Environmental Data in Decision Making in EPA Regional Offices

The mid-Atlantic region of the United States has a wide diversity of natural resources. Human pressures on these natural resources are intense. These factors have resulted in the collection of substantial amounts of environmental information about the region by EPA (both Regional and Research Offices), other governmental agencies, industry, and environmental groups. EPA Regional Offices comprehend first hand the importance of environmental data and are extremely supportive of investments in these data. Environmental data are used prominently in a variety of strategic planning and resource management initiatives. In EPA Region 3, the use of scientifically-sound environmental data is, in fact, one of our strategic programmatic goals. Environmental information is captured and assessed continuously by Regional staff, sometimes working in partnership with other Federal and State agencies, to derive relevant resource management conclusions. The restoration goals for the Chesapeake Bay are based on environmental indicators and resulting data. Attainment of the water quality objectives for streams and coastal estuaries are predicted on monitoring data. Our initiative in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands area uses environmental indicators to measure the condition of forests and streams. Landscape-level indicators will provide unique opportunities for the use of data in planning and management activities in support of the principles of community-based activism and sustainable development. Significant value is added to these data during their use by Regional managers. Regional programs, such as the Chesapeake Bay Program and several National Estuary Programs, are founded in environmental data. Environmental information is used by the Regional program managers to ascertain whether programs are accomplishing their intended objectives. Finally, Regional programs provide a crucial means for disseminating this information to broad segments of the public, so that a better informed and educated client base for effective environmental protection will develop.     

Performance of EIA authority and effectiveness of EIA system in Pakistan

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) agencies worldwide face multiple challenges that compromise their performance and in turn EIA procedural effectiveness. The current study aimed to evaluate the performance of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of Punjab, Pakistan and the problems it faces whilst implementing EIA and ensuring EIA effectiveness. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data for the study. EPA performance and procedural effectiveness were evaluated using the formal and informal roles of EPA and EIA good practices respectively. They were also linked to regulatory framework, capacities of actors and contextual factors. Study found that EPA and EIA system performance is weak. Consequently, procedural effectiveness is compromised. The main causes include limited capacities of EPA, consultants and proponents; lack of political will; political interference and outdated regulations. A strong political will of the government is required to enhance the capacity of EPA and other actors in terms of motivation or “the will to” and means or “the ability to”. Measures taken by international EIA agencies to improve performance and effectiveness have also been discussed. Based on this study, lessons can be learnt by not only EPA Punjab but also other agencies in Pakistan and international agencies facing similar challenges.     

The adequacy of training for EIA in the United States of America

The well-established environmental impact assessment requirements in the United States have given rise to a number of training needs within federal and state agencies. Requirements for training vary for EIA project managers, technical specialists, senior managers and others involved in EIA. Information needs about EIA vary also, but include general awareness, procedural knowledge, substantive methodological knowledge and technical knowledge. While EIA training is provided in short courses, on the job, and in universities there remain deficiencies in the training of specialists, senior managers, and others. Proposals are made here to help overcome these. This paper examines the needs and provisions for training in environmental impact assessment (EIA) in the USA federal system and in the system created by the California Environmental Quality Act. The investigation is based on the very limited literature on training, on responses to letters, on the printed material requested from agencies and, most importantly, on the results of a series of interviews of personnel in various federal agencies at central and regional levels, in California, and elsewhere. A recent report by the Environmental Law Institute (1981) furnished invaluable background information on EIA training in the federal agencies. The list of liaison officers printed by the Council on Environmental Quality (1982a) was used to request interviews and information.     

