act, the
Virginia Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Virginia Pesticides Law
and the Virginia Household Substances Act.
In addition to enabling legislation for Federal programs, Virginia
has passed a number of acts which expand the State's role. In 1976, the
State passed the Virginia Toxic Substances Information Act largely in
response to the Kepone incident. The Act stipulated that all chemicals
manufactured or used in manufacturing within the State must be reported
to the Health Department. In addition, the Act created an interagency
coordinating mechanism, the Virginia Toxic Substances Advisory Council
which reviews and makes recommendations on toxic substances policy
issues to the Board of Health. The Act also requires that an annual
report on the status of toxic substances control in Virginia be made to
the Governor and the General Assembly. Also contained in the Act is a
broad mandate to all State agencies to cooperate with the State Board of
Health in carrying out its mandate.
Additional legislation exists for toxics programs without a Federal
counterpart, including the regulation of fertilizers and paints, certification
of operators of water and water works, energy, and the consolidated
laboratory. In addition to the Toxic Substances Advisory Council,
another coordinating body, the Council on the Environment is mandated by
statute.
In the 1982 session of the legislature, Virginia amended the Toxic
Substances Information Act to delete the requirement that the State
evaluate toxic substances to develop a Class I list of those chemicals
thought to be most hazardous to health or the environment. In the past
six years, only two substances, asbestos and benzene, had been designated
as Class 1 chemicals. The Toxic Substances Advisory Committee recommended
that the Class I concept be eliminated after a cost-benefit analysis
indicated no benefit to the State and high costs to Industry and the
State. The Health Department felt that its limited staff time could be
better utilized in a more problem solving approach. The amendment did
not affect requirements on industry to report and update information on
chemical production, use and geographical data. Further, the Act still
requires industry to report any new information indicating a substance
may be hazardous to health or the environment.
Another amendment to the Toxic Substances Information Act which
proposed to change the confidential business Information disclosure
process, was defeated. Although some amending legislation was introduced
in the 1982 session on hazardous waste, no other major toxic substances
bills were introduced.
-175-
-------
II. Organizational Coordination In Toxic Substances Management
In Virginia, twelve different ag
programs to control toxic substances,
responsibilities are as following:
State Department of Health
State Air Pollution Control
Board
State Water Control Board
Department of Labor and
Industry
Department of General
Services
Office of Emergency and
Energy Services
Department of the
State Police
Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services
encies manage twenty-two different
The major agencies and their
Toxic Substances Information
Hazardous Waste Management
Occupational Health
Epidemiology
Sewage Waste Water
Air
Water
Occupational Safety and Health
Mining
Consolidated Laboratory Services
Hazardous Materials Emergency
Response
Transportation of Hazardous
Materials
Pesticide
Hazardous Household Substances
The primary toxic substances coordinating mechanism between agencies
rests with the Toxic Substances Advisory Council. It is charged with
reviewing and evaluating policies and programs on toxic substances and
making recommendations to the State Board of Health. It was created by
the Virginia Toxic Substances Information Act and has broad representation
from every major agency working on toxic substances problems. It consists
of five appointed members and twelve ex-officio members. The Governor
appoints one member each from the areas of agriculture, medicine, labor,
industry and local government. Ex-officio members are the chairpersons
of the following State agencie: Water Control Board, Air Pollution
Control Board, Board of Conservation and Economic Development, Labor and
Industry, Marine Resources, Agriculture and Consumer Services and the
Council on the Environment. The Council meets at least four times a
year.
The State also has a Council on the Environment created by the
Virginia Environmental Quality Act of 1970. Commissioners from each of
eight different agencies and two citizen representatives appointed by
the Governor serve on the Council and advise the Secretary of Commerce
and Resources. It meets quarterly and is responsible for permit coordination
environmental education programs and reviewing regulations or policies
at the request of the Secretary.
-176-
-------
Another important tool for inter-agency coordination is the Annual
Report to the General Assembly and Governor on the Stat-as of Control of
Toxic Substances in the Commonwealth by the State 3oard Health. Required
by the Toxic Substances Information Act, -he Report describes each major
State program and its activities for controlling toxics, including
Federal and State rules and regulations, strategies, current activities,
future plans, primary contact persons, legal authority, and budget
and information. 3y providing information on program activities and
agency responsibilities, the report greatly assists personnel to quickly
identify appropriate programs or individuals for their needs. The
report also gives an annual update on the chemical inventory, occupational
disease reports and other key toxics policies and programs.
Although authority for the State's toxic substances programs is
spread among several different agencies, the State Health Department has
responsibility for management of several toxics programs. Its Office of
Health Protection and Environmental ?ianagement reports directly to the
State Health Commissioner and includes toxic substances information,
hazardous waste management, occupational health, epidemiology, radiological
health and sewage waste water management.
The program with primary responsibility for toxic integration is
the Bureau of Toxic Substances Information. The Bureau staffs the Toxic
Substances Advisory Council and drafts the annual report. Operating
under the Virginia Toxic Substances Information Act, the Bureau gathers
and evaluates manufacturing and health data on chemical substances in
the State. It has completed an initial chemical inventory and has
computerized that data. It also has computer access to national health-
related data bases. The Bureau has two toxicologists on staff and
evaluates information on toxic substances upon request from other programs,
from local governments and from the public, but does not regulate.
The Bureau of Occupational Health shares the administration of the
Virginia Occupational Safety and Health Standards with the Department of
Labor and Industry. The Bureau has primary authority over the health
portion of the State OSHA program and is responsible for identification,
evaluation and control of health hazards. Twenty-two inspectors are
responsible for occupational health enforcement. In addition, the State
employs occupational health consultants which assist employers at their
request in evaluating and improving occupational and health protection
on a voluntary basis without penalties or enforcement actions.
Epidemiological studies and short term investigations are conducted
by the Health Department's Division of Epidemiology. The Division
conducts 20-25 studies a year on toxics-related problems for different
programs within the Health Department and for other State agencies.
Authority for toxics in water is shared by several agencies. The
Division of Water Programs within the Health Department has responsibility
for drinking water quality and has issued joint regulations with the
State Water Control Board governing sewerage. The Water Board has
-177-
-------
issued several reports on toxic pollutants and has agreed in its State
EPA Agreement to further develop strategies for reducing the effects of
toxic substances on the Chesapeake Bay. In addition, it plans to develop
a toxic monitoring strategy and increase its investigations concerning
the effects of toxic substances in the aquatic environment. Although
the Board develops standards, policies and plans, as well as conducts
inspections and issues discharge permits, authority for actual certification
of water and waste water treatment plant operators rests with the Department
of Commerce.
Authority for Virginia's air program rests with the State Air
Pollution Control Board. Although the Board operates primarily under
enabling legislation to adopt Federal standards, the State does have
additional authority under the State Air Pollution Control Law, which
has enabled the Board to issue regulations governing airborne toxics.
Laboratory analysis for all State agencies is conducted by the
Division of Consolidated Laboratory Services in the Department of General
Services.
III. Information Management
The Virginia Toxic Substances Information Act gives the State
Department of Health primary responsibility as the State's toxic substances
information agency. The Act requires that all chemicals manufactured,
or used in manufacturing within the State be reported to the Health
Department. The Bureau of Toxic Substances Information was established
in the Department's Office of Health Protection and Environmental Management
to collect and evaluate the information to determine toxicity and potential
threats to health or the environment. The initial Chemical Inventory
was computerized and is available to State agencies and to the public.
It contains over 30,000 pages o£ computerized chemical, manufacturing
and geographical data. The Act has reporting procedures for confidential
business information and strict penalties for their violations. This
data is contained in a separate computer system with very limited access.
The Bureau also has access to several medical, environmental and toxicological
data systems. The Bureau has toxicologists on staff which conduct
evaluations on toxics problems for other programs, local governments,
the public and agencies upon request.
New substances manufactured or used in manufacturing are required
to be reported if they are new ventures. New substances do not have to
be reported before they reach the market, but must be reported by the
end of the year. Significant changes are reported annually.
Virginia requires physicians to report incidents of occupational
disease and injuries due to toxic substance exposure to the Health
Department.
-178-
-------
Additional data on toxic substances is gathered by individual
agencies and stored separately. Other programs and agencies do share
information on an ad hoc basis and utilize the Health Department's
Division of Epidemiology, Chemical Inventory and toxicological evaluation
services.
Although the State's occupational health information is not computerized,
Virginia is one of 24 states that will become part of a Federal OSHA
data bank, the Management Information System.
IV. Toxic Substances Control
The Bureau of Toxic Substances Information issues Health Hazard
Alerts on key toxic problems. These advise the public of hazards and
precautions which should be taken to reduce or prevent exposure. Nine
have been issued, including topics such as urea-formaldehyde foam insulation,
pentachlorop'nenol-treated lumbeT and asbestos. The alerts are disseminated
to varying audiences targeted to reach the affected public for each
hazard. In addition, the Bureau conducts toxicological evaluations for
other programs and agencies. The State has not developed a formal risk
assessment model, but the Division of Epidemiology conducts several long
and short-term follow-up studies on key toxics problems. Recent legislation
amended the Toxic Substances Information Act to delete the requirement
that the State evaluate toxic substances to develop a Class I list of
Chose chemicals thought to be the most hazardous to health or the environment.
Emergency response work is carried out in otheT departments within
the State, chiefly the Office of Emergency and Energy Services and the
Department of State Police. The State''lias a new program which is designed
to coordinate response by Federal and SCaee agencies, local governments,
commercial, contractor and charitable organizations to hazardous materials
accidents and incidents. Teams, composed of personnel from a variety of
State agencies, will respond to assist in control and clean-up of hazardous
materials incidents. Coordinated and combined training programs are
being developed.
An additional compliance training program has been held for State
troopers on the rules and regulations on transportation of hazardous
materials.including radioactive materials. This training program is
being integrated with the existing motor carrier safety compliance plan.
-179-
-------
V.
Current Status and Analvsis
The chief toxics management problems in Virginia are hazardous
waste disposal facility and toxic pollution of the James Oliver and the
Cheasapeake Bay. The State Health Department and the Legislature are
working together to revise State laws and regulations to tighten hazardous
waste management and enforcement procedures and to more closely align
them with Federal RCRA regulations. The State Vater Board has given
high priority to assessing toxic pollution in the Cheasapeake Bay. The
Board is developing a toxics monitoring strategy and is stepping up
investigations concerning the effects of toxics in the aquatic environment.
Although Virginia's toxic substances programs are spread among
twelve different agencies, several existing management structures exists
to help coordinate activities. The Virginia Toxic Substances Advisory
Council and the Council on the Environment assist in breaking down
barriers between separate agencies and in coordinating policies and
programs on toxic substances. The Toxic Substances Annual Report greatly
facilitates inter-agency coordination by providing information and a
contact person for every State program with responsibility for toxic
substances control. The State's newly initiated emergency response and
hazardous waste transportation programs will develop important inter-
agency response, training and enforcement programs. The State Health
Hazard Alerts, toxicological evaluations and epidemiology services
provide excellent assistance for other toxics programs in the State.
The relative smallness of the State's environmental program offices also
assists in improving inter-agency coordination. Further, all agencies
are mandated under the Virginia Toxic Substances Information Act to
coordinate information and strategies for solving toxics problems in the
State.
The Virginia General Assembly has repeatedly rejected reorganization
attempts designed to place all existing environmental regulatory agencies
in a single larger agency. However, the Health Department has grouped
together environmentally related programs under the Office of Health
Protection and Environmental Management. That office is implementing a
more coordinated problem solving approach to maximize limited staff and
financial resources. Other State agencies, such as the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services, with multiple programs have similarly
organized their toxics related programs under one head. Greater sharing
of data from the State's tumor, occupational disease and birth defects
reporting system, now primarily local and hospital based, could potentially
lead to identifying potential problems.
-180-
-------
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HfcALI rt
ORGANIZATION CHART
ttc**TA*y of
*yMA* MSOUKIS
Sua 3o«m 91 *«ntn
COMMISSION** Of Mg^UTH
9CPVITY COMMISSIONER
3IVWON 0'
K?f\t .MLATT0N3
UAMACIMtNT
OM«Ct 0# *€AC*W •U.'«NI1l3
k MS04J*CfS OtVCLO^MfMT
9#fid of AOMwirriunoN
4 17AM SJftVtCU
OlVWO* Of VITAL
MC0«0* AMO
HfAit* rrAfirrics
OtVUlO* Of HlAkl
I0UCAT1ON A«0
iNfCAMATlOK
lASTtfiH ^MIOM
I 3IV41QN Of
U SliOtCAC (XAMlttl*
i anvcis
OtV<$IO« Of
^J*OlAIINQ AMO
MMIHAI. JMVlCU
-/tsri*N msiqn
DIVISION Of H«CA|
XMO ACCflUMtl^d
gwvcn
*0*TXf*N MO^CN
OIVtStOM Of H4AITM
'IAMMIN<3
0*OCt«tN<3
j 31 vision if iwrjency
i «€rv 4€awtw uftvtcu
offtcs of n*< *«o«uc tXMfiMi*
Mov«C«fr 19S1
-------
Wisconsin ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics Related Legislation
1. Chapter 144, Subchapter III 144.30-Air Pollution Control
2. Chapter 144, Subchapter III 147.01-Water Pollution
Discharge Elimation.
3. Chapter 144, Subchapter II 144.43 - Solid Waste,
Hazardous Waste and Refuse.
4. Chapter N.R. 157 - Management of PCS'3.
5. Chapter 364 101.58-Employees Right-to-Know.
6. 55140.05 - Pesticide (DHSS).
7. Ag 29 Pesticide Regulation.
B. Major Departments
1. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
2. The Department of Health and Social Services
(DHSS).
3. The Department of Agriculture (DATCP).
C. Other Department/Off ices
1. The Department of Labor (DOL).
2. The Department of Transportation (DOT).
3. The Division of Emergency Government (DEG).
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate
1. ¦ No comprehensive ITM legislation exists in Wisconsin.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts
1. The Pesticide Review Board, the Pesticide
Technical Advisory Council, the Governor's Task
Force on Hazard Abatement, and the "Wisconsin
is watching" Program.
2. Agency task force cormittees.
3. The DNR Toxic Substances Survey for the Great
Lakes Basin.
4. Joint agency use of State Laboratory of
Hygiene facilities.
-182-
-------
5. Legislative Council Special Committee on
Groundwater - Technical Advisory Committee.
[II. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Use of DHSS Bureau of Health Statistics data.
2. Limited State reporting requirements.
3. Permit and licensing application.
4. DNR and CHSS monitoring.
5. DHSS Epidemiology Section Studies.
6. Poison Center.
B. Data Coordination
1. Data is collected and stored by individual
agencies.
C. Information Availability
1. The DHSS publishes a newsletter for
State and local health professionals.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Problem Identification and Ranking
1. Input is received from DNR regional
officer, local health departments, citizen complaints, local
physicians and CNR/CHSS investigations.
2. No priority setting process has been established.
B. Risk Assessment Models
1. The DHSS Epidemiology Section uses risk
assessment models, prepared by other offices
when advising on risks. Hazard assessments
using the SNARL approach are used for non-
regulated water contaminants,
C. Current Character of Toxic Control
1. The DNR has been provided the environmental
oversight authority.
-183-
-------
Kev State Officials
Governor: Anthony Earl
State Capitol
Madison, WI 53702
Donald Percey
Secretary
Wisconsin Department of Health and Human Services
P.O. 3ox 309
Madison, WI 53701
Kenneth Rentmeester
Administrator
State of Wisconsin Division of Health
P.O. Box 309
Madison, WI 53701
Carroll Besadny
Administrator
Department of Natural Resources
101 South Webster Street
Madison, WI 53707
Program Contacts
Mr. Llycd Lueschow
Assistant Administrator
Division of Environmental Standards
Department of Natural Resources
101 South Webster Street
Madison, WI 53707
(608) 266-6977
Henry Anderson, M.D.
Chief, Section of Environmental Epidemiology
Wisconsin Departirent of Health and Social Services
P.O. Box 309
Madison, WI 53701
(608) 266-1253
-184-
-------
Wisconsin ITM
I. State Legislative Authorities Directing Toxic Contrsl
For the nost part, Wisconsin has taken its legislative lead from
the Federal government. Excluding hazardous waste laws, the State's
legislative requirements do not exceed that of the Federal government.
Major toxics related legislation in the State includes:
1. Chapter 144, Subchapter III i44.30 - Air Pollution Control.
2. Chapter 144, Subchapter III 147.01 - Water Pollution Discharge
Elimination. "All rules ... shall not exceed the requirements
of the Federal Water Pollution Act."
3. Chapter 144 subchapter II 144.43 - Solid Waste, Hazardous
Waste and Refuse.
The Hazardous Waste requirements exceed the Federal RCRA by
requiring that all hazardous waste (no matter what quantity)
be disposed of in a State licensed facility. If the quantity
is over 100 !
hazardous waste, and PCB's in the Sheboygan River.
-185-
-------
II. Organizational Structure of Lead Agency/Official(s) on Toxics
Management
In Wisconsin, c'nere are three major agencies/offices with significant
toxics responsibilities: The Department of Natural 3.asourcas, the
Department of Health and Social Services, and the Department of Agriculture.
The Department of Labor, the Department of Transportation ana the Division
of Emergency Government are also active, but slightly less.
The Department of Natural Resources is granted the environmental
regulatory and enforcement authority. There are three basic divisions
within DNR: Environmental Standards, Enforcement, and Environmental
Impact. The Division of Environmental Standards is the most directly
involved with toxics. This division is organized by media (water quality,
air management, solid and hazardous waste management) bureaus. Communication
between the bureaus and the three major divisions appears to be ad-hoc.
Staff meetings, the telephone, and memos all comprise what DNS labels
"total interaction". Information and particular environmental problems
are referred by bureau staff to their counterparts. Apparently, this
informal interchange has been successful at DKrt and the level of staff
cooperation within the Agency is high.
The Department of Health and Social Service's (DHSS) Division of
Health is the most active of the Divisions in toxics control. A number
of Bureaus are located within the Division including the 3ureau of
Planning, the Bureau of Health Statistics and the Bureau of Community
Health and Prevention. The Epidemiology Section is a major focus for
the State's Toxics Management. DHSS has emphasized the need to place
health effects surveillance and research at the same level as environmental
pollution control programs. It is the State's position that the epidemiological
approach to disease prevention and control, although known and successfully
applied throughout the State for communicable disease control, has not
really begun its development for environmentally-caused health problems.
The Epidemiology Section has become increasingly involved in a number of
areas, however. Under a TSCA Section 28 grant, the Epidemiology Section
conducted a study on formaldehyde vapor-related health problems in
mobile homes. The results of this study have been published and presented
to a number of public health conferences. This section has also cooperated
with State and local agencies on other Wisconsin public health concerns
including:
1.
Sheboygan River contamination
by PCB;
2.
Reported "clusters of chronic
diseases";
3.
Occupational exposures;
4.
Volatile organic chemicals in
drinking water
5.
Chemical spills;
6.
Agent Orange exposure and
7.
School Asbestos program.
-186-
-------
The Epidemiology Section, has initiated inter-agency activity on
health issues such as:
1) Adding parental occupational information to birth certiiicates.
2) Revising disease reporting statutes to include toxic exposures
and occupational illnesses.
At the intra-agency level, the Epidemiology Section has represented
the Department on a number of multi-department activities such as the
Pesticides Review 3oard, the Pesticide Technical Advisory Council, the
Governor's former Task Force on Hazard Abatement and the "Wisconsin is
Watching" program. The Section has also established a close working
relationship with various programs in the Department of Agriculture,
Natural Resources, Justice, Energy, Transportation, Emergency Government
and Industry, Labor and Human Relations.
The Department of Agriculture is responsible for the management of
pesticides. The Department interacts with the DNR on the disposal of
pesticides, the Department of Health and Human Services on human exposure
concerns and the Department of Transportation on transportation regulations
and spill emergencies.
Although communication among the three key agencies is primarily
ad-hoc, it is important to explain in more detail the formal cooperative
activities: The Pesticide Review Board, the Pesticide Technical Advisory
Council, the Governor's former Task Force on Hazard Abatement and the
"Wisconsin is Watching" Program. Other intra-agency committees have
been established on a short-term case-by-case basis. The Pesticide
Review Board is composed of the DHSS, DNR, and DOA Department Secretaries.
The Board makes final decisions on inter-agency pesticide disputes while
the technical Advisory Council provides background information. The
Council includes DNR, DHSS, and DOA staff as well as industrial, agricultural,
environmental and academic representatives. The Council meets monthly.
The Governor's Task force on Hazard Abatement was created in order
to develop a Hazardous Waste Siting Bill. Again, members of the Task
Force included Agency, industry and citizen representatives. Once the
bill was written, the task force disbanded.
The fourth integration mechanism "Wisconsin is Watching" is a
response network with intra-agency surveillance. A 24 hour hotline vas
arranged to report illegal hazardous waste dumping and DNR, DEG, State
police and local officials are primarily involved.
III. Information Management
The Bureau of Health Statistics within the Department of Health and
Human Services collects morbidity and mortality records, birth records,
etc. Every two to three years the Bureau assembles the Hospital Discharge
Survey. The Survey collects information on hospital medical diagnosis,
surgical operations, therapeutic procedures and demographic statistics.
The Bureau's data is beginning to be utilized as a way of identifying
site-related toxic problems. In addition, Wisconsin has established a
cancer reporting requirement for physicians.
-187-
-------
The DNR manages the information provided by State reporting requirements.
Hazardous waste producers and mercury users provide limited information,
and the State industries report on the volume of effluent discharged and
the amount of each pollutant. Although Wisconsin has not established a
comprehensive industrial survey or developed air, water, or waste site
inventories, the State's permit and license application process supplies
some information on the industries, chemicals, and volumes produced in
the State.
Information is also gathered from monitoring which DNH and the DHSS
Epidemiology Section conduct. For example, one of DNR's major projects
was to survey Toxic Substances in Lake Superior, Lake Michigan and
tributaries. The Survey listed the toxic chemicals present in the
waters. The DHSS Epidemiology Section also conducted an extensive
monitoring program for the mobile-home formaldehyde study. When resources
and time permit, the Section also conducts additional monitoring programs.
The Regional Offices for DNR and DHSS will also initiate occasional
field monitoring when a specific problem arises.
Data is stored by each agency; there are no formal methods for
sharing this information. If information is needed or data surfaces
which may be of interest, agency staff will utilize informal communication
channels. The DHSS Bureau of Community Health and Prevention publishes
a "newsletter" which provides information to local health departments,
hospitals, doctors and the public on health problems occasionally related
to toxics.
The State Laboratory of Hygiene houses Wisconsin's laboratory
facilities. Consequently, Wisconsin agencies use the State laboratory
to obtain their lab analyses.
Wisconsin has not developed a method for setting environmental
priorities.
IV. Toxics Control
In Wisconsin, specific chemical problems are identified through the
six DNR regional offices, local health departments, citizen complaints,
local physicians and DRN/DHSS investigations. As mentioned, the State's
chemical problems are not prioritized in a consistent fashion. Wisconsin's
response is definitely reactive or as one official said, "the State is
in a fire fighting stance."
The DHSS Epidemiology Section is beginning to use risk assessment
models developed and used nationally. For situations of exposure where
air and water standards and contamination levels do not exist guidelines
are sometimes issued.
The State has developed an emergency response plan. The Division
of Emergency Government is responsible for coordinating this effort,
while the DNR spill response team is also active. A DHSS chemical alert
system is a part of this plan.
-188-
-------
V. Analysis
The State of Wisconsin's major toxic concerns are pesticides,
groundwater contamination, toxic air emissions, occupational exposure
poisonings and hazardous waste. Information gathering and management is
somewhat limited.
The State's inter-agency integration activities have been quite
extensive. The key Agencies and offices have worked on a number of
cooperative projects, one of which created the Hazardous Waste Siting
Bill. These integration activities have primarily been arranged on a
case-by-case basis.
The office most active and committed on toxic substances control
appears to be the DHSS Epidemiology Section. Though the staff is small,
they have taken an active role in focusing Stace officials' attention on
toxics anc have initiated and participated in a number of joint Agency
efforts.
-189-
-------
Nj
I
rv>
CO
ro
State of Wisconsin
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES
Bureau of
Legal Services
Office of Planning
and Analysis
Bureau of Finance
Bureau of Management
ami Budget
DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
STANDARDS
****
Bureau of
Air Management
Bureau of
Solid Waste
Management
Bureau of
Wastewater
Management
Bureau of
Water Resources
Management
Technical
Services
Office of
Wastewater Operation
and Maintenance
DIVISION OF
ENFORCEMENT
****
Bureau of
Law Enforcement
Bureau of
Water Regulation
and Zoning
Office of
Environmental
Enforcement
Bureau of
Environmental
Impact
OFFICE
OF THE
SECRETARY
Deputy Secretary
Executive Assistant
FIELD
DISTRICTS
****
Southern
Southeast
Lake Michigan
West Central
North Central
Northwest
Office of
Intergovernmenta 1
Programs
**-%*
Bureau of
Aid Programs
Bureau of
Water Grants
i
DIVISION OF
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
****
Bureau Of
Engineering
Bureau of
Fish Management
Bureau 6f
Wildlife Management
Bureau of Forestry
Bureau of
Parks and Recreation
Bureau of Real Estate
Bureau of Research
Office of Lands
Office of Endangered
and Non-Game Species
DIVISION OF
MANAGEMENT
SERVICES
****
Bureau of
Information
and Education
Bureau of
Information
Management
Bureau of
Program Services
Jureau of Personnel
Office of Employe
Development
Affirmative Action
Office
Information
Management
Planning
-------
Washington ITM Surnnary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics - Related "Legislation
1. Environmental Policy Act
2. State Health Codes
3. Pesticide Control Act
4. Clean Air Act
5. Water Pollution Control Act
6. Hazardous Waste Disposal Act
7. Solid Waste Management Act
8. Open Public Meeting Act
9. Surface Mining Act
10.' Public Regulation of Groundwaters
11. Pesticide Health Hazards Act
B. Major Agencies
1. Department of Ecology (DOE)
2. Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS)
3. Department of Agriculture (DQA)
4. Department of Labor and Industries (DLI)
C. Other Agencies
1. Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate - NO explicit ITM legislation currently
exists.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts.
1. Emergency Response Plan.
2. Annual coordination meeting.
3. Puget Sound Water Quality Management Program.
4. Pesticide Advisory Board.
5. Ad hoc pesticides coordination.
6. DSHS - local health offices coordination.
7. Other informal, ad hoc efforts.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. DOE monitoring and reporting data stored on separate
computerized files.
2. Chemical data computerized and classified by SIC codes.
-------
-2-
3. Chemical information gathered by DOE inspectors.
4. OSHA reporting requirements.
•5-. Occupational disease^ incident. records- maintained <
industry.
6. Pesticides labeling program.
7. Tri-state pesticides program.
.8. Occupational health information gathered by DSHS.
9. Birth certificate information.
10. Vital statistic data.
11. Laboratory data.
12. Epidemiological studies.
13. Fish tumor studies.
14. Cancer Register
15. Pesticide Poisoning Monitoring
B. Data Coordination
1. DOE monitoring and reporting data stored on separate
computerized bases.
2. Chemical data computerized and classified by SIC codes.
3. Computerized DLI data.
4. Computerized abstracts of pesticides labeling information.
5. Great majority of OSHA data computerized.
IV. Toxics Control
A. Copper smelter incident
B. Puget Sound Water Quality Management Program
C. Hazardous waste problems
1. Ten Superfund sites
D. Water pollution difficulties
1. Puget Sound urban erabayments
2. Groundwater
3. Surface water
E. Pesticides problems
1. 2, 4-D
2. Spraying of herbicides in non-target areas
3. Endrin
-------
-3-
State Contacts
Earl Tower, Director
Solid Waste Management Division
Department. of Ecology
Mail Step pV-11
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-459-6316
Jim Knudson
Hazardous Waste Section
Department of Ecology
Mail Stop FV-11
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-459-6302
Joan Thcroas, Supervisor
Water Quality Management Division
Department of Ecology
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-459-6058
Glenn Smerdon
Pesticides Division
Department of Agriculture
Mail Step AX-11
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-753-5064
Lynden Baum
Pesticides Laboratory
Department of Social and Health Services
Mail Stop LD-11
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-753-5965
Floyd Frost
Office of Epidemiology
Department of Social and Health Services
1409 Smith Tcwer
Seattle, Washington 98104
206-464-6289
Aage B. Anderson, Regional Supervisor
Division of Industrial Hygiene
Department of Labor and industries
Mail Stop AX-31
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-753-4473
-------
-4-
Jim White
Office of Environmental Health Programs
Division of Health, DSHS
Mail Stop LD-11
Olynpia, Wasn. 9B504
Other Key State Officials
Governor - John Spellman
Donald W. Moos, Director
Department of Ecology
Mail Stop PV-11
Olyrtpia, Washington 98504
206-459-6000
Allen J. Gibbs, Secretary
Department of Social and Health Services
Mail Step B-44
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-753-7039
Sam Kinville, Secretary
Department of Labor and Industries
General Mministration Building
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-753-6341
M. Keith Ellis, Secretary
Department of Agriculture
406 General Administration Building
Olympia, Washington 98504
206-753-5050
-------
Washington IIM
I. Toxics Authorities
The State of Washington possesses a substantial number of laws and
regulations which deal directly or indirectly with toxic substances. The
State Agency whidi appears to 'play the' largest role in the control of toxics,
the Department of Ecology (DOE) / is mandated authority under the Envirorroental
Policy Act. The Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS), which is also
a major actor in this area, is granted the authority to protect the health
of the State's inhabitants under the State Health Codes .
The Pesticide Control Act gives the Department of Agriculture (DOA)
the responsibility of regulating and licensing pesticides application and
disposal. In addition, the Pesticide Health Hazards Act mandates DSHS to
investigate and establish procedures for the prevention of health problems
resulting from exposure to pesticides. The Department is also under contract
to U.S. EPA to enforce the section of FIFRA dealing with the labeling of
pesticide containers.
In addition, a third State agency, the Department of Labor and Industries
(DLI), is involved in toxics-related issues through their investigation of
the manufacturing and use of pesticides as they relate to worker safety
in plants and large field operations.
In addition to the aforementioned enabling laws, Washington possesses a
number of other statutes which pertain to the area of toxics control. These
laws include the Clean Air Act? Vfater Pollution Control Act; Hazardous waste
Disposal Act; Solid Waste Management Act; Open Public Meeting Act; Surface
Mining Act; Industrial Safety Health Act of 1973? and several water pollution-related
laws including the Public Regulation of Groundwaters. The authority to
establish standards for drinking water is granted to DSHS rather than DOE.
Finally, several bills recently have been passed by the State Legislature
which deal with issues such as increased criminal and civil penalties for
hazardous waste violators, waste reduction and recycling, and funding
mechanisms for State Superfund money and hazardous waste management activities.
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
One of the first efforts toward the coordination of toxics control
programs in Washington was the Hazardous Materials Mvisory Committee,
instituted under an executive order frcm the former governor. Although the
Committee is no longer in existence, the group was responsible for the
establishment of a State-wide emergency response plan which is in effect.
i
-------
A current integration mechanism is the annual coordination meeting
of representatives from three State agencies with U.S. EPA staff. This
meeting is used as a planning apparatus for those applying for and receiving
grant funds under the provisions of several Federal laws, such as the Clean
Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Public participation in these, meetings, is encouraged.
An amoitious, rou±ti-agency program currently under development is the
Puget Sound Water Quality Management Program. This program, sponsored jointly
by the State Department of Ecology and the U. S. EPA, is being designed to
clean up and maintain the Sound and the surrounding waters.
The area of pesticides management has fostered a rasnber of coordinating
programs within the State of Washington. The Pesticide Advisory Board, which
provides recommendations regarding policy directions, includes representatives
from DOE, DO A, DSHS, DLI, the Department of Natural Resources, the State's
universities, pesticide manufacturers and producers, and the pesticide
application industry. In addition, pesticide contamination of water supplies
has triggered a large degree of cctrmunication and cooperation between DOE
DOA, and DSHS.
In addition to the coordination efforts among State agencies, others
exist at the State and local levels. For example, DSHS works closely with
the local health agencies with regard to problems such as drinking water
protection and radiation exposure. These local health agencies are financially
independent of the State government, and are free to perform their own relevant
work.
These and other formal coordination mechanisms, such as the proposed
consolidation of the State's laboratories, are important steps towards the
effective control of toxics; however, other circumstances call for more
informal, ad hoc methods of coordination. Washington State agency officials
have recognized this fact and are prepared to implement these "less-
structured" means.
III. Information Management
If one were to characterize Washington1s information management
system, one would have to describe it as being very well established. Each of
the four agencies which primarily deal with toxic substances possesses its own
resources and capabilities in this area. The Department of Ecology has
excellent air and water monitoring programs as well as a hazardous waste annual
reporting system which is used to develop a hazardous waste generation inventory.
Facilities which treat, store or "dispose of hazardous waste are required to
report as well. The State does not require the chemical industry to report
data regarding chemical manufacturing, etc., but this information is often
gathered by inspectors in the field. Industry is, however, required to
maintain their own monitoring data which can be requested by the State at
any time. All data maintained by DOE is computerized and placed on separate
data bases. All chemical data is organized according to SIC codes.
ii
-------
The Department of Labor and Industries, which uses Federal OSHA
reporting requirements, has the authority to subpoena such information. DLI
also has"the right to investigate proprietary information. In addition,
industry within the State must maintain all records of occupational disease
incidents; these records can be subpoenaed by DLI.
The State Department of Agriculture maintains a very comprehensive
pesticides labeling program in addition to participating in a tri-state
program with Oregon and Idaho. Abstracts of the information which appears on
the labels are stored in a carputerized data file and aire readily accessible.
All registration information is kept confidential and is shared, to a degree,
with the other two states.
One of the more elaborate systems of information management within the
State of Washington is maintained by the Department of Social and Health
Services. The Department has been: compiling occupational mortality
information which is used for chronic disease assessment and prevention.
DSHS is currently working towards the upgrading of information placed
on birth certificates. The certificates now include occupational information
for each parent, but the Department is striving for better malformation
reporting. D6HS staff is also closely investigating fetal deaths around the
State. All vital statistic data and most comprehensive laboratory data are
ccmputerizec! and stored in DSHS's bases, (The Department does some lab work
under contract to the Department of Ecology; however, these data are kept by
DOE.)
DSHS personnel conduct a number of epidemiological studies each year,
usually in response to citizen concerns and suspected cancer clusters. To
date, no cause and effect has been determined as a result of these studies.
Investigations are also ongoing regarding fish tumor incidents in Puget Sound.
In connection with this problem, human consumption of fish is being studied.
Finally, the State of Washington possesses a Cancer Register which is
administered through the Hutchinson Cancer Center and is part of the National
Cancer Institute's SEER program. State officials are also closely involved
with the Oregon Comprehensive Cancer Registry, which serves part of Washington
State.
IV. Toxics Control
In general, when attenptiraj to oontrol toxics problems in Washington,
State agencies strive to work together as much as possible. For example, a
number of years ago, high levels of arsenic were found in the hair and urine
of children living in the vicinity of a copper smelter. After an investigation,
DSHS suggested that DC® 's air program and the occupational health program
within DLI, tighten their respective standards and more closely investigate
the situation. These actions were taken and the worker problem has since been
ameliorated. Carmunity environmental problems remain.
iii
-------
The Puget Sound program is another example of an integrated toxics
control effort. Participating agencies will be DOE.and DOA. These State
agencies, and others, are currently working with U. S. EPA in setting up
this program.
WdsfryngtQn has afairl}!;extensive hazardous waste and toxics disposal
problem, possessing ten of tlie 418' priority Superfund sites. The majority of
hazardous waste is shipped to an approved disposal site in Arlington, Oregon
and a missile site in Idaho.
The Hazardous Waste Act of 1976 makes a distinction between dangerous "
waste and extremely hazardous waste, which is considered a sub-set of
dangerous waste. Dangerous wastes are considered to be non-radioactive wastes
"which are disposed of in any such quantity or concentration as to pose a
substantial present or potential hazard to human health, wildlife or the
environment...". Extremely hazardous wastes, on the other hand, are
dangerous wastes which:
"(a) will persist in a hazardous form for several years or
more at a disposal site and which in its persistent form:
(1) presents a significant environmental hazard and may
be concentrated by living organisms through a food
chain or may affect the genetic makeup of man or
wildlife, and
(2) is highly toxic to man and wildlife..."
A secondary aspect of this classification scheme, which is described
in a background paper entitled "Determination of Harmful Quantities of
Hazardous Substances", is the use of criteria as designations thus avoiding
the problem of providing lists of Substances.
An area of growing concern within the State is that of water pollution.
In addition to the problems connected with the Puget Sound and its surrounding
bays, the State may have same rather serious groundwater contamination
difficulties. Officials are particularly concerned with potential problems
in the western section of the State where the groundwater level is high.
Problems have also arisen with regard to surface water. Those studying this
problem are focusing on the infusion of contaminated sediments into the
surface water.
A final toxics control area which has received a great amount of
attention is pesticides control. The State Department of Agriculture, and
other agencies, have recognized tfhe» fact that Washington has sane unique
pesticides - related problems which must be dealt with in an innovative
manner. For example, the State has banned the use of the pesticide 2,4-D,
in designated areas and at certain times of the year, due to its abverse
effects on grapes, a major source of agricultural revenue.
iv
-------
(Vineyards are often close to wheat fields where such spraying was prevalent.)
State officials are also closely investigating the unlawful spraying of
herbicides in non-targeted areas and the spraying of endrin in apple orchards,
which has lead to the contamination of game birds. Pesticides labs are
maintained by DSBS and DOS,
V. Analysis
In general, Washington's toxics control and integration efforts appear
to be very progressive and proactive. Each of the major State agencies possesses
good monitoring data, and other forms of data, which generally are well organized
(computerized) and openly shared among the other departments. State officials
have recognized that these data might be better organized and utilized through
the use of CSIN, and they will be contacting the CSIN staff with regard to
this in the near future.
Most of the specific problem areas within the State of Washington
appear to be well handled. For example, the State seems to have hazardous
waste difficulties under control, and there seems to exist a sufficient
knowledge of exactly what kinds and amounts of hazardous wastes are currently
present within the State. The State is also very active in water protection
particularly with regard to the cleanup of the Puget Sound. (EPA staff
has put Washington State officials in touch with Maryland officials regarding
the findings fran the recent Chesapeake Bay study These findings should
prove helpful due to the many similarities between the two water bodies.)
Finally, the most premising aspect of .Washington's toxics control and
integration efforts is the general cooperative atmosphere which apparently
exists among the State's agencies. There appears to be very little conflict
and competition among these departments? quite to the contrary, there seems
to exist a willingness to work together and coordinate efforts whenever
feasible. If this atmosphere persists, one could predict a continually
successful future for the State in its toxics control.
v
-------
Florida ITM Summary
I. Toxics Authorities
A. Major Toxics-Related Legislation
1. Florida Statute 403
2. Florida Pesticide Application Act of 1974, as
amended 1982
3. State Clean Air Act.
4. State Clean Water Act.
B. Major Agencies
1. Department of Environmental Regulation (DER)
2. Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services (DHRS).
3. Department of Agriculture (DOA).
C. Other Agencies
1. Department of Labor (DOL).
II. Organizational Coordination in Toxics Management
A. Legislative Mandate - No comprehensive ITM
legislation currently exists.
B. Major Cooperative Efforts.
1. Monthly meetings between DER and DHRS.
2. Pesticide Technical Council.
3. Coordination of land, air, and water programs
within DER.
4. Memoranda of Understanding.
III. Information Management
A. Means of Gathering Data
1. Air and water monitoring and sampling within DER.
2. Hazardous waste facility applications.
-------
3. Birth defects registry.
4. Cancer registry.
5. Reporting system for health effects from
pesticide exposure.
B. Data Coordination
1. Very limited coti|Hiter capability.
IV. Toxics Control
1. Emergency response plans.
2. No specific control programs.
Key State Officials
Governor: Bob Graham
Victoria Tschinkel, Secretary
Department of Environmental Regulation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
James Howell, Deputy Secretary
Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services
1323 Winewood Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Terry Cole, Assistant Secretary
Department of Environmental Regulation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Program Contacts
Larry Lukin, Director
Division of Environmental Programs
Department of Environmental Regulation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 487-1855
Howard Rhodes, Deputy Director
Division of Environmental Programs
Department of Environmental Regulation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 487-1855
-------
Paul Schcuboe, Environmental Specialist
Bureau of Drinking Vfeter
Department of Environmental Regulation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 488-3601
Rodney DeHan, Environmental Administrator
Groundwater Section
Department of Environmental Regulation
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 488-3601
Stephan King
State Health Officer
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
1323 Winewood Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 488-1234
Eanix Poole, Administrator
Environmental Health Program
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
1323 Winewood Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 488-1234
Eldert C. Hartwig, Administrator
Office of Laboratory Services
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
P.O. Box 210
Jacksonville, Florida 32211
(904) 354-3961 Ext. 3245
John Witte
State Epidemiologist
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
1323 Winewood Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
-------
Florida ITM
I. Toxics Authorities
The primary piece of legislation in Florida dealing with environmental
issues is Florida Statute 403. Although this Statute does not deal directly
with toxic substances, it serves as the enabling legislation for the
Department of Environmental Regulation, in addition to its encompassing
the pre-existing State Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, the Statute spells
out the mandated hazardous waste facility application and siting process,
with the respective roles of State and local governments being specifically
assigned. The Law also contains a sunshine provision which allows public
access to all environmentally - related information.
The Florida Pesticide Application Act of 1974, which was amended
in 1982, establishes a mandatory reporting system for adverse human health
effects from pesticide exposure. The Law also provides for the certification
and licensing of the applications of restricted-use pesticides. The 1982
amendments strengthened the original Act by mandating actions such as the
expansion of the Pesticide Technical Council, to be discussed below at
greater length.
The State agency most active in toxics-related issues is the
Department of Environmental Regulation (DER). The State Department
of Agriculture (DOA) is responsible for pesticide management, and both
agencies work closely with the State Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services (DHKS) with regard to health effects from
environmental exposure.
Included in DER's many responsibilities is enforcement authority for
Phase I of RCRA. in addition, the Department is responsible for regulating
public water systems. DHRS, and Florida's county health departments, have
jurisdiction over small private well systems and individual wells. Pollution
of underground water supplies is generally handled by DER, regardless of
how the groundwaters are ultimately used. Finally, certain State legislators
have proposed expanding DER authority to include jurisdication over pesticides
and underground tanks, as they affect groundwater.
II. Organizational Cooperation in Toxics Management
Before discussing sane of the cooperative efforts among Florida's
agencies, it is important to recognize the varying perspectives of each
actor. Florida possesses an Executive Management form of government under
which the heads of seme agencies, e.g. DHRS and DER, are appointed by the
Governor while others, e.g. the Commissioner of Agriculture, are elected.
This leads to an interesting interplay among "equal" department heads and
sometimes presents situations where the Governor may not have the final word.
-------
No formal legislative mandate for toxics integration currently exists
in Florida; however, several less-structured mechanisms have been established
which serve to heighten coordination and integration among agencies. One
such effort is the monthly meeting among representatives of DHRS and DER.
In addition to simply "comparing notes" on their respective projects, the
representatives attempt to designate responsibilities with regard to areas
of overlapping jurisdiction, such as data collection and groundwater '
protection. (Notes Groundwater contamination is an issue of great concern
in Florida due to the State's sandy, porous soil and water tables which
are generally close to the surface). The meetings are also used to develop
prospective and reactive responses to environmental problems.
Another major coordinating mechanism within the State is the nineteen-
member Pesticide Technical Council. Agencies represented on the body
include DER, EHRS, and of course, DOA. The Council's major responsibility
is to provide policy reccnmendations to the Commissioner of Agriculture, an
elected official. The Technical Council also investigates how pesticides
are registered in the State.
Additional methods of coordination utilized within Florida include
a number of memoranda of understanding among certain State agencies.
Through these agreements, respective areas of responsibility are determined
for each agency in order eliminate any confusion or neglected areas
resulting from overlapping jurisdictions. There is some danger of this
concerning drinking water supplies which are controlled by both DER and DHFS.
Finally, many State agencies are striving for in-house coordination
and integration in order to ameliorate redundancy and competition. Such
efforts are being made within DER with respect to the land, air, and water
programs.
III. Information Management
Not unlike many other states, Florida's information management
appears to include both strong and weak areas. One particularly ambitiajs
program is the State-wide cancer registry. This State possesses a particular
need in this area in that it has the highest death rate from cancer in the
nation. The problem was addressed by the State Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services in 1979 when it contracted with the Comprehensive
Cancer Center at the University of Miami to develop and operate the Florida
Cancer Data System (PCDS). Hospitals throughout the State have three
alternatives as to the manner in which they report cancer. They may use
the Confidential Identification Report (CIR) form which provides basic
information such as case identification, demographic information, site of
tumor, date of diagnosis, and whether the patient was treated or referred.
The form is to be submitted after the patient is admitted. The second
alternative, and the manner encouraged by EHRS, is for the hospitals to
-------
report to FCDS on the Confidential Report of Malignancy (CRM) form, a form
which is similar to the CIR but even more extensive in nature, without
coding the data on a coding strip. (Coding would be done by FCDS.) The
third alternative is for the hospital to complete the CRM and code the data.
Another premising information management effort is the State's
Congenital Defects Epidemilogical Surveillance System. This program, within
the DHRS, began as a pilot project in the five county area surrounding
Jacksonville in 1971. By monitoring all vital records, CDES is now operational
in all 67 Florida counties. In addition, the program employes a mechanism
whereby 36 "sentinel" hospitals and birthing centers voluntarily report
malformation incidents. These data are then analyzed in order to determine
possible trends and clusters which may have environmental causes. Negotiations
are currently underway to expand the voluntary participation to other hospitals
throughout the State. This program works in conjunction with CDC's birth
defects program.
In addition to the collection and analysis of air and water data,
the Florida DER also gathers information on hazardous waste within the State.
Florida Statute 403 requires "estimates of the composition, quantity, and
concentration of any hazardous waste identified or listed under this Act,
or combinations of any such waste and any other solid waste proposed to be
disposed of, treated, transported, or stored, and the time, frequency, or
rate at which such waste is proposed to be disposed of, treated, transported,
or stored..." Responsibility for the siting of hazardous waste disposal
facilities currently exists within the Regional Planning Caimissions
throughout the State.
Also, the State Department of Agriculture maintains a pesticide
incident monitoring system which was established under the Pesticide
Application Act of 1974. The Act requires all physicians to report all
pesticide-related illnesses or injuries to the nearest county health
department, which relays the information to the Department.
Finally, most of the environmentally-related laboratory work
within the State is performed by DER, DHRS, and the county health
departments. In general, DHRS has very broad laboratory capabilities in
the study of tissue samples, etc., while DER tends to concentrate on air
and water studies. Although DHRS performs all lab work connected
with drinking water, DER possesses enforcement responsibility under the
Safe Drinking Water Act. (Cooperative efforts between the two agencies have
prevented this descrepency from causing any real problems.) Extensive
lab work is also performed by the 67 autonomous county health departments.
A number of these county labs have better canpabilities than those at the
State level.
-------
The areas of information management which appear to be the weakest are
the general lack of data available within the State, its coordination among
agencies and the inability of interested parties to conveniently access
published data. The relevant State agencies possess little to no computer
capability. Birth defects and cancer registry data are stored within bases
at the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta; State officials have no access
to other major published computerized bases. Agencies such as DER and EHRS
are attempting to obtain greater capability, but a large amount of resources
will be needed in order to obtain this goal.
IV. Toxics Control
Save for certain emergency response plans, which are generally
coordinated at the local level, Florida currently lacks any formal toxics
control programs. However, State officials are looking towards the future
development of State-wide plans to address problems such as pesticide
contamination of groundwater. It is felt, however, that further problem
investigation and data compilation are needed before the plans can be
implemented in an effective manner.
V. Analysis
The most significant problem facing Florida, environmentally, is
that of its high water table and an interconnecting groundwater system which
is being assaulted by toxics. Temik, of which aldicarb is the major active
ingredient, is a systemic pesticide used to eliminate nematodes (microscopic
worms which devour small root systems). Because systemic pesticides are
placed directly into soil, groundwater contamination has become a problem.
To date, no epidemiological studies or health effects surveillance has been
done with respect to the problem, and the major source of data has been Union
Carbide, the manufacturer of Temik. There is still a question regarding the
degree of aldicarb*s persistence in Florida's unique environment. DER
and the State Health Officer have been working closely with the Commissioner
of Agriculture on this question and have served as advisors. One of the
reccnmendations of these officials, to greatly restrict or temporarily ban
the use of Temik, was recently enacted by the State. The Biscayne Aquifier
provides drinking water to much of the State; 90% of the population gets its
water to much of the State; 90% of the population gets its drinking water
from wells, most of them private. Florida DER is monitoring well water to
see where contamination has occurred; however, little has been discovered.
Florida needs to improve its data resources by gaining direct access
to major sources, perhaps through CSIN. DER and EHRS, as well as the State
Legislature, are investigating the current dearth of resources, such as a
State toxicologist, and actions may be taken to alleviate this problem in
the future. There is a perceived need far an integrated toxics management
network, and state officials are very interested in participating in
workshops dealing with areas such as risk assessment, date management, and
epidemiology.
------- |