The computers and electronics industry alternative system of environmental protection: A new pilot program

New systems approaches by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have attempted to prevent and limit environmental damages through multimedia management of resources, energy, and environmental impacts, while engaging communities, environmental groups, facilities, industries, states, and local agencies. Collectively these diverse interests have begun to partner with corporate management to work toward a shared vision of how multimedia management and multistakeholder participation can best evolve in concert with environmental management system approaches. This article analyzes one industry-specific program under the Common Sense Initiative, called an Alternative System of Environmental Protection (ASEP) for the Computers and Electronics Subcommittee. The significance of this working group's attempt to increase regulatory flexibility lies in its collective establishment of an alternative regulatory framework for an entire industry. Contrary to many other EPA single-facility pilot programs, this method cuts across the entire computer and electronics industry. The group hopes to achieve sector-wide regulatory improvements through a process providing funding for shared research, dynamic feedback, and technical assistance, while engaging in multistakeholder relationships with communities, workers, local governmental agencies, and other stakeholders.     

Environmental management of the stone cutting industry

Environmental Management of the stone cutting industry in Hebron is required to reduce the industry's adverse impact on the downstream agricultural land and the adverse impact on the drinking water aquifers. This situation requires the implementation of an industrial wastewater management strategic approach and technology, within the available technical and financial resources. Ten pilot projects at different locations were built at Hebron to reduce or eliminate the incompatible discharge of the liquid and solid waste to the environment and improve the stone cutting industry's effluent quality. A review of existing practices and jar test experiments were used to optimize the water recycling and treatment facilities. The factors reviewed included influent pumping rates and cycles, selection of the optimal coagulant type and addition methods, control of the sludge recycling process, control over flow rates, control locations of influent and effluent, and sludge depth. Based on the optimized doses and Turbidity results, it was determined that the use of Fokland polymer with an optimal dose of 1.5mg/L could achieve the target turbidity levels. The completion of the pilot projects resulted in the elimination of stone cutting waste discharges and an improvement in the recycled effluent quality of 44-99%. This in turn reduced the long term operating costs for each participating firm. A full-scale project that includes all the stone cutting firms in Hebron industrial area is required.     

Priority screening of toxic chemicals and industry sectors in the U.S. toxics release inventory: a comparison of the life cycle impact-based and risk-based assessment tools developed by U.S. EPA

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) and Risk Assessment (RA) employ different approaches to evaluate toxic impact potential for their own general applications. LCIA is often used to evaluate toxicity potentials for corporate environmental management and RA is often used to evaluate a risk score for environmental policy in government. This study evaluates the cancer, non-cancer, and ecotoxicity potentials and risk scores of chemicals and industry sectors in the United States on the basis of the LCIA- and RA-based tools developed by U.S. EPA, and compares the priority screening of toxic chemicals and industry sectors identified with each method to examine whether the LCIA- and RA-based results lead to the same prioritization schemes. The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental Impacts (TRACI) is applied as an LCIA-based screening approach with a focus on air and water emissions, and the Risk-Screening Environmental Indicator (RSEI) is applied in equivalent fashion as an RA-based screening approach. The U.S. Toxic Release Inventory is used as the dataset for this analysis, because of its general applicability to a comprehensive list of chemical substances and industry sectors. Overall, the TRACI and RSEI results do not agree with each other in part due to the unavailability of characterization factors and toxic scores for select substances, but primarily because of their different evaluation approaches. Therefore, TRACI and RSEI should be used together both to support a more comprehensive and robust approach to screening of chemicals for environmental management and policy and to highlight substances that are found to be of concern from both perspectives.     

ENVIRONMENTAL AUDITING: A Synoptic Approach for Assessing Cumulative Impacts to Wetlands

/ The US Environmental Protection Agency's Wetlands ResearchProgram has developed the synoptic approach as a proposed method forassessing cumulative impacts to wetlands by providing both a general and acomprehensive view of the environment. It can also be applied more broadly toregional prioritization of environmental issues. The synoptic approach is aframework for making comparisons between landscape subunits, such aswatersheds, ecoregions, or counties, thereby allowing cumulative impacts tobe considered in management decisions. Because there is a lack of tools thatcan be used to address cumulative impacts within regulatory constraints, thesynoptic approach was designed as a method that could make use of availableinformation and best professional judgement. Thus, the approach is acompromise between the need for rigorous results and the need for timelyinformation. It is appropriate for decision making when quantitative,accurate information is not available; the cost of improving existinginformation or obtaining better information is high; the cost of a wronganswer is low; there is a high demand for the information; and the situationcalls for setting priorities between multiple decisions versus optimizing fora single decision. The synoptic approach should be useful for resourcemanagers because an assessment is timely; it can be completed within one totwo years at relatively low cost, tested, and improved over time. Anassessment can also be customized to specific needs, and the results arepresented in mapped format. However, the utility of a synoptic assessmentdepends on how well knowledge of the environment is incorporated into theassessment, relevant to particular management questions.KEY WORDS: Cumulative impact assessment; Landscape ecology; Regionalprioritization     

Regulating Industrial Stormwater: State Permits,Municipal Implementation,and a Protocol for Prioritization1

Abstract:  This research evaluated the effectiveness of regulations for stormwater pollutants originating from industrial facilities. Industrial facilities discharging stormwater are subject to General Permits implemented by state and federal agencies, which require facility operators to identify themselves and to implement pollution prevention measures. An overlying system of permits require Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System operators to identify and inspect facilities in their jurisdictions capable of discharging substantial pollutant loads into stormwater conveyances, introducing more active regulation and strategic prioritization, but with unequal implementation in different urban regions. This research evaluated the interaction between the regulations and ways in which the regulations succeed, or fail, at protecting water quality. The research evaluated potential for pollutant discharges at 136 industrial facilities in Pinellas County, Florida, using telephone interviews; off-site facility visits; and on-site facility inspections, targeting four industrial categories: wood products; stone, clay, glass, and concrete products; fabricated metal products; and electronic products. Results documented that a large proportion of facilities subject to General Permits conduct few or no activities likely to produce stormwater pollutants, indicating that the regulations’ equal treatment of all facilities may constitute overregulation. The research developed a methodology to assess facilities using intensity of industrial activities exposed to stormwater, a rational measurement that could regularize municipal agencies’ requirements and prioritize implementation toward facilities with the potential to impact receiving water quality.     

The cumulative dimensions of impact in resource regions

The development of mineral and energy resources worldwide has placed pressure on regional environments, economies and communities. The cumulative impacts, or cumulative effects, arising from overlapping development have stretched political systems that have traditionally been geared toward the regulation and management of individual resource developments, presenting challenges for policy makers, resource developers and civil society actors. An equally challenging task has been realisation of the potential development dividends of mineral and energy resources in the areas of business development, infrastructure, human development or the management of resource revenues. This paper introduces a special issue on ‘Understanding and Managing Cumulative Impacts in Resource Regions’. The special issue interrogates the effectiveness of new and traditional policy responses, explores methods and strategies to better respond to cumulative impacts, and details practical examples of collaborative and coordinated approaches. Papers cover a range of environmental, economic and social issues, geographical regions, commodities, and conceptual approaches. This introductory paper introduces the cumulative impact issues that have manifest in resource regions, critically appraises current conceptions of cumulative impacts, and details management and policy responses to address the cumulative dimensions of impact.     

Assessing ecological risk on a regional scale

Society needs a quantitative and systematic way to estimate and compare the impacts of environmental problems that affect large geographic areas. This paper presents an approach for regional risk assessment that combines regional assessment methods and landscape ecology theory with an existing framework for ecological risk assessment. Risk assessment evaluates the effects of an environmental change on a valued natural resource and interprets the significance of those effects in light of the uncertainties identified in each component of the assessment process. Unique and important issues for regional risk assessment are emphasized; these include the definition of the disturbance scenario, the assessment boundary definition, and the spatial heterogeneity of the landscape. Although the research described in this article has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through Interagency Agreement Number DW89932112-01-2 to the U.S. Department of Energy, it has not been subjected to EPA review and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of EPA and no official endorsement should be inferred.     

西部开发中的累积环境影响

本文首先分析了西部地区生态环境现状，指出西部生态环境十分脆弱，破坏严重。然后在介绍累积影响概念的基础上，结合累积影响的发生过程，对西部地区的开发建设项目以及它们对环境可能产生的累积影响进行具体分析，指出累积影响问题在西部大开发过程中是客观存在的，西部开发过程中必须重视累积影响的作用。最后文章提出了一系列对策和建议，包括加强对累积影响的研究、对开发项目进行累积影响评价（CIA）、强化环境管理和法律监督，以及加强关于生态环境的宣传教育等，以促进西部地区的可持续发展。     

Managing environmental impacts of energy development: Air quality in the Hunter Region,New South Wales,Australia

The Hunter Region in New South Wales, Australia, is undergoing rapid economic development based on its black coal resources. Cumulative impacts of new projects cannot be easily assessed with the traditional environmental impact statement. This article examines air quality impacts, and presents a systems analysis model to assist environmental management. The model consists of an input-output model of the regional economy and an air dispersion model. Results are obtained for sulfur oxides and fluorides.     

LANDSCAPE‐SCALE ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEMS: PAST,PRESENT, AND FUTURE1

ABSTRACT: Analyses of cumulative impacts to riparian systems is an important yet elusive goal. Previous analyses have focused on comparing the number of hectares impacted to the number of hectares restored, without addressing the loss of riparian function or the effect of the spatial distribution of impacts. This paper presents an analysis of the spatial distribution of development‐related impacts to riparian ecosystems, that were authorized under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Impacts on habitat structure, contiguity, and landscape context were evaluated using functional indices scaled to regional reference sites. Impact sites were mapped using GIS and analyzed for spatial associations. Positive spatial autocorrelation (i.e. clustering of impact sites) resulted from the piecemeal approach to impact assessment, which failed to prevent cumulative impacts. Numerous small projects in close proximity have resulted in adverse impacts to entire stream reaches or have fragmented the aquatic resources to a point where overall functional capacity is impaired. Additionally, the ecological functions of unaffected areas have been diminished due to their proximity to degraded areas. A proactive approach to managing cumulative impacts is currently being used in Orange County, California as part of a Corps of Engineers sponsored Special Area Management Plan (SAMP). The SAMP process is evaluating the ecological conditions and physical processes of the study watersheds and attempting to plan future development in a manner that will guard against cumulative impacts.     

Inventorying and Monitoring Wetland Condition and Restoration Potential on a Watershed Basis with Examples from Spring Creek Watershed, Pennsylvania, USA

We developed an approach for inventorying wetland resources, assessing their condition, and determining restoration potential in a watershed context. This article outlines how this approach can be developed into a Wetland Monitoring Matrix (WMM) that can help resource management agencies make regulatory and nonregulatory decisions. The WMM can be embedded in a standard planning process (Wetlands, Wildlife, and Watershed Assessment Techniques for Evaluation and Restoration, or W³ATER) involving the setting of objectives, assessing the condition of the resource, prioritizing watersheds or sites, implementing projects, and evaluating progress. To that process we have added the concepts of reference, hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classification, and prioritization for protection and restoration by triage or adaptive management. Three levels of effort are possible, increasing in detail and diagnostic reliability as data collection shifts from remote sensing to intensive sampling on the ground. Of key importance is the use of a consistent set of monitoring protocols for conducting condition assessments, designing restoration and creation projects, and evaluating the performance of mitigation projects; the same variables are measured regardless of the intended use of the data. This approach can be tailored to any region by establishing a reference set of wetlands organized by HGM subclasses, prioritizing watersheds and individual wetlands, and implementing consistent monitoring protocols. Application of the approach is illustrated with examples from wetlands and streams of the Spring Creek Watershed in central Pennsylvania, USA.     

Early Development of Systems Analysis in Natural Resources Management from Man and Nature to the Miami Conservancy District

Contemporary approaches to natural resources and environmental decision-making typically draw on a “systems” perspective to assess and improve management strategies. This paper describes the early genesis of the systems analysis approach. It concentrates on a period between the mid-19th to early 20th centuries. During the early part of this period, George Marsh's Man and Nature and related works laid out an approach to problem-solving that recognized the relationship among physically disperse elements in the environment, the need to balance benefits against costs, the potential for using quantitative modeling to understand management options, and the importance of integrating human and natural components into solutions. In the early 20th century, the Miami Conservancy District project brought this approach to fruition with its use of complex simulation and optimization modeling, detailed cost–benefit analysis, and its linking of economics, engineering, science, and law into a far-reaching solution to a complex water resources problem. The objective of this paper is to describe the early development and application of this conceptual approach to problem-solving. An examination of the origins of natural resources systems analysis can broaden one's perspective of the contemporary field to understand its roots as a philosophy for environmental problem-solving.     

The Cost of Developing Site-Specific Environmental Regulations: Evidence from EPA's Project XL

The flagship of the Environmental Protection Agency's regulatory reinvention initiative, Project XL has been touted as a regulatory blueprint for a site-specific, performance-based pollution-control system, but widespread complaints about the costs of the program beg the question of whether the costs of tailoring regulations to individual facilities are manageable. To address this question, this paper presents original survey data on a sample of 11 XL projects. We find that the fixed costs of putting in place XL agreements are substantial, averaging over $450,000 per firm. While stakeholder negotiations are widely cited as the principal source for these costs, we find that they actually arise mainly from interaction between participating facilities and the EPA. Moreover, EPA management problems are perceived by our survey respondents as having inflated project development costs. Finally, we find that the key factors that explains differences in costs across XL projects are the scope and complexity of the project proposal. These findings suggest that Project XL favors large firms that can afford to pay significant project development costs, that EPA management problems must be resolved to reduce costs, and that there may be a significant economic bias against complex and innovative proposals—precisely the type of proposals that Project XL was designed to foster in order to improve the efficiency of the regulatory system.     

A theory of chemicals regulation and testing

Risk management of chemicals requires information about their adverse effects such as toxicity and persistence, for example. Testing of chemicals allows for improving the information base for regulatory decision‐making on chemicals' production and use. Testing a large number of chemicals with limited time and resources forces a prioritization of chemicals. This paper proposes a decision model that provides a ranking of chemicals according to “urgency to test”. The model adopts a value‐of‐information approach describing the expected welfare gains from regulatory actions that respond to test information. We determine the value‐of‐information of tests revealing chemicals' levels of toxicity and persistence. We compare our findings to the prioritization of chemicals in the new European Chemicals Regulation “REACH”, where several tens of thousands of chemicals are to be tested in order to fill existing information gaps and to implement more effective risk management. We find that the main lines of chemicals' prioritization under REACH receive backing from our decision model. However, prioritization for testing can be further improved by accounting for testing costs and the sensitivity of regulatory action with respect to the test information.     

Formulating an ecosystem approach to environmental protection

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has embraced a new strategy of environmental protection that is place-driven rather than program-driven. This new approach focuses on the protection of entire ecosystems. To develop an effective strategy of ecosystem protection, however, EPA will need to: (1) determine how to define and delineate ecosystems and (2) categorize threats to individual ecosystems and priority rank ecosystems at risk. Current definitions of ecosystem in use at EPA are inadequate for meaningful use in a management or regulatory context. A landscape-based definition that describes an ecosystem as a volumetric unit delineated by climatic and landscape features is suggested. Following this definition, ecosystems are organized hierarchically, from megaecosystems, which exist on a continental scale (e.g., Great Lakes), to small local ecosystems.Threats to ecosystems can generally be categorized as: (1) ecosystem degradation (occurs mainly through pollution) (2) ecosystem alteration (physical changes such as water diversion), and (3) ecosystem removal (e.g., conversion of wetlands or forest to urban or agricultural lands). Level of threat (i.e., how imminent), and distance from desired future condition are also important in evaluating threats to ecosystems. Category of threat, level of threat, and distance from desired future condition can be combined into a three-dimensional ranking system for ecosystems at risk. The purpose of the proposed ranking system is to suggest a preliminary framework for agencies such as EPA to prioritize responses to ecosystems at risk.     

Economic Impacts of Zebra Mussels on Drinking Water Treatment and Electric Power Generation Facilities

Invasions of nonnative species such as zebra mussels can have both ecological and economic consequences. The economic impacts of zebra mussels have not been examined in detail since the mid-1990s. The purpose of this study was to quantify the annual and cumulative economic impact of zebra mussels on surface water-dependent drinking water treatment and electric power generation facilities (where previous research indicated the greatest impacts). The study time frame was from the first full year after discovery in North America (Lake St. Clair, 1989) to the present (2004); the study area was throughout the mussels’ North American range. A mail survey resulted in a response rate of 31% for electric power companies and 41% for drinking water treatment plants. Telephone interviews with a sample of nonrespondents assessed nonresponse bias; only one difference was found and adjusted for. Over one-third (37%) of surveyed facilities reported finding zebra mussels in the facility and almost half (45%) have initiated preventive measures to prevent zebra mussels from entering the facility operations. Almost all surveyed facilities (91%) with zebra mussels have used control or mitigation alternatives to remove or control zebra mussels. We estimated that 36% of surveyed facilities experienced an economic impact. Expanding the sample to the population of the study area, we estimated $267 million (BCa 95% CI = $161 million–$467 million) in total economic costs for electric generation and water treatment facilities through late 2004, since 1989. Annual costs were greater ($44,000/facility) during the early years of zebra mussel infestation than in recent years ($30,000). As a result of this and other factors, early predictions of the ultimate costs of the zebra mussel invasion may have been excessive.     

Use of wetlands for water quality improvement under the USEPA Region V Clean Lakes Program

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region V Clean Lakes Program employs artificial and modified natural wetlands in an effort to improve the water quality of selected lakes. We examined use of wetlands at seven lake sites and evaluated the physical and institutional means by which wetland projects are implemented and managed, relative to USEPA program goals and expert recommendations on the use of wetlands for water quality improvement. Management practices recommended by wetlands experts addressed water level and retention, sheet flow, nutrient removal, chemical treatment, ecological and effectiveness monitoring, and resource enhancement. Institutional characteristics recommended included local monitoring, regulation, and enforcement and shared responsibilities among jurisdictions. Institutional and ecological objectives of the National Clean Lakes Program were met to some degree at every site. Social objectives were achieved to a lesser extent. Wetland protection mechanisms and appropriate institutional decentralization were present at all sites. Optimal management techniques were employed to varying degrees at each site, but most projects lack adequate monitoring to determine adverse ecological impacts and effectiveness of pollutant removal and do not extensively address needs for recreation and wildlife habitat. There is evidence that the wetland projects are contributing to improved lake water quality; however, more emphasis needs to be placed on wetland protection and long-term project evaluation.     

Toward Policies and Decision-Making for Dam Removal

Dam removal has emerged as a critical issue in environmental management. Agencies responsible for dams face a drastic increase in the number of potential dam removals in the near future. Given limited resources, these agencies need to develop ways to decide which dams should be removed and in what order. The underlying science of dam removal is relatively undeveloped and most agencies faced with dam removal lack a coherent purpose for removing dams. These shortcomings can be overcome by the implementation of two policies by agencies faced with dam removal: (1) the development and adoption of a prioritization scheme for what constitutes an important dam removal, and (2) the establishment of minimum levels of analysis prior to decision-making about a dam removal. Federal and state agencies and the scientific community must encourage an initial experimental phase of dam removal during which only a few dams are removed, and these are studied intensively. This will allow for the development of the fundamental scientific understanding needed to support effective decision-making in the future and minimize the risk of disasters arising from poorly thought out dam removal decisions.     

Regulatory context for cumulative impact research

Wetlands protection has become a topic of increased public attention and support, and regulation of wetlands loss under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act has received high priority within the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Despite this, the nation is continuing to experience serious wetlands losses. This situation reflects the contentious nature of wetlands protection; it involves fundamental conflicts between environmental and development interests. Better information is needed to support regulatory decision making, including information on cumulative impacts. Currently, consideration of cumulative impacts, although required by various federal regulations, is limited. One reason is that most regulatory decisions are made on a permit-specific, site-specific basis, whereas cumulative impacts must be assessed on a broader, regional scale. In addition, scientific information and methods necessary to support cumulative impact assessment have been lacking. An anticipatory, planning-oriented framework to complement the existing site-specific permit review program is needed to support more effective consideration of cumulative impacts; such an effort is beginning to emerge. In addition, EPA is supporting research to provide better information on cumulative effects. It is recommended that the EPA program place initial emphasis on synthesis and analysis of existing information, on maximizing its use in decision making, and on information transfer. Recommended approaches include correlation of historic wetlands losses with loss of wetlands function and values, regional case studies, and development of indices of cumulative impact for use in permit review.Formerly Director, Office of Federal Activities, US Environmental Protection Agency     

Making or breaking waste facility siting successes with a siting framework

Waste facility siting successes depend on many linked factors of facility design and impacts, site characteristics, and community beliefs and values. A facility siting framework is constructed to combine important elements and cause–effect linkages that affect the siting outcome. The framework consists of three main components: (1) core elements of facility design, effects, and community beliefs, attitude and response; (2) contributing factors of site and community characteristics, community beliefs and values that affect the interpretation of the facility and its effects; and (3) siting management interventions to manage the process and facility impacts. The framework is applied in an unsuccessful and a successful siting case to determine the key elements that contribute to siting outcome: (1) thorough need justification for the facility from the proponent's and the community's perspective; (2) careful facility design and prediction of the impacts and to select impact management compensation measures; (3) screening and selection of communities where the beliefs and values are compatible with the type of facility and its effects, (4) cooperatively selected impact reduction (i.e., prevention, control, and mitigation) measures followed by compensation and incentives; and (5) intensive process management to balance the community characteristics and values with the proponent's efforts to plan, design, assess and manage impacts, and ultimately, gain approval of the facility. The siting framework provides a comprehensive and robust structure of key factors that contribute to siting outcome and, therefore, provides the tool to identify, evaluate, and design siting interventions to enhance the chances of successful siting outcome.