Role of and challenges to environmental impact assessment proponents in Pakistan

This study identified the role of and challenges faced by Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) proponents in Punjab, Pakistan. Expected roles of proponents in EIA were taken from regulations, legislation and guidelines. The comments of consultants, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) regarding the role played by proponents were extracted from literature and used for evaluation. To identify the challenges of proponents in each step of the EIA, 40 semi-structured interviews were conducted with private and government proponents in Punjab. Oftentimes, projects start prior to obtaining an environmental approval. Proper scoping is seldom conducted. Stakeholder involvement in EIA is limited. Proponents sometimes do not share complete project information with consultants, which compromises the report quality and timely decision making. Moreover, some proponents attempt to influence the review and decision making and do not ensure compliance to approval conditions except for few multinationals. The key challenge highlighted by proponents was the discrimination on part of the EPA between private and government projects. Other challenges included lack of professionalism of some consultants and delayed and non-transparent decision making. Although regional in scope, the results of the study hold importance for EIA systems worldwide particularly in countries with similar economic systems who are facing a trade-off between economic growth and environmental sustainability.     

Trends in ambient concentrations of agrochemicals in humans and the environment of the United States

Uses of pesticides and related agrochemicals have been regulated in the United States since 1948. The United States government has supported human and environmental monitoring for pesticides and selected toxic chemicals for the past 15 yr. The initial ambient monitoring systems were designed to determine average concentrations of pesticides and related chemicals in human and environmental media on a nationwide basis and determine changes in these concentrations over time. The results of these surveys showed that almost all of the general human population and various environmental components contained low concentrations of chlorinated pesticides. As the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) restricted many uses of the chlorinated pesticides, the organophosphorous and carbamate pesticides which replaced them were not as easily monitored by ambient surveys. Special monitoring studies had to be done more frequently to produce data on these compounds which were not as persistent or accumulative in the environment. Currently, a re-evalution has begun to determine pesticide monitoring data needs for the next 5 to 10 yr, modify existing ambient surveys, and plan needed short-term studies to efficiently meet regulatory data needs. Ambient monitoring for trends in chemical levels in humans and the environment will continue in the United States at a reduced level, and many exposure data needs will be met with use-specific monitoring studies.Presented at the International Conference on Environmental Hazards of Agrochemicals in Developing Countries, 8–12 November, 1983 in Alexandria, Egypt.     

Nanotechnology applications and implications research supported by the US Environmental Protection Agency STAR grants program

Since 2002, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been funding research on the environmental aspects of nanotechnology through its Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants program. In total, more than $25 million has been awarded for 86 research projects on the environmental applications and implications of nanotechnology. In the applications area, grantees have produced promising results in green manufacturing, remediation, sensors, and treatment using nanotechnology and nanomaterials. Although there are many potential benefits of nanotechnology, there has also been increasing concern about the environmental and health effects of nanomaterials, and there are significant gaps in the data needed to address these concerns. Research performed by STAR grantees is beginning to address these needs.     

Some international activities in environmental health monitoring and surveillance

Environmental health monitoring and surveillance include activities such as collection of information on the production and use of chemicals; preparation of inventories of waste discharges; measurement of physical, chemical and biological agents in air, water and food, at work place and at home; epidemiological investigations, and collection and analysis of environmental, and health statistical data. There are two main objectives of these activities: estimation of human exposure to potentially harmful environmental factors and timely detection of adverse health effects; and the assessment of environmental conditions in relation to established guidelines and standards. Environmental health monitoring and surveillance projects initiated, organized and implemented by the Specialized Agencies and other bodies of the United Nations system include monitoring of air and water quality and of food and animal feed contamination; pilot projects on air pollution exposure assessment and biological monitoring; and ionizing radiation surveillance. Principles of environmental and health monitoring in occupational environment, and of monitoring and surveillance of environmental health effects are outlined. Two examples are provided of national environmental health surveillance systems.Revised and up-dated text of a paper presented at the World congress on Environmental Health in Development Planning, Mexico City, November 1979.Formerly Manager, Environmental Health Criteria and Standards, and Chief Central Unit, International Programme on Chemical Safety, Division of Environmental Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.     

Terrestrial vertebrate fauna surveys for the preparation of environmental impact assessments; how can we do it better? A Western Australian example

The Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in 2002 released Position Statement, No. 3, Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an Element of Biodiversity Protection outlining how terrestrial fauna survey data are to be used and interpreted in the preparation of environmental impact assessments (EIA). In 2004, the EPA released its Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors, Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia, No. 56. This paper briefly assesses the adequacy of recent terrestrial fauna surveys undertaken to support publicly released EIAs and indicates that the EPA is not always adhering to its own position and guidance statements. This paper argues that the current fauna survey guidelines are in need of improvement. The approach and requirements of some other Australian states are briefly assessed to identify similarities and where improvements can be made to the Western Australian (WA) guidelines. This paper concludes with suggestions on how the process and the guidelines in WA can be revised to more adequately assess the impact of developments on terrestrial vertebrate biodiversity and ecosystem function. These suggestions may have relevance for other areas where fauna surveys are undertaken to support EIAs.     

Environmental impact assessment in the Philippines: 1977–1985

During 1977 a Philippine environmental impact statement (EIS) system was established and the National Environmental Protection Council (NEPC) was formed to develop environmental policy. Several months after its creation, NEPC was given responsibility to certify that proposed projects met EIS system regulations. With few exceptions, this requirement to gain NEPC's approval was not taken seriously by agencies. The poor record of agency compliance with the EIS system is explained by the absence of ‘controls’ to force thorough assessments. Judicial controls are absent. Procedural and evaluative controls are in place, but NEPC has neither the budget nor the political power to enforce them. Although the national EIS system is ineffective, agencies sometimes conduct informal, ad hoc environmental assessments in response to instrumental controls exercised by international funding organizations, professional controls exerted by planners, and public controls brought about by individuals and groups who would be adversely affected by projects.     

美国环境监测五大标准分析方法系列特点

着重介绍了美国环保局(EPA)开发的五套环境监测标准分析方法系列:EPA600,EPA500,CLP,EPASW-846,EPA200的要点,并简要评述了其特点,这些代表美国环境科学技术最新成就的方法系列应当为我们参考和借鉴.     

Quality assurance and quality control data validation procedures used for the Love Canal and Dallas lead soil monitoring programs

Public awareness of soils contamination has increased in recent years due in part to the notoriety associated with the indiscriminate release, packaging, transporting and disposal of hazardous materials. In 1980, and again in 1982, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was responsible for designing, implementing and conducting environmental monitoring programs at Love Canal in Niagara Falls, New York, and in Dallas, Texas, that dealt with suspected contaminated soils. Both of these monitoring programs were conducted over a relatively short time with the collection and analysis of over 4000 soil samples. The methods employed by the Environmental Protection Agency for providing soil data that was scientifically valid and of defensible quality for each of these monitoring programs are presented. Also, methods for identifying data bias, its precision and its uncertainty are identified.     

Development of the Coastal Intensive Site Network (CISNET)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) have formed a partnership to establish pilot sites for the development of a network known as the Coastal Intensive Site Network (CISNet). CISNet is composed of intensive, long-term monitoring and research sites around the U.S. marine and Great Lakes coasts. In this partnership, EPA and NOAA are funding research and monitoring programs at pilot sites that utilize ecological indicators and investigate the ecological effects of environmental stressors. NASA is funding research aimed at developing a remote sensing capability that will augment or enhance in situresearch and monitoring programs selected by EPA and NOAA. CISNet has three objectives: 1) to develop a sound scientific basis for understanding ecological responses to anthropogenic stresses in coastal environments, including the interaction of exposure, environment/climate, and biological/ecological factors in the response, and the spatial and temporal nature of these interactions, 2) to demonstrate the value of developing data from selected sites intensively monitored to examine the relationships between changes in environmental stressors, including anthropogenic and natural stresses, and ecological response, and 3) to provide intensively monitored sites for development and evaluation of indicators of change in coastal systems.     

Assessing benthic community condition in Chesapeake Bay: does the use of different benthic indices matter?

Federal and state environmental agencies conduct several programs to characterize the environmental condition of Chesapeake Bay. These programs use different benthic indices and survey designs, and have produced assessments that differ in the estimate of the extent of benthic community degradation in Chesapeake Bay. Provided that the survey designs are unbiased, differences may exist in the ability of these indices to identify environmental degradation. In this study we compared the results of three indices calculated on the same data, and the assessments of two programs: the Chesapeake Bay Program and the Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment (MAIA). We examined the level of agreement of index results using site-based measures of agreement, evaluated sampling designs and statistical estimation methods, and tested for significant differences in assessments. Comparison of ratings of individual sites was done within separate categories of water and sediment quality to identify which indices summarize best pollution problems in Chesapeake Bay. The use of different benthic indices by these programs produced assessments that differed significantly in the estimate of degradation. A larger fraction of poor sites was classified as good by the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program’s Virginian Province and MAIA benthic indices compared to the Chesapeake Bay benthic index of biotic integrity, although overall classification efficiencies were similar for all indices. Differences in survey design also contributed to differences in assessments. The relative difference between the indices remained the same when they were applied to an independent dataset, suggesting that the indices can be calibrated to produce consistent results.     

An Interactive, Spatial Inventory of Environmental Data in the Mid-Atlantic Region

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is working with federal, state, local, and non-governmental partners to produce an interactive, spatial inventory of environmental data in the mid-Atlantic region. The inventory will include maps of sampling locations, lists of measurements, and design information for hundreds of research sites and monitoring programs. It will also feature user-defined queries, resulting in customized maps that satisfy search criteria. (For example, "Display the probability-based surveys that measure dry deposition and nutrient availability in soils"). The inventory will be used in an interagency pilot study, instigated by the National Science and Technology Council's Committee on the Environment and Natural Resources, to integrate environmental monitoring and research activities. The inventory will also provide information for a regional ecological assessment led by EPA Region 3 and the Office of Research and Development. In addition, an interagency consortium will use the inventory to identify suitable field data for assessing the accuracy of satellite imagery. In each of these three applications, the inventory will be tested and evaluated as a potential prototype for completing additional regions of the U.S. Maintained as an Oracle database, the inventory is accessible on the internet at http://www.epa.gov/monitor/. Currently, ten inventory records are on-line for demonstration. The complete federal inventory of approximately 180 records will be accessible on-line by October, 1997; approximately 200 state, local and non-governmental records are scheduled for on-line access by April, 1998.     

A nationally consistent framework for identifying interstate waters with applications for the national listing of fish advisories

A 1988 survey, funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and conducted by the American Fisheries Society, identified the need to standardize the approaches for evaluating risks and developing fish consumption advisories that are comparable across different jurisdictions. A major tool for evaluating the progress in developing such nationally consistent information is EPA??s web-based National Listing of Fish Advisories (NLFA) database, which has archived fish advisory information since 1993. The NLFA comprises both a database and Geographic Information System mapping components that are implemented using the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). EPA and the US Geological Survey have developed an enhanced NHD product (NHDPlus) that is applied to define an interstate waters framework for the conterminous USA. This NHDPlus-based framework provides an efficient watershed-oriented approach for identifying interstate advisories from NLFA. We provide summaries of (1) the degree of consistency documented for inland waters where states have issued advisories for shared interstate NHD reaches and (2) the patterns for interstate advisories organized according to the ecoregions developed for EPA??s Wadeable Streams Assessment. Approaches are also discussed for addressing interstate consistency issues for fish advisories in coastal waters making use of the NHDPlus combined with other nationally consistent frameworks, such as the 12-digit hydrologic unit code subwatersheds in the Watershed Boundary Dataset. Probability survey methods are recommended as a way to promote increased interjurisdictional consistency in the development of the monitoring and risk assessment conclusions reflected in NLFA, as well as in other EPA water quality-based programs.     

