Other Innovations. (1) Extensive Community In- volvement. The FCLP of local citizens meet with ExxonMobil, WVDEP, and EPA almost every month to provide input into decisions made regard- ing the cleanup and redevelopment of the Superfund site. (2) Coordinating Redevelopment Activities with Cleanup Actions. As cleanup ac- tivities continue, ExxonMobil has been working with local and state redevelopment agencies to identify redevelopment options and developers, soliciting the opinions of the community, and has improved the site’s aesthetics and marketability by demolishing on-site structures. (3)
Other Innovations. Promoting Energy Efficiency Lessons in Other Agency Innovation Programs. While the Labs21 program is innovative in its fo- cus on laboratories in the United States, its em- phasis is on improving the energy efficiency of the whole building rather than the components of the lab individually. Examining energy and water re- quirements from the comprehensive building per- spective promoted by Labs21 can identify significant opportunities to improve efficiencies across all types of commercial structures. EPA intends to take what it learns from the Labs21 XL project and transfer lessons learned to other inno- vative Agency programs designed to help reduce pollution by promoting energy and water efficiency such as EPA’s ENERGY STAR and Water Alliances for Voluntary Efficiency (WAVE) programs. 115 The Superior Environmental Performance: The Labs21 program is establishing partnership agree- ments with over a dozen public and private sector pilot partners. EPA and DOE are working with each partner to define a specific project, set vol- untary energy reduction and environmental perfor- xxxxx goals, and measure and report the success of their efforts. The lessons learned from the pilot phase will be applied once the Labs21 program is fully implemented. The following is a sample of Project Status and Results the types of projects these partners have commit- xxx to: • Xxxxxxx-Xxxxx Squibb is planning an 80,000 square-foot addition to its existing facility in Wallingford, Connecticut. Of that, 56,000 square feet will be new laboratory space. Xxxxxxx-Xxxxx Squibb has made a commitment to design, install, and operate equipment to reduce both energy and water consumption at this site. • Wyeth-Ayerst (Wyeth) Pharmaceuticals has two projects in the Labs21 program. The first is a renovation of its 1.2 million square-foot Collegeville, Pennsylvania, headquarters and research and development campus. Wyeth in- tends to make the campus a benchmark for re- source efficiency and sustainability among similar facilities worldwide. • The second project is Wyeth’s new Vaccine Discovery Research Facility in Pearl River, New York. This laboratory will be designed, built, and commissioned to achieve a LEED™ gold rating or better. LEED™ is a rating sys- tem created by the U.S. Green Building Coun- cil to evaluate the sustainable design and performance of a given facility. • The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) National Marine Fisheries Service is in the process of ...
Other Innovations. (1) Industry-Organized and Community-Based Environmental Protection Model. This collaborative approach may: (a) lead to greater cooperation and creativity in approach ing environmental regulations by regulators and industrial participants; (b) set an example of envi ronmental stewardship for other commercial in terests throughout Xxxxxx County; and (c) educate the public in Owatonna and Blooming Prairie about environmental impacts of their actions. This in dustrial partnership model could be exported to other industrial facilities in Xxxxxx County and throughout the United States. (2) Testing the Use
Other Innovations. (1) Establishment of a Trans- ferable Model for Other States and Localities. This project will establish a highly transferable model in two unique and important ways. First, EPA’s policy memorandum is nationally applicable as it encourages states to take steps necessary to offer more flexibility at the state level. States retain the discretion to implement this federal policy in a more stringent manner or to be broader in scope than the federal program as they see fit. Second, LSB’s program will serve as a model project by encouraging the use of best management practices for handling LBP debris from residential housing as set out by HUD. (2) Cleanup of Additional Hous- ing Units. The decreased costs of disposing of LBP as household wastes will allow lead abatement dollars to stretch further, thereby potentially en- abling the cleanup of thousands of additional hous- ing units nationally if the flexibility is broadened beyond LSB. The Superior Environmental Performance: By extending the RCRA HWE rule to allow con- tractors and individuals to perform lead abatements in residential housing units, EPA will enable LSB to forgo costly testing and disposal of lead debris in solid waste landfills, allowing more lead xxxxx- ment projects to take place with the funds saved in disposal costs, thus preventing more children from being exposed to lead hazards. In addition to en- couraging use of the HWE rule to facilitate resi- dential LBP abatement activities, EPA also strongly encourages individuals and contractors to use best management practices, as set out by HUD when evaluating and controlling LBP hazards in hous- ing units. By ensuring that appropriate safety mea- sures are taken at the time of the removal, worker health will also be protected. LSB’s procedures and contract requirements ensure that all contrac- tors undertaking LBP remediation under LSB’s auspices must follow all federal, state, and local health and safety precautions that apply to this type of activity. Progress in Meeting Commitments Project Status and Results (As of November 2001) • EPA committed to issue a policy memorandum clarifying the regulatory status of wastes gen- erated as a result of LBP activities in homes and other residences as non-hazardous waste under the RCRA HWE Rule at 40 CFR 261.4(b)1. To increase awareness about the policy memorandum, EPA committed to cir- culate the document to all EPA regions, states, tribes, and trade associations, as well as to post it on the EPA Web si...
Other Innovations. (1) Innovation/Multimedia Pollution Prevention. The integration of the pre- treatment program with other environmental moni- toring and management programs will allow more efficient use of resources. Louisville and Jefferson County MSD will test several of the 18 recom- mended results-oriented measures for assessing performance of pretreatment programs developed by a special committee from the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies in 1994, under a cooperative agreement grant with EPA. When appropriate, Louisville and Jefferson County MSD will reinvest cost-savings into pollution preven- tion activities, including outreach, education, and technical assistance, first within the pretreatment program, then in other watershed-based programs. Louisville and Jefferson County MSD is working with the Kentucky Pollution Prevention Center for input in this area. (2) Transferability to Other Municipalities. Other municipalities will be able to draw valuable lessons from Louisville/ Jefferson County MSD’s experience, as it relates to imple- xxxxxxx a performance-based program in indi- vidual facilities and ultimately across a multi-plant, multi-watershed sewer district. Louisville and Jefferson County MSD’s XL project confronts the operational, data collection and analysis, and en- vironmental challenges posed by a regulatory struc- ture that compartmentalizes programs that in practice would benefit from a more holistic ap- proach and will attempt to build links between the pretreatment program and the rest of the system.
Other Innovations. (1) Limited Preapprovals for Air Permits. Pharmaceutical industries change their product lines frequently. Usually, such changes require a time-consuming preconstruction permit exercise potentially resulting in delays in getting new products to market. By focusing on the total emissions of a facility, XL is testing and confirming flexible emission reduction strategies that may be both duplicated at similar facilities across the country and integrated into EPA’s exist- ing regulatory regime. (2) Tiered Reporting— Building Incentives into Data Collection Requirements. A key innovative feature of Merck’s XL project is that the monitoring, record keeping, and reporting requirements for the PSD permit in- crease in stringency as the site’s actual total xxxxx- ria pollutant emissions come closer to the total emissions cap. Annual reporting is required when facility-wide emissions are less than 75 percent of the cap. Semiannual reporting is required when facility-wide emissions are between 75 percent and 90 percent of the cap. Monthly reporting is re- quired when emissions are equal to or greater than 90 percent of the total emissions cap. Since data collection and reporting are expensive, this pro- vides an additional incentive for the facility to minimize its emissions. 135 The Superior Environmental Performance: Merck will improve air quality in the Shenandoah National Park and surrounding community by op- erating under the site-wide emissions caps and Project Status and Results permanently reducing total criteria air pollutant emissions by approximately 300 tons per year, a 20 percent reduction versus recent actual emis- sions, as required by the facility-wide cap. Xxxxx- ria pollutants such as SO2 and NOx emissions can damage plant life, reduce visibility, contribute to acid rain, and cause adverse health effects. In ad- dition, NOx reacts with VOCs to create ground- level ozone, which can damage vegetation and structures and also have harmful effects on the res- piratory system of people. The emission subcaps guarantee at least a 25 percent reduction of SO2 and 10 percent reduction of NOx versus recent ac- tual emission levels. Merck – Total Criteria Pollutant Emissions July 2000-June 2001 199.02 February 2000- January 2001 499.54 Emissions Cap 1,202 Baseline 1,503 0 000 000 000 800 1000 1200 Tons per Year 1400 1600 Progress in Meeting Commitments (As of September 2001) • EPA has met its commitment to propose a site- specific PSD and NSR rule, which provide...
Other Innovations. (1) Air emissions per mea- sure of production. This project represents an in novative approach to allowing changes in manufacturing processes that may result in reduced air emissions per standardized measure of produc tion. (2) Performance-based air emission ratio system. The project also provides an opportunity to test whether a tiered air emission ratio system, with both rewards and penalties, can provide a Project Status and Results better incentive for reducing air emissions. If suc cessful, the project will result in a new, flexible, performance-based approach designed to achieve superior environmental results and cost savings. In addition, if this approach is adopted more widely, it will allow the public to compare the environ mental efficiency of different facilities for the first time ever, a profound change to how environmen tal information is approached. The Superior Environmental Performance: The project establishes an innovative, incentive- based per unit emission measure that should drive down Xxxxxxxx’x per unit emission of VOCs. In addition to the per unit measure, emission caps on VOCs and PM ensure that the facility’s overall emissions will not exceed those from normal op erations. Andersen will be able to manufacture more of its windows from recycled wood fiber and vinyl than in the past, reducing both its use of vir gin materials and its air emissions. Andersen will also decrease its reliance on high-solvent processes, further reducing air emissions at the facility. Progress in Meeting Commitments (As of November 2001) • Current activities are primarily focused on fi nalizing the permit, which is expected in mid- 2002. The following commitments have been targeted and are expected to be incorporated into the Andersen Minnesota XL Permit (the first six Andersen commitments are currently being met): Andersen • Conduct a health risk analysis for toxic air emissions (completed and reviewed by MPCA). • Limit VOC emissions to 2,397 tons per year for the entire Bayport Facility (see Figure 1). • Combine the existing diptank VOC synthetic minor limits into a single rolling average limit of 1,573.9 tons per year (see Figure 1). • Limit non-milling PM emissions for the Bayport Facility to 209.1 tons per year (see Figure 2). Andersen – Volatile Organic Compounds Facility-wide Actual TBD 2002 Facility-wide Cap 2,397 Facility-wide Past Performance Diptank Actual Diptank Rolling Average Limit Diptank Past Performance TBD 2002 TBD 2002 1,573.9 T...
Other Innovations. (1) Testing Subbasin Moni- toring as a Tool. EPA and the POTW will be able to determine the usefulness of subbasin monitor ing as a less resource-intensive compliance tool and targeting mechanism for pollution prevention outreach. Once baseline data are established within the city’s wastewater collection system subbasins, the POTW will be able to target certain businesses for pollution prevention activities, rather than pre dicting outputs from industrial process inputs. (2) Fundamental Change in Approach Toward Indus- trial Waste Generation. The Southside Water Rec lamation Plant is testing a suite of new methods for preventing discharge of pollutants and freeing up resources for outreach and education by attempt ing to permanently integrate pollution prevention principles, promotion, and recognition as part of the city’s required Industrial Pretreatment Program.
Other Innovations. In addition to my obligations under Clause 6, I will disclose promptly in writing to Company all Innovations conceived, reduced to practice, created, derived, developed, or made by me (alone or jointly with others) during my employment with Company and for three (3) months thereafter, whether or not I believe the Innovations are subject to this Deed, to permit a determination by Company as to whether or not the Innovations are or should be deemed to be Company Innovations. Company will receive that information in confidence.
Other Innovations. (1) Effectively Targeting Monitoring and Inspection Schedules to Maintain Environmental Quality. Only SIUs and minor us- ers that have been in compliance will qualify for less frequent inspections and monitoring by city personnel. (2) Generating Greater Environmen- tal Benefit by Reducing Programmatic Burdens. By reducing the frequency of inspections and moni- toring on those industrial users who are already in compliance, this project aims to make more re- sources available to city personnel to work to achieve greater environmental results through fo- cused activities. (3) Remote Monitoring and Wa- tershed Protection. This project will test the application of real-time, remotely deployed moni- toring devices that will provide continuous, pub- licly accessible water quality data while creating minimal demand on personnel. Monitoring and annual inspection will be reduced, while greater focus will be placed on reducing non-point source pollutants in urban storm water drainage. Resource 42 savings from regulatory flexibility will be reap- portioned to watershed protection activities. The Superior Environmental Performance: This project tests an innovative and comprehen- sive system, which will provide the capability to detect contaminants with the potential to impact water quality and ultimately the aquatic environ- ment and drinking water reservoir for the City of Xxxxxx. The City of Xxxxxx also plans to create buffer zones in undeveloped drainage basins within the boundaries of the watershed. These creek-side buffer zones or conservation easements will reduce the runoff of agricultural and suburban pollutants. The three main areas addressed to achieve supe- rior environmental performance are:
