Clean Sweep Programs - US Environmental Protection Agency

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Section 1 IntroductionFor the past 20 years, state and localgovernments have collected and safely disposed ofmore than 24 million pounds of unwanted pesticides.These efforts, now commonly called “Clean Sweepprograms,” focus on agricultural pesticides but mayalso include other pesticides, such as those used byhomeowners, golf courses, or highway departmentsalong their rights-of-way. There is no federalstatutory requirement or mandate to conduct thesecollections. Clean Sweeps are state and localinitiatives, and the states have adopted a variety ofapproaches to finance and implement their programs.However, all of the states have the samegoal: fostering environmental protection and pollutionprevention by removing these potentially hazardousmaterials from the environment.This report is a salute to the states’successful and largely unheralded contribution tocleaning up the environment.1.1 What are the goals of this report?Tell a great story of environmental protection.The potential for soil and water contamination due tothe improper management of waste pesticides is highand is widely documented. Many state and localgovernments recognized and addressed this possibleproblem and have removed and disposed of over 24million pounds of potential contaminants.Recognize the efforts of state and local governments.State and local governments have taken thelead and largely used their own resources to developprocedures for the safe collection and disposal ofunwanted pesticides. The federal government hasplayed a limited supporting role. EPA wishes torecognize the states and counties for their accomplishments.Document Clean Sweep programs and providean accessible information database. State CleanSweep programs have many common features, buteach state has designed its program to meet its ownneeds. This report presents information on eachstate’s program in a standard format. It alsoconsolidates all of the information, allowing nationaltotals to be calculated and providing a nationwideperspective on the accomplishments of CleanSweeps. In addition, EPA plans an on-line versionof this report, which will be a living document,periodically updated as established programs changeor new ones start.Serve as a resource for regulators, lawmakers,and the public. This report provides informationfor federal, state, tribal, county and municipalofficials and citizens interested in initiating orimproving the collection of agricultural pesticides.Support national and international efforts toprevent pollution and promote environmentalprotection. Several national and international effortsattempt to prevent persistent and bioaccumulativetoxics (PBTs) from reaching the environment and toremove the PBT contamination that already exists.Clean Sweep programs ensure that existing pesticidestocks, including pesticides categorized as PBTs, areproperly collected and disposed.1.2 How do Clean Sweep programsmesh with EPA’s priorities andprograms?EPA’s mission is to protect human health andsafeguard the natural environment -- air, water, andland -- upon which life depends. Clean Sweepprograms conducted and led by state and localgovernments are consistent with this mission. Theseprograms have collected and properly disposed ofmillions pounds of unwanted pesticides, therebyensuring that they will not be released as potentialcontaminants in the environment. This section brieflydescribes some of the specific EPA programs whose1
Section 1 Introductiongoals coincide with the Clean Sweep goal ofproperly collecting and disposing of unwantedpesticides.PesticidesThe Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, andRodenticide Act (FIFRA) establishes standards forthe regulation, sale, distribution and use of pesticidesin the U.S. The Act authorizes EPA to review andregister pesticides for specified uses and to suspendor cancel the registration of a pesticide if subsequentinformation shows that continued use would poseunreasonable risks. Much of EPA’s work onpesticides involves:• Registering, or licensing, pesticides,• Ensuring that pesticides, when used accordingto label directions, can be used with a reasonablecertainty of not causing harm to humanhealth and not posing unreasonable risks to theenvironment, and• Reviewing older pesticides to ensure that theymeet current health, safety and environmentalstandards.Section 19 of FIFRA establishes standards for thestorage, disposal, transportation and recall ofpesticides and requires EPA to publish regulationson pesticide container design and residue removal.EPA is currently developing these regulations onpesticide containers and containment structures,which are intended to facilitate the safe use, safedisposal and safe refill of containers.Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic ChemicalsPersistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT)pollutants persist in ecosystems and accumulate infish and up the food chain, thereby posing healthrisks. In 1998, EPA drafted a strategy 1 toovercome the remaining challenges posed by thesepollutants, which stem from their ability to travel longdistances, to transfer rather easily between air,water, and land, and to linger for decades. SinceEPA’s traditional single-statute approach is not thefull solution to reducing risks from PBTs, EPAcreated a system that will address the cross-mediaissues associated with priority PBT pollutants. Thepriority PBTs are the Level 1 substances identifiedby Canada and the U.S. in the 1997 BinationalToxics Strategy. 2 For each of the priority PBTslisted in the box below, EPA is developing a PBTnational action plan.Priority PBTs: Level 1 Substances under theBinational Toxics StrategyPesticidesaldrinchlordaneDDT (+DDD+DD E)dieldrinmirextoxapheneNon-pesticidesbenzo(a)pyrenehexachlorobenzenealkyl-leadmercury and compoundsoctachlorostyrenePCBsPCDD (dioxins) and PCDF(furans)National action plans draw on the full arrayof EPA statutory authorities and national programs.EPA may use regulatory action where voluntaryefforts are insufficient. EPA may pursue, in the1The draft strategy is titled A Multimedia Strategy for Priority Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) Pollutants(Working Draft), prepared by the US EPA Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic Pollutants (PBT) Plenary Group and the US EPAOffice Directors Multimedia and Pollution Prevention Forum, November 16, 1998. It can be found on the web site of EPA’sPersistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxics (PBT) Chemical Program at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/pbt/home.htm.2The full name of the Binational Toxics Strategy is the Canada-United States Strategy for the Virtual Elimination ofPersistent Toxic Substances in the Great Lakes Basin. Information can be found on the Binational Toxics Strategy home page athttp://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/bns/.2
Page 1 and 2: ForewordThe states and some countie
Page 3 and 4: Table of ContentsSECTIONFOREWORDTAB
Page 5 and 6: List of Figures and TablesNumber Ti
Page 7 and 8: State IndexAlabamaAlaskaArizonaArka
Page 9 and 10: Executive SummaryParticipants. Alth
Page 11 and 12: Executive Summarypounds. States wan
Page 16: The Clean Sweep Reportshort-term or
Page 19 and 20: Section 1 Introductionextensive and
Page 21 and 22: Section 1 Introductionfunded, conti
Page 23 and 24: Section 2 Clean Sweep Program Opera
Page 25 and 26: Section 2Clean Sweep Program Operat
Page 35 and 36: Section 2Clean Sweep Program Operat
Page 45 and 46: Section 3 Clean Sweep Program Resul
Page 51 and 52: Table 11 Total Amount of Pesticides
Page 57 and 58: 44Table 13 Specific Pesticides Trac
Page 59 and 60: Table 14 Quantity of the Most Commo
Page 61 and 62: Section 4 Challenges and Opportunit
Page 63 and 64:
Section 4 Challenges and Opportunit
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Section 5 Observations5.2 The unit
Page 73 and 74:
Section 5ObservationsTable 17: Tota
Page 75 and 76:
Section 5 Observations5.3 Reliable
Page 77 and 78:
Section 5 Observationsamount annual
Page 79 and 80:
Appendix INOTES on STATE “ATA GLA
Page 81 and 82:
ALABAMA AT A GLANCESince 1994 Alaba
Page 83 and 84:
ALASKA AT A GLANCEAlaska conducts s
Page 85 and 86:
ARIZONA AT A GLANCEArizona does not
Page 87 and 88:
ARKANSAS AT A GLANCEThe Arkansas St
Page 89 and 90:
CALIFORNIA AT A GLANCESince 1989 Ca
Page 91 and 92:
COLORADO AT A GLANCEAn EPA grant an
Page 93 and 94:
YearColorado Table 1 - Quantity of
Page 95 and 96:
Summary of Connecticut Waste Pestic
Page 97 and 98:
Summary of Delaware Waste Pesticide
Page 99 and 100:
Summary of Florida Waste Pesticide
Page 101 and 102:
GEORGIA AT A GLANCEGeorgia has cond
Page 103 and 104:
HAWAII AT A GLANCEHawaii conducted
Page 105 and 106:
IDAHO AT A GLANCEIdaho’s permanen
Page 107 and 108:
ILLINOIS AT A GLANCESince its first
Page 109 and 110:
Illinois attempted a swap program i
Page 111 and 112:
Summary of Indiana Waste Pesticide
Page 113 and 114:
IOWA AT A GLANCESince 1991 Iowa has
Page 115 and 116:
YearIowa Table 1 - Quantity of Pest
Page 117 and 118:
Summary of Kansas Waste Pesticide D
Page 119 and 120:
KENTUCKY AT A GLANCEKentucky conduc
Page 121 and 122:
LOUISIANA AT A GLANCELouisiana coll
Page 123 and 124:
MAINE AT A GLANCEMaine conducted it
Page 125 and 126:
MARYLAND AT A GLANCEThe Maryland De
Page 127 and 128:
MASSACHUSETTS AT A GLANCEMassachuse
Page 129 and 130:
MICHIGAN AT A GLANCEMichigan’s pe
Page 131 and 132:
MINNESOTA AT A GLANCESince 1989 Min
Page 133 and 134:
Minnesota Table 1 - Quantity of Pes
Page 135 and 136:
Summary of Mississippi Waste Pestic
Page 137 and 138:
Summary of Missouri Waste Pesticide
Page 139 and 140:
Summary of Montana Waste Pesticide
Page 141 and 142:
Summary of Nebraska Waste Pesticide
Page 143 and 144:
Summary of Nevada Waste Pesticide D
Page 145 and 146:
Summary of New Hampshire Waste Pest
Page 147 and 148:
Summary of New Jersey Waste Pestici
Page 149 and 150:
New Jersey Table 3 - County-by-Coun
Page 151 and 152:
Summary of New Mexico Waste Pestici
Page 153 and 154:
Summary of New York Waste Pesticide
Page 155 and 156:
churches, schools and businesses. P
Page 157 and 158:
NORTH CAROLINA AT A GLANCENorth Car
Page 159 and 160:
North Carolina Table 1 - Quantity o
Page 161 and 162:
Summary of North Dakota Waste Pesti
Page 163 and 164:
Summary of Ohio Waste Pesticide Dis
Page 165 and 166:
OKLAHOMA AT A GLANCEOklahoma does n
Page 167 and 168:
OREGON AT A GLANCESince 1991 Oregon
Page 169 and 170:
PENNSYLVANIA AT A GLANCEIn 1993 Pen
Page 171 and 172:
RHODE ISLAND AT A GLANCERhode Islan
Page 173 and 174:
SOUTH CAROLINA AT A GLANCESouth Car
Page 175 and 176:
SOUTH DAKOTA AT A GLANCESince 1993
Page 177 and 178:
TENNESSEE AT A GLANCEThe Tennessee
Page 179 and 180:
TEXAS AT A GLANCESince 1992 Texas h
Page 181 and 182:
YearNumberof SitesTexas Table 1 - Q
Page 183 and 184:
UTAH AT A GLANCESince 1993 Utah has
Page 185 and 186:
VERMONT AT A GLANCEVermont first co
Page 187 and 188:
VIRGINIA AT A GLANCEVirginia conduc
Page 189 and 190:
YearQuantity ofPesticides(pounds)Vi
Page 191 and 192:
Summary of Washington Waste Pestici
Page 193 and 194:
Summary of West Virginia Waste Pest
Page 195 and 196:
Summary of Wisconsin Waste Pesticid
Page 197 and 198:
WYOMING AT A GLANCEIn 1992 Wyoming
Page 199 and 200:
Appendix II - Pesticides That are R
Page 201 and 202:
Appendix IIU044 chloroform U080 met
Page 203 and 204:
Appendix IIIB. Availability Contrac
Page 205 and 206:
Appendix III4. Federal Hazardous Ma
Page 207 and 208:
Appendix III22. INDEPENDENT CONTRAC
Page 209 and 210:
Appendix IIIContractor further agre
Page 211 and 212:
Appendix III33. CONTRACTOR’S DUTI
Page 213 and 214:
Appendix IIIC. Any deviation of mor
Page 215 and 216:
Appendix III45. MERGER CLAUSEThis a
Page 217 and 218:
Appendix IVOnyx Environmental Servi
Page 219 and 220:
State Pre-89 1989 1990 1991 1992 19
Page 221 and 222:
State pre-89 1989 1990 1991 1992 19
Page 223 and 224:
Appendix VILouisiana: Division of P
Page 225 and 226:
Appendix VII - Sample Emergency Pla
Page 227 and 228:
Appendix VIIICOMPARISON OF PESTICID
Page 229:
StateEstimated(lbs. A.I.)Total Used
show all

Clean Sweep Programs - US Environmental Protection Agency

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?