A multi-variate methodology for analyzing pre-existing lake water quality data

Environmental agencies are given the task of monitoring water quality in rivers, lakes, and other bodies of water, for the purpose of comparing the results with regulatory standards. Monitoring follows requirements set by regulations, and data are collected in a systematic way for the intended purpose. Monitoring enables agencies to determine whether water bodies are polluted. Much effort is spent per monitoring event, resulting in hundreds of data points typically used solely for comparison with regulatory standards and then stored for little further use. This paper devises a data analysis methodology that can make use of the pre-existing datasets to extract more useful information on water quality trends, without new sample collection and analysis. In this paper, measured lake water quality data are subjected to statistical analyses including Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to deduce changes in water quality spatially and temporally over several years. It was found that the lake as a whole changed temporally by season, rather than spatially. Storm events caused the greatest shifts in water quality, though the shifts were fairly consistent across sampling stations. This methodology can be applied to similar datasets, especially with the recent emphasis by the U.S. EPA on protection of lakes as water sources. Water quality managers using these techniques may be able to lower their monitoring costs by eliminating redundant water quality parameters found in this analysis.     

Using Science to Assess Environmental Vulnerabilities

Beginning in 1995, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Office of Research and Development has focused much of its ecological research in the Mid-Atlantic as part of the Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment (MAIA). The goal of MAIA is to improve the assessability of scientific information in environmental decision-making. Following the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) whose goal is to guide monitoring that effectively reflects current ecosystem condition and trends, MAIA's second, current, phase of research under the Regional Vulnerability Assessment (ReVA) program is designed to target risk management activities using available data and models. The papers presented here are from a conference held in May 2003 that presented results of research in this second phase of MAIA. The conference was organized into the following topics: 1. Assessing Current Impacts and Vulnerabilities 2. Forecasting Environmental Condition and Vulnerabilities 3. Developing Management Strategies to Optimize the Future, and 4. Assessing and Responding to Environmental Vulnerability.     

An Overview of Contaminant-Related Issues Identified by Monitoring in San Francisco Bay

The San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances (RMP) began in 1993 and is sponsored by 74 local, state, and federal agencies and companies through their discharge or Bay use permits. The RMP monitors water, sediment, toxicity, and bivalve bioaccumulation at 25 sites in the Bay that are considered to represent "background" conditions. Several major environmental issues have been identified by the RMP. Polychlorinated biphenyls and mercury were often above water quality guidelines, and often occurred in fish tissues above U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) screening values. Concentrations do not appear to be decreasing, suggesting continuing inputs. Episodes of aquatic toxicity often occurred following runoff events that transport contaminants into the Bay from urbanized and agricultural portions of the watershed. Sediment toxicity occurred throughout the Bay, and has been correlated with concentrations of specific contaminants (chlordanes, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons) at some locations; mixtures of contaminants were probably also important. Since the RMP does not monitor all ecosystem components, assessments of the overall condition of the Bay cannot be made. However, in terms of contamination, the RMP samples suggest that the South Bay, and North Bay sites are moderately contaminated.     

Bi-national assessment of the Great Lakes: SOLEC partnerships

Many administrative jurisdictions have authority over parts of the Great Lakes, sometimes with competing purposes as well as governance at differing scales of time and space. As demand increases for high quality information that is relevant to environmental managers, environmental and natural resource agencies with limited budgets must look to interdisciplinary, collaborative approaches for the collection, analysis and reporting of data. The State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conferences (SOLEC) were begun in 1994 in response to reporting requirements of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between Canada and the U.S. The biennial conferences provide independent, science-based reporting on the state of health of the Great Lakes ecosystem components. A suite of indicators necessary and sufficient to assess Great Lakes ecosystem status was introduced in 1998, and assessments based on a subset of the indicators were presented in 2000. Because SOLEC is a multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional reporting venue, the SOLEC indicators require acceptance by a broad spectrum of stakeholders in the Great Lakes basin. The SOLEC indicators list is expected to provide the basis for government agencies and other organizations to collaborate more effectively and to allocate resources to data collection, evaluation and reporting on the state of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem.