OPEI Regulatory Development Series
A
to
Writing
-------
A
to Writing
This toolkit should be viewed and used as a resource supplementing the
series of ADP guidance and related training materials (including Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circulars and Executive Orders). It does
not replace or modify any portion of the ADP guidance or impose any new
requirements.
For information and guidance on the Analytic Blueprint (ABP) and other
Action Development Process policies advising consideration of innovative
approaches, contact the Regulatory Management Division in OPEI or visit
the EPA intranet at http://intranet.epa.gov/adplibrary/. The ABP guidance
can be found at http://intranet.epa.gov/adplibrary/adp/analyticblueprint/
documents/abp9-30-04.pdf
NATIONAL CENTER FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATION
It I /"* £" I
" I \
-------
Wky Ute Ttu* TovUdt\
The Innovation Toolkit for EPA Rulewriters supplements the well-established regulatory
development process (also known as the action development process or "ADP") during
which many options are considered. Specifically, this toolkit provides you with:
• A "problem-solving" framework for considering innovative approaches in the regulatory
process (page 5).
• Important factors when considering innovative approaches (page 7).
• Descriptive categories of innovative approaches (page 9) with concrete examples,
including ideas for potential regulatory applications (Appendix A—page 13).
This toolkit does not provide an exhaustive list of all innovative tools and approaches
potentially applicable in rulewriting. Effective use of the toolkit will depend on your
creativity. You are encouraged to read the first five sections as a guide, and then focus
on the examples in Appendix A (and in other sources, as noted) that are relevant to the
regulation you are developing.
The examples in Appendix A include innovative approaches used in regulations, pilot
projects, and programs at both the federal and state level. Many of the innovative
approaches were developed or adopted by EPA programs. In some cases, the approaches
were not used in regulations per se (that is, they may include non-regulatory components);
however, the innovative concepts can be modified to work as regulatory options.
-------
Contents
o
u
_D
ro
Innovation in Rulemaking 3
When to Consider Alternative Approaches 3
Problem Solving in Innovative Regulation Development 5
Important Factors for Considering Innovation 7
Measurable Goals 7
Information Quality Related to Risk 7
Public Involvement and Collaboration 8
Compliance 8
Geographical Elements 8
Statutory Support 8
Innovative Approaches 9
Performance-Based Approach 9
Market-Based Approach 9
Tailored Regulation and Other Sector Approaches 9
Other Incentives to Motivate Performance "Beyond Compliance" 10
Resources on Innovations 11
Conclusion.. ...12
-------
Appendix A 13
Performance-Based Approach 13
Plant-wide Applicability Limits (PALs) 13
Other Examples 13
Market-Based Approach 14
Clean Air Market Programs 14
Other Examples 15
Tailored Regulation and Other Sector Approaches 16
Dead Chemical Significant New Use Rules 16
Other Examples 17
Other Incentives to Motivate Performance Beyond Compliance 19
Pulp and Pa per Cluster Rules 19
Other Examples 20
Appendix B 23
Innovation Leading Questions 23
Q)
-------
DO
c
E
"5
c
|
Environmental protection encompasses a
broad range of environmental problems and
uses a growing set of tools and strategies to
address them. Over the past decade, EPA and
state environmental agencies have tested new
approaches that provide flexibility and reduce
costs while achieving improved environmental
results. These new approaches complement
the traditional regulatory structure, which
continues to be the essential foundation for
environmental protection. The purpose of
this document is to promote consideration of
effective, innovative approaches by you, the
rulewriter, during regulatory development.
Translating statutory provisions into specific
legally enforceable requirements is one of
EPA's core functions. It provides a significant
opportunity to integrate successful innovative
approaches into mainstream environmental
regulation.
Support at all levels of EPA is vital for
innovative approaches to be adequately
considered and appropriately used. Seek
direction and expect encouragement from
your management regarding the use of viable,
innovative approaches to address existing and
emerging environmental challenges.
When to Consider Alternative Approaches
As you are aware, EPA's guidance, Action Development
Process: Guidelines for Preparing Analytic Blueprints (see
below) asks rulewriters to consider a range of options
during several stages of regulatory development. The
summary below outlines the ADP steps where you, as
a rulewriter, can identify possible regulatory and non-
regulatory strategies, including innovative approaches,
early in regulatory design.
1. Preliminary Analytic Blueprint and Early Guidance
Workgroups are expected to prepare a Preliminary
Analytic Blueprint (PABP) for Tier 1 (Administrator's
Priorities) and Tier 2 (Cross-Agency Actions) actions.
For Tier 3 actions, the ADP recommended that
blueprints be developed (and some program offices
expect them). In the absence of a PABP, a planning
document often is created to guide the development
of a Tier 3 rule. During this stage, the workgroup
identifies the types of regulatory approaches to
consider, and agrees on a provisional plan for data
collection and analyses to support rule development.
It is important to list innovative approaches under
consideration in the PABP, because the data and
analyses needed to support an innovative approach
may be different from those of more traditional
regulations.
In addition, senior managers (Administrator, Deputy
Administrator, or Assistant Administrator (AA))
review PABPs—this review provides managers
with an opportunity to give explicit direction to
the workgroup, including the charge to consider
alternative approaches.
2. Detailed Analytic Blueprint
Workgroups also complete a Detailed Analytic
Blueprint (DABP) for Tier 1 and Tier 2 actions. Building
on the PABP, the DABP ensures that a comprehensive
analytical plan is developed and put in place to
promote analysis of a full range of policy questions
and different possible regulatory approaches.
Innovative approaches that are being considered
should be included in the DABP. The DABP includes
detailed plans for addressing risk, economics,
-------
stakeholder involvement, and other issues. The DABP
also specifies how the workgroup will satisfy statutory
and executive order requirements applicable to rule
development.
DABPs receive approval at the AA level, another
opportunity for management to provide general
direction to the workgroup (including the specific
consideration of alternative approaches). Blueprints
can be modified in later stages of the development of
the action, if necessary.
3. Workgroup Data Collection, Consultation, Peer
Review, Analysis, and Options Development
During this stage, workgroups develop and analyze a
range of options for the action (or regulation). While
conducting early analyses, information may come
to light that would point to an innovative approach
that had not originally been considered (and can be
included now). This stage is an appropriate point
to solicit feedback from stakeholders on alternative
approaches listed in the DABP—and to explore
approaches suggested by stakeholders in the
consultation process.
In addition to the three stages outlined above, there
may be other opportunities for considering innovative
approaches described in the ADP (such as, response
to public comment after a rule has been proposed),
as described in EPAs guidance.
1
i—t-
o"
3
Q)
CO
Consider innovative
approaches early in
rulemaking-during the
analytic blueprint stage-
and possibly in the final rule
when addressing public
comments.
Rulemaking
Process
-------
Problem
til Innovative
o
'"£ "£
c ^
DO W
J> C
O O
CO jU
(^
W rj^
^^
L_
0.
Environmental regulations address existing
environmental problems—and set the stage
for solving emerging challenges. Faced with
a range of often complex issues, you, the
EPA rulewriter, serve an important role as a
"problem-solver." The following "problem-
solving" framework can be used in the
regulatory context, among many others, to
help you define the environmental problem
at hand, identify a plan for addressing the
problem, and integrate innovative approaches
into the regulation. Inherent to being an
environmental problem-solver is a willingness
to consider (and select and implement)
regulatory and non-regulatory solutions (or a
combination of both) for addressing identified
problems. In combination with key ADP stages
described in Section I, the following framework
supports this approach.
1. Identify and define precisely the environmental
problem to be addressed
• Do you have all the information you need to fully
understand and address the problem? Have you
contacted a broad range of sources to gain valuable
input (such as, to identify pollutants, environmental
impacts, and environmental outcomes)?
• What is the desired result of addressing the
problem(s) and how will you measure the
effectiveness of the solution?
2. Develop potential regulatory and/or non-
regulatory solutions/options
• Have you identified the approach to address
the problem (including geography, ecology,
characteristics of community, risks)? Is there
completed research on the environmental problem?
• Have you identified a full range of traditional and non-
traditional, regulatory and non-regulatory approaches
that are supported by underlying statutory authority
and that may encourage "beyond compliance"
performance?
• Are there other stakeholders (within and outside
of EPA) with whom you are required to partner to
meet shared goals? Have you contacted affected
constituencies and others to identify approaches
used previously, glean lessons learned, or obtain
other relevant input?
• Can you set non-prescriptive performance goals for
addressing the problem so they allow use of flexible,
innovative approaches?
• Would information disclosure provisions (between
parties participating in an innovative approach and/or
to the public) encourage improved performance, aid
in implementation, or otherwise be meaningful?
-------
3. Evaluate and select regulatory and/or non-
regulatory solution(s) for the environmental
problem
• Would it be appropriate to use a mix of regulatory
and non-regulatory approaches?
• What are the pros and cons of each option (including
legality, feasibility cost)?
• Does the selected solution reflect a consideration of
the range of environmental, economic, and problem-
solving factors (including monitoring, enforcement,
and the type of entities and facilities involved) to
avoid unintended, negative outcomes?
• How much risk or uncertainty is associated with the
health or environmental impacts of the activity?
• What are the measurable goals that support the
solution?
The following problem statements (4 and 5) may
not appear to fit within the regulatory ADP. However,
including evaluation tools in rules—both "traditional"
and innovative—can help EPA assess the effectiveness of
the chosen solution after implementation. By doing so,
EPA and those responsible for implementing regulations
can determine immediate and long term results, and
plan for future actions accordingly.
4. Implement and periodically assess the solution/
option
• How can periodic monitoring of results be used to
assess the effectiveness of the solution? How can
the implementation phase allow for adjustment as
necessary?
5. Assess the long-term effectiveness of the solution/
option
• What are the mechanisms for reviewing the long-term
effectiveness of the solution and for assessing when
the environmental problem has been resolved?
• What are the "lessons learned" and how are they
provided to problem solvers?
Q)
C±. CO
o o
=> <•
Ozf
fi> CO
Q_ 5"
-------
twu>ort
-------
Public Involvement and Collaboration
Meaningful public involvement is especially important
when considering innovative approaches. Information
should be made available to the right people at the
right time. To that end, ensure that relevant information
is publicly accessible in a timely fashion. Present
information in a manner that is easy to understand for the
intended audience. EPA provides guidance and tools for
effectively involving the public in regulatory decisions.
Collaborative problem solving is the process of
convening stakeholders to craft workable solutions
to specific environmental problems (e.g., negotiated
rulemaking http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/aai/
negregfs.htm). In order to maximize the potential for
innovative solutions, consider the various levels of
collaborative activities possible. For example, identify
what EPA programs deal with the same regulated
community, and then consider the level of coordination
and information-sharing needed. Review the full
spectrum of potential stakeholders that could enhance
the likelihood of a successful innovation and engage
them at the appropriate level. Minimally, learn about
historical or ongoing discussions with affected parties
(including EPA programs that deal with the same
regulated community), potential partners, and other
constituencies. Enable collaborators to develop a shared
understanding of the problem and develop possible
innovation solutions through information exchange and
dialogue.
(For information on public involvement and
collaboration, see, page 11, Resources on Innovations.)
Compliance
Consider whether there are various degrees of
performance among the regulated entities potentially
affected by the innovative approach (such as a tailored
regulation approach or other incentives designed to
motivate performance "beyond compliance"). Careful
consideration is warranted to ensure that all sizes,
shapes, and types of affected regulated entities are
appropriately covered, whether they are historically
non-compliant, compliant, or exceed compliance. One
way to address this concern is to consider calibrating
the regulatory approach to match various performance
levels for the regulated community—ensuring that all
approaches are enforceable.
Geographical Elements
Determine whether there are geographical elements
(especially for a tailored regulation approach or a
performance-based approach) associated with the
given environmental problem. These geographical
characteristics may affect the scope of a rule or the
approach to controlling pollution in a specific region
or eco-system (for example, to address trans-boundary
pollution or area-specific pollution).
Statutory Support
Confirm that the underlying statutory authority is
adequate to support the innovation under consideration.
By their nature, new approaches are often not explicitly
reflected in authorizing law. Therefore, close consultation
with the Office of General Counsel and the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance is necessary to
determine whether incorporating an innovative approach
is a legal and viable option for a particular regulation.
n
B a
o o
-------
I
u
TO
2
a
-—
1
Innovative approaches developed and used
by EPA, states, and the regulated community
take many forms and serve many purposes.
The four categories of innovative approaches
described in this section, organize and
illustrate the wide range of options. Some
elements of the categories may overlap due
to the complementary nature of innovative
approaches. In addition, these innovative
approaches can be used in combination to
reach a desired goal, such as moving toward
superior environmental performance. In this
way, innovation may be viewed as a means to
an end.
Performance-Based Approach
A performance-based approach establishes an
environmental quality standard or goal and offers a
regulated entity options for deciding the best way to
achieve it. This approach takes advantage of an entity's
knowledge of its own processes and technology
without sacrificing accountability. The standards or goals
selected should be measurable and enforceable. An
example of this approach is the Plant-wide Applicability
Limit approach to New Source Review permitting under
Title I of the Clean Air Act. This approach also may
serve as the basis for other categories of innovative
approaches. For example, performance-based emissions
caps are a key component of some market-based
approaches such as Clean Air Market Programs.
Turn to Appendix A, page 13 for details on examples
and links to sources.
Market-Based Approach
Emissions/effluent trading and other market-based
incentives are being used on an increasingly wide scale
to achieve environmental goals in a more cost-effective
manner. Harnessing existing market forces, these
incentives can make a difference addressing efficiency
and cost considerations for industry. Examples of this
approach include Clean Air Market Programs, effluent
trading programs, faster chemical reviews, user fees,
deposit-refund systems, and preferential procurement
policies. These examples are among those examined
in EPAs National Center for Environmental Economies'
(NCEE) report: The United States Experience with
Economic Incentives for Protecting the Environment.
Turn to Appendix A, page 14 for details on examples
and links to sources.
Tailored Regulation and Other Sector
Approaches
Under this approach, a rule or program can be adapted
to address a specific environmental problem or to fit
a sector of the regulated community. Characteristics
of the environmental challenge (including the media,
geographic location, surrounding community, and
-------
ecosystem) or of the regulated industry can be key
factors for developing the best method of protecting
human health and the environment. For instance,
many regulations are developed that focus on the
environmental problems of a specific industry's
processes (for example, the consolidated federal air rule
for synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry
or alternative treatment options applicable for small
water systems). Tailoring applicable requirements to a
specific industry's needs and challenges can improve
compliance and reduce costs for both government and
industry.
Regulations can also be "clustered" or collectively
organized to help effectively address the unique needs
of a particular industry. This "sector approach" enables
EPA and states to group regulatory and voluntary
solutions that are "good fits" for a specific industry set.
The better an industry is able to understand the full
complement of applicable regulatory requirements and
take advantage of non-regulatory tools, the greater the
assurance that pollution control, compliance assistance,
and other relevant investment and expenditure
decisions will be well-met. One innovative sector
program approach is the Environmental Results Program
developed by Massachusetts and applied to dry
cleaning, printing/photo processing, auto repair/auto
paint industries, and other sectors in other states.
Another example is EPA's partnership with the specialty-
batch chemical sector that led to a voluntary phase-out
of the use of certain chemicals.
Turn to Appendix A, page 16 for details on examples
and links to sources.
Other Incentives to Motivate Performance
"Beyond Compliance"
Sometimes, innovative approaches (like those previously
described) have the potential to move environmental
performance beyond the minimum requirements
established by law. Other times, innovative approaches
deliberately set out to motivate superior performance
by: 1) targeting problems not traditionally regulated; 2)
disclosing information; 3) recognizing and rewarding
environmental leadership; 4) promoting continual
improvement; or 5) using other means.
Whether regulatory or voluntary, incentives can
encourage performance "beyond compliance."
For instance, providing environmental performance
information to the public can motivate facilities to
improve their environmental performance (and, thus,
the public's perception). At the same time, voluntary
programs can reward industry leaders and motivate
participants to improve their environmental performance,
without imposing additional enforceable mandates.
Examples include the Drinking Water Notification
requirements, the federal Energy Star product labeling
program, and the Smart Growth Program.
Another innovative tool, the Environmental Management
System (EMS), can assist entities in improving overall
environmental performance and achieving results
beyond required standards. Used by regulators
(federal and state governmental agencies) and
businesses alike, an EMS is an organizational tool for
planning, implementing, reviewing, and improving
operational practices and actions that drive business
and environmental goals. Although an EMS does
not guarantee any particular level of environmental
performance, it can be valuable as an organizational tool
helping a facility to achieve and exceed regulatory goals.
Furthermore, an EMS can often lead to improvements
in unregulated environmental aspects, such as pollution
prevention, since it requires an entity to look at its overall
environmental impact. Programs that encourage the use
of EMSs have been developed for a number of industry
sectors including egg producers and local wastewater
treatment facilities.
Turn to Appendix A, page 1 9 for details on examples
and links to sources.
oj_
j|
>
"
p;
~
10
-------
t/1
o
o
t/1
w
tj
Valuable reference and resource materials
regarding innovation are available throughout
EPA. Appendix A offers samples of innovative
projects, approaches, and tools accessible
via the EPA Innovations Catalogue, other EPA
Web sites, and elsewhere. The Innovations
Catalogue is a searchable, growing database
that includes a variety of information related
to EPA innovation projects (http://intranet.
epa.gov/innovation/catalog/). On the
Catalogue Web site, rulewriters can conduct
electronic searches for innovation projects
relevant to the rule being developed
and retrieve valuable contact information
(such as, project manager names and
numbers). Another source, the Innovations
Portfolio: Strategic Approaches for Leading
Change" (March 2005) highlights a broad
array of innovative projects that enhance
environmental performance (http://www.epa.
gov/innovation/portfolio). In addition, specific
Web sites exist for public involvement (http://
www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/public/
index.htm) and collaborative problem solving
(http://intranet.epa.gov/collaborations/).
Another useful source for information is the National
Center for Environmental Innovation (NCEI), in EPA's
Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation (OPEI). NCEI
can provide meaningful information on a wide range of
innovative approaches, programs, and initiatives and
can coordinate with EPA program offices and states that
have implemented innovative projects. For example,
some program offices are establishing innovation
centers such as such as the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response's (OSWER) Innovation Initiative
(http://www.epa.gov/oswer/IWG.htm) or the Office
of Air and Radiation's (OAR) Center of Excellence for
Air Innovations/Futures. The Innovation Action Council
(chaired by NCEI) is supported by a network of program
and regional staff involved in innovative programs.
The National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE)
in OPEI maintains a wealth of information regarding
innovative economic incentives or market-based
mechanisms, including the EPA report, The United States
Experience with Economic Incentives for Protecting the
Environment (EPA-240-R01-001, http://yosemite.epa.
gov/EE/epa/eerm.nsf/vwSER4336170C9605CAF8852569D
20076110F?Open Document).
There are numerous other informative reference materials
available outside of EPA. Some examples include the
Environmental Council on the States' (ECOS) Web site
for Ideas and Solutions on Environmental Information
and Regulatory Innovation (WISER) Web site (http://
www.ecos.org/wiser/); individual state sites (e.g.,
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
ERP http://www.state.ma.us/dep/erp/erppubs.htm);
and other stakeholder organizations' sites, such as the
National Academy of Public Administration (http://www.
napawash.org/pc_economy_environment/index.html
and Resources for the Future (www.rff.org).
11
-------
This toolkit invites you to apply a problem-
solving framework to your work during the
regulatory development process. Hopefully,
the methods it suggests and the resources it
targets will assist you in confidently exploring
and integrating new regulatory solutions into
core media programs.
As the nation continues to face complex environmental
challenges and as regulators learn to live with dwindling
budgetary resources, innovative solutions are increasingly
important to environmental protection. As you will see
from exploring the examples of innovative work on-
going in EPA, states, and the regulated community, many
benefits accrue from innovative regulatory approaches,
such as:
• Strategically addressing existing and emerging
environmental challenges,
• Improving environmental performance and promoting
superior environmental results, and
• Reducing costs for local, state, and federal
governments and industry to meet environmental
standards.
n
o
n_
12
-------
a
a
13
Performance-Based Approach
Plant-wide Applicability Limits (PALs)
Components: Plant-wide air emissions cap, emissions
profile.
Potential use: Rules for emission and effluent pollutants.
Challenge: New Source Review standards can in some
cases restrict changes in a facility that could otherwise
improve efficiency and reduce overall environmental
degradation.
Innovative Approaches: Establish air emission permits
that would focus on overall environmental performance
instead of the adoption of a particular technology.
Description: Parts C and D of Title I in the Clean Air Act
govern the New Source Review program (NSR). This
program requires an existing source to install modern
pollution control equipment when it undertakes major
modifications that increase emissions significantly. The
requirement is triggered if the modifications are not
considered to be "routine maintenance," or otherwise
exempted, and if they result in a "significant increase"
in emissions. A plant-wide applicability limit (PAL) is
a voluntary limit or "cap" on a facility's total emissions,
which is established based on the facility's historical
emissions. A facility can apply for and obtain a PAL
based upon its actual emissions baseline, without
obtaining a major NSR permit. PALs do not alter other
federally required unit specific controls (NSPS, RACT,
BACT, LAER, MACT).
Benefits: PALs can offer a number of advantages for
industry, permitting authorities, and the environment.
PALs are a response to the needs of some industries to
make rapid adjustments in a fast-paced marketplace
(e.g., changing product lines). As long as their emissions
stay within the limits of the cap (PAL), facilities can
make changes to their operations while avoiding the
wait necessary to obtain a major NSR permit. PALs also
provide certainty and operational flexibility. The public
obtains a complete picture of the emissions profile of
the source and is assured of an opportunity for public
participation in the event emissions increase in the
future. PALs can also facilitate and encourage emissions
reductions and pollution prevention (P2) by focusing
company attention on reducing the overall level of plant-
wide emissions. A 2001 EPA review of flexible air permit
programs (including PALs) revealed that companies
significantly reduced actual plant-wide emissions
and/or emissions per unit of production (e.g., sources
with at least five years of implementation experience
under flexible permits reduced VOC emissions within
a range of 35 to 85 percent). The flexible permits also
led to economic benefits for both the companies and
the permitting authorities (including permitting authority
staff time freed up for redirection into addressing higher
environmental priorities). Finally, the review revealed
that flexible permits including PALs generally work as
intended, assuring appropriate environmental protection
under all applicable requirements including SIPs for
compliance with NAAQS). Overall, PALs help to better
align air permitting to encourage emissions reductions
and pollution prevention while maintaining or enhancing
environmental protection.
Best Use: PALs are most appropriate when regulated
entities: 1) can demonstrate a need for operational
flexibility; and 2) are prepared to demonstrate sufficient
technical capacity and commitment to operate under
the more rigorous emissions and to change monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements that flexible
permits require. An entity's past compliance history can
be an important indicator of capacity and commitment
for flexible permitting techniques.
Reference: http://www.epa.gov/ttncaaa1 /t5/meta/
m24005.html
Other Examples
Production-based Performance Standard: Through
EPA's Project XL, Intel Corporation's Ocotillo facility (in
Arizona) entered into an air quality permit (with EPA, the
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, and local
pollution control boards) using an EMS with a facility-
wide air emissions cap to replace individual permits
for different sources at the site. This arrangement gave
Intel the flexibility to make equipment and process
-------
changes without air quality reviews, as long as the site
emission limits were not exceeded and all other permit
conditions were met. In addition to the site-wide cap
on air emissions (VOCs, CO, HAPs, etc.), Intel voluntarily
established a production-based performance standard
(expressed annually in tons of emissions per year per
unit of annual production) to ensure that air emissions
per unit of production would not increase. The company
has found these performance-based concepts to be
beneficial and is implementing similar innovations at
other facilities. EPA has recognized significant reductions
in solid and non-hazardous waste and substantial
water recycling results. http://www.epa.gov/ProjectXL/
intel/0998.htm
MACT Rule for Pharmaceuticals: Section 112(d) of
the Clean Air Act requires EPA to regulate emissions of
Hazardous Air Pollutants by new and existing sources to
the level achievable by the Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT). Pharmaceutical production facilities
are captured under this rule. The rule gives the industry
the option of installing new emission control equipment
or by meeting an alternative, pollution prevention,
performance-based standard that shifts the focus to
improving production processes. These alternative
standards require plants to significantly reduce
toxic air emissions from their operations by process
improvements such as recovering or recycling solvents.
The rule also contains an "emissions averaging" provision
that allows facilities flexibility to choose where in their
operations to focus emissions controls. (63 FR 50279,
September 21,1998; 65 FR 52587, August 29, 2000; 40
C.F.R. §63.1252)
Merck & Co. Project XL Emissions Reductions (Merck
Stonewall Plant XL Project): Merck's pharmaceutical
manufacturing facility in Elkton, Virginia participated in a
project to comply with requirements to limit (or "cap")
certain pollutant emissions below recent actual levels,
ensuring sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emission
reductions needed to protect visibility and reduce
acid deposition in nearby Shenandoah National Park
and the community. In exchange, the company gained
regulatory flexibility such that it would no longer need
to obtain prior approval (from EPA or Virginia) for facility
changes that cause changes in emissions (as long as
emissions remained below the cap), http://www.epa.
gov/projectxl/merck/index.htm
Market-Based Approach
EPAs NCEE report, The United States' Experience with
Economic Incentives for Protecting the Environment,
contains a comprehensive list of market incentives. Some
examples from the report follow.
Clean Air Market Programs
Components: Cap and trade mechanism, banking
provisions, auctions.
Potential Use: Rules for emission and effluent
pollutants.
Challenge: Reducing acid rain pollutants without
hampering development and economic growth.
Innovative Approaches: Creation of a cap and trade
program for sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions, utilizing
market-drivers and flexibility to promote improved
environmental performance.
Description: EPAs Clean Air Market Programs use cap
and trade programs to address environmental issues.
These programs include a limit or "cap" on the total
amount of pollutant emissions from all regulated sources
(e.g. power plants), with the cap set below historical
emissions levels to induce reductions. Within that
framework sources are allotted authorizations to emit a
fixed amount of a pollutant (i.e., emission allowances),
and the total number of allowances cannot exceed the
cap. The sources can choose how to reduce emissions,
including whether to buy additional allowances from
other sources that have reduced emissions. Sources can
buy or sell (i.e., trade) allowances on the open market.
Sources must measure and report all emissions and turn
in the same number of allowances as emissions at the
end of the compliance period. Two key examples of
this approach are the EPA Acid Rain Program and the
proposed Clear Skies Initiative.
1
Q.
X
14
-------
a
a
15
The EPA Acid Rain Program (Title IV of the Clean Air Act)
is being implemented with a main goal of significantly
reducing acid rain by reducing nationwide SO2
emissions from electric utilities to about one half of the
industry emissions in 1980 by the year 2010. Within this
program the Clean Air Act sets an annual national cap on
SO2 emissions, and EPA allocates allowances to sources
to match that cap. Each allowance gives affected
sources (usually power plants) the right to emit one ton
of SO2 per year. A plant's total annual emissions cannot
exceed its allowances.
These allowances are transferable, allowing market forces
to determine their price. If a source reduces its SO2
emissions more than required, it has left-over allowances
that it can sell to another utility or bank for its own
future use. This is the "trading" aspect of the program.
EPA emphasizes, however, that no matter how many
allowances a utility purchases, it will not be allowed to
emit levels of SO2 that would violate national or state
ambient health-protection standards.
An important component of this Title IV market program
is the auction, which gives private citizens, brokers,
and power plants the chance to buy and sell SO2
allowances in the open market. Each year, when EPA
grants allowances to utilities, a limited number of those
allowances are withheld and auctioned. Proceeds from
the auctions are returned to utilities in proportion to the
allowances withheld. In addition to allowances offered
by EPA, private parties may offer allowances for sale in
the auction. Privately offered allowances are sold only
after all EPA allowances are sold.
Benefits: The Acid Rain Program is proving that market-
based emissions trading schemes can and do work. In
1995 (after legislation was passed in 1990), the program
began to see significant reductions in SO2 emissions
from large electric generators. The program has also
revealed extreme cost effectiveness; it is aiding 100
percent compliance among sources and it is stimulating
early emissions reductions. Data in EPAs 2003 report,
Response of Surface Water Chemistry to the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990, also confirms a large and
widespread decrease in acidic precipitation (i.e.,
wet sulfate deposition) spanning broad areas in the
Northeast and Upper Midwest of the U.S.—areas most
affected by acid rain. EPA believes that documented
regional declines in surface water sulfate can be linked
to declines in emissions and deposition of sulfur that
has occurred since the Acid Rain Program was created.
Finally, reductions due to the Program have come about
at a faster pace and at much lower costs than expected.
Best Use: Allowance trading approaches are best used
when the problem encompasses a large area in which
there are many sources responsible for the problem. This
approach is also most effective when emission control
costs vary across sources, and when there are consistent
and accurate means to measure emissions. In addition,
the regulating agency (e.g., EPA) must be able to receive
and assure the quality of a large amount of emissions and
allowance transfer data. The agency must also be able
to fairly and accurately determine compliance as well as
strongly and consistently enforce the rule.
References:
Allowance trading basics: http://www.epa.gov/
airmarkets/trading/basics/index.html
Trading concepts (program design, tracking
allowances): http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/index.html
Acid Rain and NOX Trading Program regulations:
(40CFR Parts 72-80).
Auctions: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/auctions/
factsheet.html
1999 Acid Rain Program Progress Report: http://
www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/arpreport/index.html
The EPA Acid Rain Program 2001 Progress Report:
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/cmprpt/arp01/index.html
Response of Surface Water Chemistry to the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990: http://www.epa.gov/ord/
htm/CAAA-2002-report-2col-rev-4.pdf
Other Examples
Effluent Trading For Indirect Discharges: Through
an effluent trading program, facilities within the same
publicly owned treatment works (POTW) service area
-------
can work together to control the discharge of metals in a
more cost efficient manner across all parties (compared
to traditional programs focused solely on individual
facility efforts). Based on similar concepts described
in the Clean Air Markets example described above,
companies can buy sell, or retire excess reductions in
effluent discharges to meet or exceed to meet local
discharge limits. The buying and selling companies
negotiate a price for the credits, and their permits are
adjusted to reflect the amount of credits sold. The
Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission established such
a program for its industrial users (indirect dischargers),
through which 20 percent of reductions via trading
were "retired" for environmental benefit. In May 1998,
it published a report of lessons, benefits, barriers and
other insights entitled Sharing the Load: Effluent Trading
for Indirect Dischargers. A brief summary of this project
can be found in the EPA Innovations Catalogue under
"Effluent Trading for Indirect Dischargers Pilot."
http://intranet.epa.gov/innovation/catalog/
Other U.S. Effluent Trading and Offset Programs: For
brief summaries and contact information on a wide range
of U.S. effluent trading and offset programs (37 in total)
visit: http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/trading/
traenvrn.pdf. This document provides useful information
including pollutants addressed, obstacles encountered,
noteworthy innovations, and contact persons. Other
examples and useful information, including the EPA 2003
Trading Policy can also be found at http://www.epa.
gov/owow/watershed/trading.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/EE/epa/eem.nsf/vwSER/433617
OC9605CAF8852569D20076110F?OpenDocument
(Section 6.14 Effluent Trading).
Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT): Traditional waste collection
programs are funded through property taxes or a fixed
fee, which generally provide no incentive for residents
to minimize waste. However, in communities with
pay-as-you-throw(PAVT) programs (also known as unit
pricing or variable-rate pricing) residents are charged
for the collection of municipal solid waste based on the
amount they throw away. This program creates a direct
economic incentive to recycle and reuse more, and to
generate less waste. EPA promotes PAVT and similar
programs by providing information, tools, and grants to
local officials, residents, and others interested in these
programs.
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/payt
http://yosemite.epa.gov/EE/epa/eem.nsf/vwSER/433617
OC9605CAF8852569D20076110F?OpenDocument
(Section 4.4.1 Variable Pricing).
Lead-Acid Batteries Deposit System: To avoid
including lead-acid batteries in municipal landfills, and
to recover and reuse material, lead-acid batteries are
subject to mandatory deposit systems in several states
and to voluntary deposit systems in most other areas.
The lead in used batteries has positive economic value
for battery makers. Deposit amounts are typically five to
ten dollars per battery. Consumers can obtain refunds
by returning a used battery to the same retailer, typically
within seven to 30 days after the purchase of a new
battery. Eleven states have required deposit systems.
Deposit systems for lead-acid batteries appear likely to
create a significant economic incentive, because they
offer consumers money in return for a used product. This
incentive results in increased effectiveness of battery
disposal control efforts. State deposit legislation has
addressed such questions as the refund period and
what portion of unclaimed refunds goes to different
parties, http://www.epa.gov (search on "lead-acid
battery deposits").
Tailored Regulation and Other
Sector Approaches
Dead Chemical Significant New Use Rules
Components: A voluntarily phase-out combined with a
tailored sector-based regulation.
Potential Use: To coordinate the phase-out of
sector practices and products that are harmful to the
environment.
Challenge: To keep track of chemicals that are being
reintroduced to the marketplace and evaluate their
impact on human health and the environment.
1
Q.
X
16
-------
a
a
Innovative Approaches: The voluntary phase out of a
number of chemicals of concern and the use of tailored
regulation under Section 5 of the Toxic Substance
Control Act (TSCA) to prevent the reintroduction of
these chemicals into the marketplace.
Description: The EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics negotiated the voluntary phase-out of a number of
chemicals of concern, and then used tailored regulation
under Section 5 of TSCA to prevent the reintroduction
of those chemicals into the marketplace. The regulatory
mechanism is a "significant new use rule" or SNUR. In
a SNUR, EPA can require companies that want to use
a chemical for any use that the Agency has identified
as a significant new use to provide prior notice to the
Agency, giving the Agency the opportunity to review the
proposed use and control or restrict it if necessary.
In determining whether a use is "significant" and "new,"
the Agency must consider a variety of factors, including:
the projected volume of manufacturing and processing;
the extent to which a use would change the type, form,
magnitude, and duration of human and environmental
exposure; and the reasonably anticipated manner and
methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution,
and disposal of the substance associated with the
use. Chemicals that have been phased out ("dead
chemicals") can become the subject of SNURs even for
uses in which they were once employed.
Benefits: Provides EPA with the opportunity to evaluate
the intended use and if necessary, to prohibit or limit
that activity before it occurs to prevent any unreasonable
risk or injury to human health or the environment.
Best Use: As a follow-on to voluntary removal of a
particular substance from the market in response to
evidence that a particular substance may have health
and/or environmental consequences and where other
substitute products/practices are available.
References:
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/index.htm
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/cnosnurs.htm
17
Other Examples
Massachusetts Environmental Results Program: The
Environmental Results Program (ERP) is a self-certification
program that replaces individual facility permits with
a set of multi-media industry-wide performance
standards and a facility-derived annual certification
of compliance by a senior company official. ERP
addresses environmental performance issues in sectors
with large numbers of small sources. It has been used
for sectors like drycleaners, auto repair, auto painting,
and photo processors. ERP also allows a state to
expand the universe of small businesses on record and
better quantify the cumulative impact of these diffuse
sources. ERP was developed by the State Environmental
Agency in Massachusetts. Results indicate improved
environmental performance and reduced costs for
business. Other states that have implemented ERPs
include Florida and Rhode Island. http://www.state.
ma.us/dep/erp/erphome.htm
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel: In May
2004, EPA adopted a comprehensive national program
to reduce emissions from future nonroad diesel engines
by integrating engine and fuel controls as a system
to gain the greatest emission reductions. To meet
these emission standards, engine manufacturers will
produce new engines with advanced emission-control
technologies similar to those already expected for
highway trucks and buses. Exhaust emissions from these
engines will decrease by more than 90 percent. This
nonroad rule was developed through a collaboration
that included the White House, EPA, the Office of
Management and Budget, the environmental community,
state and local governments, engine and equipment
manufacturers, refiners, technology companies, and
other groups and associations, http://www.epa.gov/
cleandiesel/#cleanairrule
Alternative Treatment Options for Small Water
Systems: This rule provides alternative compliance
options for small businesses. The 1996 Safe Drinking
Water Act specifically required EPA to provide
technology assessments (and develop maximum
contaminated levels or treatment techniques) for small
-------
systems. Since large systems had served as the basis for
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations feasibility
determinations, the technical and cost considerations
associated with these technologies could not be used
for small water systems. Therefore, in August 1998, EPA
announced changes to make it more affordable for
smaller water systems to meet federal drinking water
standards including a list of technologies that offer
alternative, less expensive, readily-available treatment
options for small systems (based on the quality of the
water source) and supporting guidance for assessing
their application. The notice also allows small systems
to request more time to achieve compliance and
establishes procedures for receiving variances from
required standards. 63 FR 42032 (8/6/98)
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/1998/August/
Day-06/w21032.htm
Transportation Conformity Rule: This rule ensures
that federally funded transportation programs, plans,
and projects do not create or worsen violations, nor
delay attainment, of air quality standards. In 1997,
EPA amended this rule to give states greater flexibility
in planning programs (that reduce mobile source air
pollution) by providing authority to set performance
measures to determine conformity. The 1997 rule
gives rural areas more options for demonstrating
conformity, tailors procedural modeling requirements to
different types of areas, and applies specific modeling
requirements to large, urbanized areas (populations
over 200,000). Originally the rule did not recognize and
account for different environmental conditions in rural
and urban communities or the varying costs associated
with achieving standards in each.
62 FR 43779 - http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-
Al R/1997/August/Day-15/a20968.htm
Consolidated Air Rule for the Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry: This optional
Consolidated Federal Air Rule (CAR) creates an
integrated set of air toxic rules for the Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) under major
portions of new source performance standards (NSPS)
and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) applicable to storage vessels,
process vents, transfer operations, and equipment leaks.
The effect of the CAR is to improve understandability
reduce burden, clarify requirements, and improve
implementation and compliance with SOCMI rules.
SOCMI sources can choose to comply with existing
applicable rules or the CAR (40 C.F.R. 60, 61, 63, 65).
65 FR 78267 - http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/car/car_rdpg.
html
EPA's Partnership with Specialty-Batch Chemical
Sector: EPA has entered into a partnership with the
Specialty-Batch Chemical Sector to encourage voluntary
efforts to improve compliance using EMS plans and
pollution prevention techniques. In return for these
efforts, EPA, states, and trade associations will work
cooperatively to overcome regulatory barriers to
recycling and reusing of hazardous waste, streamlining
air permitting and reporting, and developing and sharing
compliance assistance tools. Industry manufacturers
typically make a large number of specialized chemical
products in small batches during brief production
periods that require frequent changes in material inputs,
production activities, and wastes, http://www.epa.
gov/sectors
Rolling Easements: Rolling easements are tailored to
the special conditions in the coastal environment (e.g.,
threatened coastal eco-systems, large-scale cumulative
loss of coastal intertidal habitats). This program motivates
the private sector to purchase rolling easements to
ensure that wetlands survive sea level rise and increasing
development. Massachusetts, Maine, Rhode Island, and
South Carolina have already enacted some programs
using rolling easement regulations, http://yosemite.epa.
gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/ResourceCenterPubli
cationsSLRTakings.html
New England Laboratories XL Project: This
performance-based approach for managing hazardous
wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) takes into account the special circumstances
of university laboratories. (University labs generate
small quantities of diverse types of hazardous wastes.
Hazardous waste generating activities and practices at
1
Q.
X
18
-------
a
a
19
such labs are inherently different from manufacturing
and industrial operations, typical facilities covered
by RCRA requirements.) Working with EPA, Vermont
and Massachusetts will apply a site-specific rule using
comprehensive environmental management plans
at three New England universities. The agreed-upon
pilot program is expected to lower costs and increase
environmental protection. Proper handling and/or
disposal of laboratory hazardous waste will be assured.
http://www.epa.gov/projectxl/nelabs/index.htm
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Industry Sector;
Meat Processing Industry sector; Metal Casting
Industry Sector: EPA has entered into industry-wide
performance agreements that set voluntary improvement
objectives with several sectors. These projects
include use of industry-wide EMS, development of
BMP guidelines, New Source Review air permitting
guidelines, and customer-driven development of simple
compliance assistance rules, http://www.epa.gov/
sectors
Other Incentives to Motivate
Performance Beyond Compliance
Pulp and Paper Cluster Rules
Components: Integrated, multi-media approach
to control release of pollutants, voluntary incentives
program.
Potential Use: Rule applicable to industry with
prohibitive advanced technology costs that releases
pollutants to multiple media.
Challenges: Separate technology-based air and water
regulations can prevent a facility from reaching optimal
environmental performance. Traditional regulation
of effluent limitations based on the best available
technology (BAT) economically achievable does not
encourage regulated entities to go beyond compliance.
Innovative Approaches: The rule allows individual
mills to consider all regulatory requirements at once
when making compliance-related technology decisions.
The rule gives dischargers the opportunity to choose
between the required technology standard or a more
stringent standard with rewards for those choosing the
latter.
Description: The Pulp and Paper Cluster Rule is the
first time EPA has issued an integrated, multi-media
regulation to control the release of pollutants to two
media (air and water) from one industry. In doing so, EPA
is making it possible for individual mills in the pulp and
paper industry to consider all regulatory requirements at
one time. Individual mills can then choose the control
technologies and process change combinations that are
most advantageous for them to meet regulations.
The effluent limitations set forth in the Pulp and Paper
Cluster Rule are also the first to encourage improved
environmental performance through an innovative,
voluntary incentives program. The Voluntary Advanced
Technology Incentives Program encourages bleached
paper grade, soda, and sulfite mills to commit to
advanced levels of environmental performance (beyond
the limits set by the Pulp and Paper Cluster Rule). The
voluntary program establishes three levels, or "tiers,"
of advanced technology performance requirements.
Each tier has its own unique limitations and standards
based on the underlying model technology particular
to that level. Mills accepted into the program are
subject to more stringent limitations but they are given
rewards and incentives for participating. These rewards
and incentives include increased time to comply
with pollutant discharge permit limitations, reduced
monitoring requirements, greater permit certainty,
reduced inspections, and reduced penalties.
Benefits: EPAs integration of the regulations in the
Pulp and Paper Cluster Rule provides greater protection
of human health and the environment, reduces the
cost of complying with wastewater regulations and air
emissions controls, promotes and facilitates coordinated
compliance planning by industry, promotes and
facilitates pollution prevention, and emphasizes the
multimedia nature of pollution control.
The Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives Program
provides pulp and paper mills with a platform to
advance the research and development of technologies
-------
and processes that provide greater environmental
protection. EPA expects that the combination of
regulation, research, pilot projects, and incentives will
foster continuous environmental improvement with each
mill investment cycle. This will result in the widespread
use and perfection of advanced technologies that
surpass the environmental protection provided by
compliance with the baseline BAT. The development of
increasingly more advanced bleach plant process
technologies is a critical step toward reaching EPAs goal
of a "mill of the future" and the Clean Water Act's ultimate
goal of eliminating the discharge of pollutants to the
nation's waters.
Best Use: A multi-media rule is best used when the
cost of complying with separate regulations is costly and
inefficient. A Voluntary Advanced Technology Incentives
Program is best used when innovation is deterred by
high capital investment costs and severe penalties for
violations.
References:
http://www.epa.gov/OST/pulppaper/cluster.html
http://www.epa.gov/ost/pulppaper/fact.html
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/pulppaper/reg.html
Other Examples
Energy Star Program: This incentives program identifies
energy efficient products, homes, and businesses that
meet program standards and can then display the
Energy Star label. A rigorous promotion campaign was
undertaken to increase consumer preference, that in turn
can increase the demand for and production of such
products. Over the next ten years, the annual energy bill
of the U.S. could decrease by as much as $200 billion if
Energy Star items are used, http://www.energystar.gov
Drinking Water Notifications: EPA issued the Consumer
Confidence Report final rule (63 FR 44511, August 19,
1998), requiring water suppliers to put annual drinking
water quality reports into customers' hands. These
mandatory reports (developed by EPA in consultation
with water suppliers, environmental groups, and the
states) give Americans practical information regarding
impacts on their health and environment. As with other
rules, states may set their own regulations for reports
from systems within their borders (but the rule sets
baseline standards that ensure all consumers receive
comparable reports). Both EPA and the states can take
enforcement action to ensure reports are supplied to
consumers.
40 CFR 141—http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr1.html
40 CFR 142—http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ccr/ccr-frne.
html
Smart Growth Program: This program offers a set
of strategies communities can use to reduce the
environmental footprint from development (a substantial
source of non-point source pollution)—such as
encouraging ways to reduce vehicle trips and protect
open space resources and minimize habitat disruption.
Working through existing regulatory processes, the Smart
Growth Program gives credits for use of environmentally
protective development patterns. For instance, in EPAs
guidance, Improving Air Quality Through Land Use
Activities, a state or metropolitan area can account for
the air quality benefits of smart growth development
in state air quality plans and transportation conformity
determinations. Smart Growth finds other similar
opportunities, provides information and outreach,
tools and technical assistance, research and policy
development, and creates public-private partnerships to
address the cross-media effects of development.
http://www.epa.gov/dced/
http://www.smartgrowth.org/
National Environmental Performance Track Program:
Performance Track is a public/private partnership
recognizing top environmental performance among
participating U.S. facilities of all types, sizes, and
complexity, both public and private. Program
partners provide leadership in many areas, including
preventing pollution at its source. To participate, a
facility must meet certain requirements, such as having
an environmental management system in place for
at least one full cycle that has been assessed by an
independent party, a history of sustained compliance,
past environmental achievement and commitment
to continuous environmental improvement, and a
o.
x
>
20
-------
a
a
commitment to community outreach. Some incentives
for member facilities include gaining a low priority
for routine inspections and exclusive opportunity for
extended hazardous waste accumulation times, and
reduced reporting frequencies under MACT. Some other
incentives for facilities to participate in the program
include public recognition and eligibility for other
administrative and operational flexibilities through
regulations and policies under the authorities of the
Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and RCRA. http://
www.epa.gov/performancetrack/
Office of Water's EMS Pilot Programs: Through a pilot
program launched in May 1997, the Office of Wastewater
Management and the Office of Compliance tested EMSs
as a tool for improving environmental performance
and compliance in local government entities. Nine
local governments used the ISO 14001 international
standard as a starting guide to develop and implement
an EMS in a facility of their choosing (also known as their
"fenceline"). EPA provided no direct financial assistance
or regulatory flexibility to the participants; nor were they
required to have third party verification of conformance
of their EMSs to ISO 14001. Participants found many
benefits from the EMS exercise including: 1) better
understanding of their legal environmental compliance
requirements; 2) identification of operational hotspots
and investigation into root causes of noncompliance;
3) prevention of future noncompliance; 4) ability to
be more articulate in their conversations with a range
of entities including regulators; and 5) consolidation
of permitting functions (e.g., 23 separate air quality
permits consolidated into eight), which lead to
significant savings (e.g., $16,000/year savings to one city
government). Due to these benefits, many other local
government entities are considering the use of EMSs in
managing their own environmental issues. http://www.
getf.org/projects/ems1 .pdf
Environmental Labels: Environmental labels provide
an opportunity to inform consumers about product
characteristics that may not be readily apparent. Armed
with this information, consumers have the ability to
reduce the environmental impacts of their daily activities
by purchasing environmentally preferable products and
minimizing their consequences during use and disposal.
Labels help consumers vote their preferences in the
marketplace and shift the market toward products that
minimize environmental impacts. Currently there are
federal pilot projects involving the use of labels in the
building area, electric power, glues and adhesives, latex
paints, solvents, and office machinery and supplies.
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/epp/documents/labeling.htm
Community Environmental Awareness Project: The
Community Environmental Awareness Project (CEAP) is a
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality effort to
develop an approach to improve the way environmental
information is presented and made available to the
public. The goal of the CEAP is to improve the public's
access to and understanding of how major industries are
performing under environmental laws and regulations.
http://www.deq.state.mi.us/ceap
Other Local Government Initiatives: Based upon
the success of the first project, the Office of Water, in
partnership with the Offices of Compliance, Air and
Radiation, and Solid Waste, launched an even more
ambitious program involving 14 public agencies. Nearly
50 organizations applied to be in the program. The
project concluded in March 2002; a final report and EMS
guidance document for local governments is available.
http://www.epa.gov/ems/water.htm
Michigan's Clean Corporate Citizen Program: The
Clean Corporate Citizen (C3) Program is built on the
concept that facilities can be relied upon to carry out
their environmental protection responsibilities without
rigorous oversight, and should enjoy greater permitting
flexibility than those that have not demonstrated that
level of environmental awareness. To obtain a C3
designation a facility must have a strong and effective
EMS. C3 facilities who voluntarily participate in this
program receive public recognition and are entitled to
certain regulatory benefits, including expedited permits.
http://www.rn ichigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3307_
3666_4134-9922-,OO.html
21
-------
Wisconsin's Five Star Recognition Program: Wisconsin
created the Five Star Recognition Program to recognize
dry cleaners that voluntarily are working to minimize
waste. The system is designed to help consumers
identify those businesses that are making a difference
in the environment. The stars are awarded based on
determined criteria, with each level building on the
previous level's requirements, http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/
cea/assistance/drycleaning/5star/
High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program: In
1998, EPA challenged chemical companies voluntarily
to make basic screen ing-level toxicity data available
to the public by 2005 on the approximately 2,100
chemicals manufactured or imported into the U.S.
annually in amounts of one million pounds or more.
Companies participating in the program summarized
existing data, identified any critical gaps as defined
by the internationally accepted Screening Information
Data Set (SIDS), proposed plans to fill data gaps as
necessary, and provided the resulting information to
EPA in a format compatible with international databases.
Public access to the information is facilitated by an
EPA Web site, which includes the ability of the public
to comment on data summaries and test plans. This
integration of a voluntary program with a regulatory
follow-up has proven very successful, providing public
access to a significant amount of information not
previously organized on commonly used chemicals in
a much shorter time than would have been required
by a regulation. The program, by emphasizing the
identification of existing information and by providing
for the use of chemical categories, also prevented
duplicative testing, reducing both program costs and the
use of laboratory animals.
http://www.epa.gov/chemrtk/volchall.htm
1
Q.
X
22
-------
CD
X
T3
I
Innovation Leading Questions
Innovation starts with asking the right questions.
Here are several key questions that encourage you
to think creatively and innovatively when addressing
environmental issues:
• What is the environmental problem we are trying
to solve? How well do we really understand the
problem?
• Who else cares about this problem—within EPA
as well as outside—that we might partner with to
meet shared goals?
• What is the full range of tools and approaches
that we might use in solving the problem? Do
these approaches capitalize on opportunities for
pollution prevention, deliver greater environmental
benefits at lower costs, and encourage "beyond
compliance" performance?
• Can we set performance goals for addressing the
problem that allow the use of flexible, innovative
approaches, rather than prescribe specific
methods and activities?
These questions, identified by an EPA Senior Manager
from the Office of Air and Radiation and endorsed by
others at EPA, have allowed staff to frame environmental
issues in a way that fosters creative thinking and
innovative approaches to environmental problem-
solving.
23
-------
24
-------
NATIONAL CENTER FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATION
k I /~* H" I
------- |