Clean Air Act The Federal Clean Air Act's primary mechanism for achieving clean air is through State Air Quality Implementation Plans. These plans encompass many different elements, including regulations limiting emissions from small and large stationary sources, both new and existing, and strategies dealing with emissions from mobile sources such as vehicle inspection programs. EPA's primary responsibilities are to assist and oversee the development of these plans, and once in place, to ensure their implementation. Because of the large number of responsibilities delegated to the states, Section 105 of the Act established a mechanism to fund a portion of these activities. These resources are used to fund both the base programs run by the states and special outputs which are specified by EPA. The special outputs are negotiated with the states and are in accordance with national objectives. The use of these funds and the accomplishment of specific objectives contained in the grants are closely tracked by EPA.

A special category of air emissions is made up of airborne toxic compounds. EPA is developing a national program to implement the air toxics portion of the Clean Air Act and emissions are expected to be reduced over the course of a 10 year period as controls for various categories of sources are developed. In addition, the Clean Air Act establishes National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAPs) under Section 112 of the Act, and EPA provides technical and financial support to state agencies for the development and implementation of air toxics programs. EPA has established emissions standards for 7 pollutants, including mercury, and another 189 hazardous air pollutants will be regulated under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA) This Federal statute was enacted in 1976 to ensure the proper management and disposal of hazardous and non hazardous solid wastes and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. In 1984, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments ( HSWA) were authorized by Congress to strengthen RCRA. The 1984 Amendments require an applicant to:

I. construct land disposal facilities in accordance with Minimum Technology Requirements, such as double liners and leachate collection and detection systems; II. construct and operate treatment and storage tanks in accordance with the Federal regulation promulgated July 14, 1986 which mandated secondary containment; III. identify and address any contamination at all solid waste management units; and IV. certify to waste minimization. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 43 The HSWA permit also requires the applicant to initiate a corrective action program to address any environmental releases of hazardous waste or constituents at solid waste management units. A corrective action program consists of:

I. RCRA Facility Assessments to identify releases or potential releases requiring further investigation; II. Interim Corrective Measures to take immediate action in response to releases; III. RCRA Facility Investigations to fully characterize the extent of releases; IV. Corrective Measure Studies to determine the need for and extent of remedial measures. This step includes the selection and implementation of appropriate remedies for all problems identified.

These 4 activities ensure that a facility will adequately identify all contamination and provide corrective action as necessary to protect human health and the environment.

The current Federal Solid Waste Management Program is an outgrowth of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 and the Municipal Solid Waste Task Force within EPA have guided Federal solid waste program development. In February 1989 a final report of the Task Force, entitled " The Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for Action," set forth the current Federal initiatives in solid waste management.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (" Superfund") " Superfund" was established in December 1980 under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ( CERCLA, 42 USC 1901 et seq.). The purpose of this program is to provide funding for the cleanup of sites contaminated with hazardous wastes. The Act authorized EPA to provide long term remedies at hazardous waste sites, and established a $ 1.6 billion fund, raised over 5 years from special industry taxes and general revenues, to finance remedial activities. In 1986, Congress reauthorized Superfund by enacting the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act ( SARA), increasing the fund to $ 8.5 billion and strengthening the remedial process.

The sites eligible for receiving Superfund monies are listed on the National Priorities List ( NPL), which is used by EPA to set priorities for cleanup of the sites. A priority site can be remediated in several ways:

I. The responsible parties, i. e., site owners and operators as well as generators and transporters, can remediate it voluntarily; II. The responsible parties can be forced to remediate it by legal and administrative actions; or III. Superfund monies can be used to finance the remedial action. If there is difficulty in getting the responsible parties to act, EPA will proceed under Superfund and will seek recovery of costs through legal action at a later date.

National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan Prevention and cleanup of oil and hazardous substance spills are the focus of Federal programs administered by the U. S. Coast Guard and EPA. The National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan was developed pursuant to the provisions of Section 311( c)( 2) of the Clean Water Act of 1972 as amended. The National Plan is also required by Section 105 of the Superfund Act. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 44 The National Plan calls for the establishment of a nationwide network of regional contingency plans. The purpose of these local contingency plans is to provide for a coordinated and integrated response by the concerned Federal, state, and local agencies in the event of a spill. The plans provide for the standardization of procedure and policy among agencies, and encourage the development of capabilities by both local governments and private interests to handle and prevent pollution discharges. Additionally, Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 ( SARA) requires state and local level emergency planning efforts. SARA requires industries to notify local governments of potential chemical hazards present in the community.

Pollution Prevention Pollution prevention has become a key notion for environmental progress in the last decade. Pollution prevention is a multi media approach with its primary goal being the avoidance of waste and pollution generation, followed by source reduction and environmentally sound recycling. The ultimate goal is to avoid shifting pollutants from one media to another by reducing the need for treatment. EPA has 4 strategic objectives by which the pollution prevention goal can be met:

  Develop a multi media approach;   Support regional, state, and local multi media prevention programs;   Build consensus for a National Agenda on Prevention; and,   Establish data strategy to develop indicators, evaluate progress, and target opportunities.

The Coastal Zone Management Act ( CZMA) The Coastal Zone Management Act ( CZMA) of 1972 established a national policy to preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, to restore or enhance, the nation's coastal zone. The Act also encouraged the states to exercise their responsibilities in the coastal zone through the development and implementation of management programs, the preparation of special area management plans, and the participation and cooperation of the public, local and state governments, interstate and regional agencies, and Federal agencies in programs affecting the coastal zone. The U. S. Department of Commerce is the Federal lead agency charged with the responsibility of implementing the Act; however, the Act provides that the objectives of the law are to be achieved through the development and administration of approved state coastal management programs. The Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 ( CZARA) augmented the original Act by authorizing Federal matching grants for assisting coastal states in developing management programs for the land and water resources of their coastal zones, particularly for nonpoint source pollution control.

Like their state counterparts, Federal agencies operate a number of programs that affect the wise use and protection of coastal resources. The CZMA, as amended, requires the actions of Federal agencies to be consistent with the policies of a state's Coastal Management Plan ( CMP). Federally conducted or supported activities ( including development projects), activities requiring Federal licenses or permits, Federal financial assistance to state and local governments, and exploration, development, and production activities on the Outer Continental Shelf which require a Federal license or permit are all subject to CZMA requirements and must be consistent with the New York CMP.

To ensure that Federal agencies comply with the CZMA provisions, the U. S. Department of Commerce adopted regulations ( 15 CFR Part 930) which established procedures for the Federal consistency process. These regulations set up separate review procedures for each of the above mentioned items. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 45 Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 The 1990 amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act ( CZMA) require that each state develop a nonpoint source pollution control program. Please refer to the Pathogens section for more information on the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990.

Pesticides are a primary agricultural nonpoint source pollutant. The NPS Management Measure for states to follow under CZARA is:

  To reduce the contamination of surface water and ground water due to the application of pesticides;   Evaluate pest problems, previous pest control measures, and cropping history;   Evaluate the leaching potential at the site. Take steps to prevent further contamination if needed;   Use integrated pest management ( IPM) strategies ( apply pesticides only when an economic benefit to the producer will be achieved and apply pesticides efficiently and at times when runoff losses are unlikely);   When pesticide applications are necessary and a choice of registered materials exists, consider the persistence, toxicity, runoff potential, and leaching potential of products in making a selection;   Calibrate pesticide spray equipment; and   Use anti backflow devices.

The practices and concepts that can be used to implement this measure on a given site are those commonly used by states and the U. S. Department of Agriculture ( USDA) for general use on agricultural lands. When this measure is implemented by using the necessary mix of practices for a given site, there should be a relatively small negative economic impact on the operator's net costs and farm income, and in some cases the impact will be positive. Many of the practices that can be used to implement this measure may already be required by Federal, State, or local rules, or may otherwise be in use on agricultural fields. Since many producers may already be using systems that satisfy or partly satisfy the intent of this management measure, the only action that may be necessary will be to determine the effectiveness of the existing practices and implement additional practices, if needed. Use of existing practices will reduce the time, effort, and cost of implementing this measure.

Other nonpoint sources of toxics addressed under CZARA include: road, highway and bridge construction sites, operation and maintenance, and runoff systems; general construction sites, onsite disposal systems; pesticide and toxic substance uses in developed areas; and marinas and recreational boating.

Toxic Substances Control Act The Toxic Substances Control Act institutes comprehensive procedures for the testing and control of chemicals believed to present unreasonable risks and injuries to human health and the environment. This includes: assisting states in developing and maintaining toxic substances enforcement programs; sponsoring cooperative surveillance, monitoring and analytical procedures; encouraging regulatory activities within the states; and supporting and promoting the coordination of research projects relating to the effects, extent, prevention and control of toxic chemical substances or mixtures. Under the Toxic Substances Control Act and FIFRA ( see Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, below), the sale, use or distribution of certain toxic substances has been banned or reduced. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 46 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act supports and promotes the coordination of research projects relating to human and ecological effects from pesticides, pesticide degradation products and alternatives to pesticides. FIFRA authorizes EPA to control pesticides that may threaten ground water and surface water. FIFRA provides for registration of pesticides and enforceable label requirements, which may include maximum rates of application, restrictions on use practices, and classification of pesticides as " restricted use" pesticides ( which limits use to certified applicators trained to handle toxic chemicals). This Act also provides for assisting states in developing and maintaining comprehensive pesticide enforcement programs; sponsoring cooperative surveillance monitoring and analytical procedures; and encouraging regulatory activities within the states. Under FIFRA and TSCA ( see Toxic Substances Control Act, above) the sale, use or distribution of certain toxic substances has been banned or reduced.

Organotin Antifouling Paint Control Act of 1988 The Organotin Antifouling Paint Control Act of 1988 prohibits the use of bottom paint containing tributyltin on vessels less than 82 feet long in order to control toxic substances in the water to help protect fish and other aquatic life.

Environmental Quality Incentives Program ( EQIP) under the 1995 Federal Farm Bill Financial incentives for voluntary compliance by private growers with the CZARA pesticide management measure and for Integrated Pest Management ( IPM) strategies may be available through the 1995 Federal Farm Bill's Environmental Quality Incentives Program ( EQIP). The Suffolk County Office of the United States Department of Agriculture ( USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service ( NRCS) would need to be involved in the preparation of any EQIP proposal.

Safe Drinking Water Act The Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended, in addition to establishing tap water criteria and ensuring the safety of public water supplies, contains other provisions to protect groundwater and sets controls on the injection of fluids into underground sources of drinking water. This Act also includes the wellhead protection program, Sole Source Aquifer Program, and source water protection program.

The National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA), ( 42 U. S. C. 4321 et seq.), was signed into law on January 1, 1970. The Act established national environmental policy and goals for the protection, maintenance, and enhancement of the environment, provided a process for implementing these goals within the Federal agencies, and established the Council on Environmental Quality ( CEQ) to oversee Federal implementation of NEPA.

NEPA contains a Declaration of National Environmental Policy which requires the Federal government to use all practicable means to create and maintain conditions under which people and nature can exist in productive harmony. NEPA also requires Federal agencies to incorporate environmental considerations into their planning and decision making through a systematic interdisciplinary approach. Specifically, all Federal agencies are to prepare detailed statements assessing the environmental impact of, and alternatives to, major Federal actions significantly affecting the environment. These statements are commonly referred to as Environmental Impact Statements ( EISs). Federal agencies are also required to lend appropriate support to initiatives and programs designed to anticipate and prevent a decline in the quality of human living and the world environment. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 47 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA) The U. S. Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA) has specified " Effects Range" values for toxics in sediments to indicate contaminant concentrations at which bottom dwelling organisms may be adversely affected, and as an indicator of overall ecosystem health. While these NOAA Effects Range values are not sediment quality criteria for regulatory purposes, they provide a benchmark for evaluating sediment contaminant measurements.

The two NOAA guideline values, ER L ( effects range low) and ER M ( effects range median) delineate three concentration ranges for a particular chemical. The concentrations below the ER L value represent a minimal effects range, a range intended to estimate conditions in which effects would be rarely observed. Concentrations equal to and above the ER L, but below the ER M, represent a possible effects range within which effects would frequently occur. At concentrations equal to and above the ER M, contaminant induced effects are likely. ( See Long, et al, 1996)

NOAA Mussel Watch Program NOAA created the National Status and Trends ( NS& T) Program in 1984 to address national concerns over the quality of the coastal marine environment, including chemical contamination. The Mussel Watch portion of the NS& T program was formed in 1986 to measure concentrations of a broad suite of trace metals and organic chemicals in surface sediments and the whole soft parts of mussels and oysters.

The U. S. Food and Drug Administration The U. S. Food and Drug Administration ( FDA), the lead Federal agency responsible for risk management of foods in interstate commerce, has set levels for contaminants which, when exceeded in fish and shellfish tissues, can prevent these products from entering the marketplace. ( State and local agencies are responsible for protecting consumers of local fisheries products. State issued consumption advisories for chemicals in sportfish and game are based on FDA levels and other factors.)

Presidential Memorandum on " Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Practices on Federal Landscaped Grounds" A Presidential Memorandum of April 26, 1996 addresses " Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Practices on Federal Landscaped Grounds" which is to be followed by all executive departments and agencies.

State Laws, Agencies and Programs Among the state agencies having authority and directly involved in coastal affairs and toxic substance management are the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the New York State Department of State, and the New York State Department of Health. The DEC has the principal responsibilities for the management and protection of environmental quality and the natural resources of the coastal zone. The DOS is the lead agency in New York for coastal zone management activities and also conducts a program of planning assistance to local communities. The DOH has responsibilities including protecting humans from toxic substances in drinking water and sportfish.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ( DEC) The DEC, in planning, developing and managing the state's water resources undertakes studies for the protection, conservation and development of state waters and establishing standards for quality and uses, permitting of wastewater discharges, and the control of dredging and filling of navigable waters. The Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials regulates and monitors hazardous waste facilities and transporters, encourages waste reduction and proper disposal of household hazardous waste Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 48 and regulates the use of pesticides. The Division requires hazardous waste generators and facilities treating the waste to submit waste reduction plans that must be approved by the Department.

State Pesticide Use Program Under the Pesticide Use Program, NYSDEC regulates the sale and use of restricted and general use pesticides in order to prevent the unsafe or excessive application of pesticides. This program is implemented through certification of pesticide applicators and backed up by examinations to ensure that only knowledgeable, qualified people are permitted to handle and apply these chemicals. A certification required by commercial applicators if they handle and apply restricted or general use pesticides, and by private applicators ( e. g., farmers) if they plan to use a restricted use pesticide. It has been estimated that 50% of the commercial pesticide applicators on Long Island may be operating without the required approvals. While pesticides have not been identified as impairing water quality or living resources, the potential for misuse or unintended off site impacts exists, particularly from uncertified applicators.

Freshwater Wetlands Law The State's Freshwater Protection Law prohibits the use of pesticides and herbicides on or in the vicinity of wetlands and associated waterbodies. However, many residents may be unaware of this law.

The Division of Hazardous Waste Remediation is responsible for the superfund program that involves regulation of inactive hazardous waste sites.

The Division of Water is charged with maintaining water quality in all of the state's waterbodies and managing water resources.

The Division is the lead for establishing water quality standards, regulates wastewater treatment and associated discharges, monitors water quality, oversees the state's nonpoint source management program, and protects groundwater aquifers.

The New York State Water Quality Standards classify waters in the state according to their best usage and specify chemical specific numeric criteria. In addition to specific chemicals in the State Water Quality Standards, a NYSDEC Technical and Operational Guidance Series document establishes guidance values for additional substances.

The New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( SPDES) was established by the New York Environmental Conservation Law and regulates discharges to the land, groundwater, and surface waters of the state. Such discharges include effluent from: public and private sewage treatment plants; industrial discharges; land application of sludge, septage, and industrial wastes; discharges into municipal wastewater treatment plants which are regulated under the industrial pretreatment program; and underground injection. This program was delegated to New York under the CWA, through which the state assumed the permitting functions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.

State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program permits are written to ensure that these discharges do not cause or contribute to the violation of ambient water quality standards. Under Phase I of the SPDES stormwater program, permits are required to be issued for municipal separate storm sewer systems serving large or medium sized populations ( greater than 250,000 or 100,000 people, respectively), and for stormwater discharges to surface waters associated with industrial activity, including certain types of marinas. At the present time, nine establishments in the Peconic Estuary Program Study Area have been issued SPDES stormwater general permits. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 49 Permits also are issued on a case by case basis if the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( USEPA) or the State determines that a stormwater discharge to surface water contributes to a violation of a water quality standard or is a significant contributor of pollutants to waters of the United States. No permits of this type have been issued, to date, in the Peconic Estuary Study Area.

Discharges to ground waters include sanitary wastes from residences and commercial establishments and non contact cooling waters. There are no permitted discharges of wastewater from industrial activities to groundwater in the Peconic Estuary Study Area ( aside from a permit at Brookhaven National Laboratory [ BNL]). Businesses, which generate wastewater containing toxic substances, dispose of such wastewater by containing the limited volumes on site, and then removing them by approved hazardous waste handlers/ transporters for treatment off site. This method is often referred to as " hold and haul".

A marina is required to obtain a SPDES stormwater discharge permit if vehicle maintenance activities, such as vehicle ( boat) rehabilitation, mechanical repairs, painting, fueling, and lubrication or equipment cleaning operations are conducted at the marina. SPDES permits apply only to the point source discharges of stormwater from maintenance areas at the marinas.

Marinas not involved in equipment cleaning or vehicle maintenance activities are not covered under the SPDES stormwater program. Likewise, a marina that has no point source discharges of stormwater is not regulated under the SPDES stormwater program, regardless of its classification and the types of activities conducted. In addition, some marinas are marine service stations that are not regulated under the SPDES stormwater program. These types of marinas are primarily in the business of selling fuel without vehicle maintenance or equipment cleaning operations.

Sewage treatment plant ( STP) effluents are subject to disinfection to limit the discharge of pathogens. The most common method of disinfection is chlorination. Chlorinated discharges to surface waters are of concern because, in systems like the Peconics which contain high levels of organic matter, chlorinated compounds can be formed which, although short lived, can be quite toxic to aquatic organisms. The complexity of the reactions of chlorine in the environment increases the difficulty of assessing its impact. Increased attention is being given to addressing the possible need to limit all uses of chlorine as a means of reducing the input of chlorinated compounds into the environment.

The water quality certification program is authorized by the New York Environmental Conservation Law and the CWA Amendments of 1977 ( 33 U. S. C. 1251, Section 401). All projects requiring Federal permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material into state waters or wetlands also require a State Water Quality Certification. The purpose of this certification is to insure that all such activities are consistent with New York State water quality standards and management policies.

The Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources protects promotes and provides for the use of fish and wildlife resources by maintaining and protecting the resources and their habitats, including managing the living marine resources of the state. This includes assessing environmental impacts on marine resources, administering the tidal wetlands and excavation and fill regulatory programs, coordinating state participation in the National Estuary Programs, recommending standards and classifications for marine waters, certifying shellfish waters for harvesting, administering shellfish management programs, assessing principal fishery stocks and developing recommendations for effective management of species.

The Division of Air controls air pollution by regulating, permitting, and monitoring sources, and developing and implementing strategies to meet the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 50 The Division of Regulatory Affairs coordinates permit reviews, assesses environmental impacts of proposed projects, reviews regulations and issues permits. The Division also administers the State Environmental Quality Review Act which requires all levels of government ( state and local) to assess the environmental significance of actions which they have discretion to approve, fund, or directly undertake.

The Division of Construction Management approves and manages engineering plans and construction activities for sewage treatment plants in the state.

The Bureau of Spill Response controls petroleum and chemical bulk storage and responds to spills. New York State law includes provisions for preventing spills of petroleum. These provisions require all facilities with a minimum capacity of 1,100 gallons to be registered, set forth standards for the handling and storage of petroleum, and set forth standards for new and substantially modified underground and aboveground storage facilities. Owners and operators must notify NYSDEC of any spills. Another State program addresses the requirements for the bulk storage of other hazardous substances, including the registration of storage tanks, spill reporting procedures and specifications for the sale and delivery of such substances.

New York State Department of State Coastal Management Program In New York State the Department of State administers the Coastal Management Program ( CMP). The CMP provides for the preservation, protection, development and use of the state's coastal and inland waterways. The program has many aspects: policies covering land use planning, development of recreation, commercial, and industrial water dependent properties, maintenance of fish and wildlife habitats, stabilization of beaches and dunes, and waste discharge from vessels and on shore facilities. The CMP's jurisdiction extends from the limit of the state's territorial waters to a line generally 500 to 1000 feet inland.

The CMP requires reviews of projects having some form of Federal involvement in coastal areas for consistency with local, state, and Federal environmental statutes and programs. The CMP provides technical and financial assistance to local municipalities to prepare Local Waterfront Revitalization Plans. These plans promote revitalization of coastal areas while protecting their integrity.

Existing state programs and requirements ( including those under the State Navigation Law) are in place to address: pollution from boat cleaning at marinas; liquid material disposal at marinas; solid waste disposal at marinas; and petroleum control at marinas.

New York State Department of Health The Department of Health enforces compliance with the Public Health Law and the State Sanitary Code. In the area of water resources, the Department establishes drinking water quality standards and establishes regulations for the sanitary control of water supplies. The Health Department sets guidance for seafood and wildlife consumption to protect human health. The Department also assists DEC in developing water and air human health standards and in overseeing public health interests for the inspection and remediation of inactive hazardous waste sites.

Fish, Shellfish and Wildlife Consumption Advisories The State routinely monitors contaminant levels in fish and game and issues advisories on eating sportfish and game because some of these foods contain chemicals at levels that may be harmful to human health. These advisories are updated yearly, and provide information on how to minimize exposure to contaminants and reduce whatever health risks are associated with exposure. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 51 Local Programs and Laws Suffolk County Sanitary Code Suffolk County sanitary code requirements ( Article 12) are more stringent than state requirements. The County law went into effect in 1980 and addresses all underground and aboveground tanks storing fuels, solvents, and chemicals, virtually anything that could contaminate groundwater or surface water. New underground tanks are required to have secondary containment and be constructed of non corrodible materials, and must have leak detection and overflow protection systems. All existing facilities had to be brought up to new construction standards by 1990.

The County law exempted existing tanks from the replacement requirement that were under 1100 gallons and used for the storage of heating oil for on premises use. However, new tanks of this type must be made of non corrodible materials. The Financing chapter of this CCMP includes several recommendation regarding incentives for private homeowners to address this potential threat to groundwater and surface water.

Organic solvents used as septic system cleaners may hinder effective septic system operation by destroying useful bacteria that aid in the degradation of waste, resulting in disrupted treatment activity and the discharge of contaminants. In addition, since the organic chemicals in the solvents are highly mobile in the soils and toxic ( some are suspected carcinogens), they can easily contaminate ground water and surface waters and threaten public health. State and County laws restrict/ prohibit the sale and distribution of illegal disposal system products in Nassau and Suffolk counties. This includes deodorizers and drain cleaners as well as cesspool additives. However, sewage system cleaners may still be used by unsuspecting residents.

East Hampton Harbor Protection Overlay District The Town of East Hampton, recognized that those who own property bordering on the Town's harbors ( including flag lots, flag strips, and flag access strips) derive many benefits from proximity to these waters and therefore have a special responsibility to help protect them. The Town has established a Harbor Protection Overlay District ( HPOD) whereby all lots in this district are subject to special requirements for maintaining or protecting wildlife habitats, and surface water quality to protect aquatic life. This includes:

  Requiring new parking lots and driveways to have " unimproved" surfaces or be constructed of one or more of the following: poured concrete, hot plant asphalt, rapid curing cut back asphalt or quartz gravel;   Requiring that runoff from new paved roads, parking lots and driveways be managed onsite   Requiring that fuel tanks be double walled fiberglass if installed below ground or include specified containment provisions if installed elsewhere;   Requiring that swimming pools: be constructed or installed with a system to reduce the use of chlorine, such as an ozonator, ionizer, or ultra violet disinfectant system; have drywells constructed for evacuation of water from the pool; not be drained anywhere but to the dry well; and not be cleaned by means of an acid wash unless the acids used are neutralized prior to discharge from the swimming pool, and   Allowing the use of wood treated with copper chromated arsenate ( CCA), ammoniacal copper quat ( ACQ), or creosote in tidal waters only when it can be shown that no reasonable alternatives to using these treated woods exists. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 52 Suffolk County Vector Control The Suffolk County Department of Public Works maintains vector control ditches ( mosquito ditches), and typically applies sprays for larval control of mosquitoes. Problem areas are monitored to determine effective treatments. The primary insecticide used is Bti ( bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis); in some areas, methoprene is used.

Local " Stop Throwing Out Pollutants" ( STOP) Programs Each of the towns have STOP (" Stop Throwing Out Pollutants") or HAZMAT ( HAZardous MATerial) Programs, or which include collections for proper disposal of oil, paints, solvents, boat and auto products ( antifreeze, polishes, etc.), cleaning chemicals, and lawn and garden chemicals. Some programs have specified collection dates and locations ( East Hampton); others collect materials on specific days ( Shelter Island ( Saturdays), Southold ( Tuesdays and Thursdays)).

Construction Site Chemical Waste Disposal All of the towns have some program or ordinance to address the disposal of chemical waste from construction sites, although they are quite varied. Although Brookhaven and Riverhead require contractors to submit plans for waste disposal at the construction site, they lack sufficient enforcement strength to ensure these plans are being followed. East Hampton has indirect ordinances for this action, but regulations are not uniform and disposal is handled on a case by case basis.

Road, Highway and Bridge Construction and Operation and Maintenance All towns except Shelter Island have programs or ordinances to address both road construction and maintenance chemical storage and disposal, although they are quite varied. East Hampton and Riverhead have reported success in allocating staff and resources to addressing this potential source of toxics.

Evaluation of Effectiveness General: In general, most of the agencies and programs described above provide adequate capacity ( statutory and regulatory authority, agency functionality, etc.) to support PEP management objectives. A few needs/ deficiencies, potentially warranting " new" programs, initiatives, or efforts are recommended.

Monitoring: Many agency programs and resources, when available, are effective and useful. There is a significant amount of data that has been collected since the initiation of the PEP that still needs evaluation.

Regulatory Sites of Concern: Existing Federal/ State/ local programs are effective at addressing toxic contamination at Superfund sites, other hazardous waste sites, and permitted facilities, including those that discharge to groundwater and surface water. Remedial investigations, feasibility studies, and clean up, in particular are complex and often take significant time to complete. Adequate monitoring and evaluation needs to take place following remedial actions to ensure the remedy is effective. Attention needs to be paid to permitted facilities that use or discharge toxic substances and enforcement action used when necessary.

Chlorine: Alternatives to chlorine for disinfection at Sewage treatment Plants ( STPs) are effective, but not all effluents are suitable for all alternatives. Where chlorine is used, ambient water quality standards for the protection of aquatic life for chlorine need to be attained.

Pesticides: FIFRA is an effective means of banning or restricting the use of pesticides of concern, as is the state mechanism. The state has an effective pesticide certification program for commercial Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 53 applicators, as well as provisions to eliminate or reduce pesticide use near wetlands. The development/ establishment of a Long Island Pesticide Management Plan should be pursued, as should enforceable programs under CZARA. The County's IPM pesticide free golf course initiative is worthwhile, as is the Federal Presidential Memorandum regarding landscaping at Federal installations. Additional demonstrations and cooperative efforts with the agricultural community to reduce or eliminate pesticide use should be pursued. Overall IPM programs need to be developed and implemented, and opportunities to expand markets for organic produce investigated.

Construction Sites, Roads: At present, on State funded projects, there are programs to effectively manage toxic chemical use at construction sites, including road construction, and roadway operation and maintenance. There are also existing statewide pesticide management, spill management, and solid and hazardous waste disposal requirements. In the absence of statewide requirements addressing remaining toxic concerns at these sites, there is a need to pursue local requirements applicable at these sites. Requirements also need to be enforced, and education/ outreach efforts with industry/ trade groups pursued.

Developed Areas: Public facilities should set the example in terms of conducting and implementing pollution prevention opportunity assessments and environmental management reviews. Stormwater runoff at marinas and boatyards may need further evaluation and management. The Town of East Hampton's Harbor Protection Overlay district is effective at addressing a number of potential sources of toxic substances, including: materials for roads, driveways and parking lot surfaces and management of runoff from these surfaces; fuel storage tanks; swimming pools; treated woods; and other activities. Certain onsite disposal system products are banned, but retail establishments may still sell them to unsuspecting customers. Additional research and investigations are needed regarding the placement of treated lumber in the marine environment. Natural shoreline and non toxic structures should be encouraged, consistent with PEP's overall policy no net increase of shoreline hardening structures. Guidelines should be developed to address the disposal of treated lumber following demolition. The Federal government's efforts to eliminate the use of the gasoline octane booster, MTBE, should continue. Structurally sound home heating oil tanks currently exempted from current replacement requirements still present a potential threat to groundwater and ultimately surface water resources. Voluntary and incentive based programs should be developed to encourage replacements and upgrades of these tanks.

Pollution Prevention: More aggressive pollution prevention programs should be established and implemented, particularly for industries/ establishments that use, generate or discharge toxic substances. Existing town " Stop Throwing Out Pollutant" type programs are necessary and should continue. Mosquito control programs should first encourage good housekeeping methods of control. The use of pesticides should be reduced to the maximum extent practicable that still adequately protects human health. Dredged Materials: Existing programs at the Federal and state level are adequate for ensuring that applications and permits for dredged material are evaluated with respect to toxics.

Recommendations for Improvements Monitoring: Many existing programs and resources at the Federal ( especially USEPA, NOAA, USGS), state ( especially NYSDEC, NYSDOH) and local agency ( SCDHS) should be accessed to the maximum extent possible and supplemented with specially funded projects. Monitoring should include not only chemical specific analyses but also evaluations of overall toxicity. In particular, sediments, biota and groundwater should be evaluated, as well as surface waters, dredged materials and soils. New Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 54 and emerging topics, issues and concerns need to be addressed, including potential endocrine disruptors, historic and present marinas and boatyards as possible areas of contamination and any locally identified areas of concern.

Regulatory Sites of Concern: Federal and state regulatory agencies need to focus on meeting deadlines associated with cleanups and permitting actions under hazardous waste laws. Facilities that use or discharge toxic substances need to be inspected and monitored, as should sites being remediated under hazardous waste laws. Enforcement should be used as necessary.

Chlorine: Consistent with human health protection needs and based on the suitability of the effluent, the use of chlorine for disinfection at Sewage Treatment Plants ( STPs) should be eliminated. Where alternatives to chlorine are not effective and chlorine continues to be used, discharge permits must ensure that the ambient water quality standards for the protection of aquatic life for chlorine be attained.

Pesticides: EPA and the State should restrict or ban all pesticides that are detected at levels of public health or environmental concern in groundwater or in the estuary. The State should continue to ensure the proper certification of commercial pesticide applicators; the public should be educated about using commercial applicators that are properly certified. The state should enforce the provisions of the State Freshwater Wetlands Law to reduce or eliminate the use of pesticides in the vicinity of wetlands. The Long Island Pesticide Management Plan should be developed/ established, as should enforceable programs under CZARA. The concepts behind Suffolk County's integrated pest management/ pesticide free golf courses should be applied to all public lands and golf courses. The Federal Presidential Memorandum regarding landscaping at Federal installations should be adhered to and a similar policy enacted for other owners of public lands. Additional work is needed with the agricultural community to demonstrate/ identify opportunities for reducing pesticide applications. Integrated pest management programs need to be developed and implemented to reduce or eliminate overall pesticide use. Opportunities for expanding markets for and production of organic produce should be investigated. Collection of unneeded and unwanted pesticides, particularly from agribusinesses and commercial landscapers, should be carried out on a regular basis.

Construction Sites, Roads: For state funded construction projects, including road, highway and bridge construction, and road, highway and bridge operation and maintenance, existing programs are adequate to control toxics. While there are other existing Statewide pesticide management, spill management, and solid and hazardous waste disposal requirements, other toxics may not be addressed on private projects or projects funded at the local level. Requirements applicable on state funded projects should be applicable at all project sites. Until such time as statewide requirements are adopted, uniform programs equivalent to those applicable at state funded projects should be enacted at the local level. Requirements also need to be enforced, and education/ outreach efforts with local government/ industry/ trade groups pursued. Similarly, adequate management programs are in place at the state level for runoff management systems for roads, highways and bridges. Similar program requirements need to be adopted for application at the local level, and until such time as they are adopted, local programs should be enacted or voluntary cooperation pursued. The desired and enforceable measures to be implemented are as follows:

Road, Highway and Bridge Construction Site Chemical Control: Limit the application, generation and migration of toxic substances, and ensure the proper storage and disposal of toxic materials. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 55 Road, Highway and Bridge Operation and Maintenance: Incorporate pollution prevention procedures into the operation and maintenance of roads, highways and bridges to reduce pollutant loadings.

Road, Highway and Bridge Runoff Systems: Develop and implement runoff management systems for roads, highways and bridges to reduce runoff pollutant concentrations and volumes; identify priority and watershed pollutant reduction opportunities ( e. g., improvements to existing urban runoff control structures); and establish schedules for implementing appropriate controls.

Developed Areas: Public facilities should set the example in terms of conducting and implementing pollution prevention opportunity assessments ( PPOAs) and environmental management reviews ( EMRs). PPOAs and EMRs should be conducted and implemented at all public facilities, beginning with Federal installations. Priorities should include facilities handling toxic materials. Stormwater runoff at marinas and boatyards may need further evaluation and management, due to materials used and disposed of at these facilities and their proximity to estuarine waters. The Town of East Hampton's Harbor Protection Overlay District is effective at addressing a number of potential sources of toxic substances, including: materials for roads, driveways and parking lot surfaces and management of runoff from these surfaces; fuel storage tanks; swimming pools; treated woods; and other activities. In Suffolk County, certain onsite disposal system products are banned, but retail establishments may still sell them. Retail establishments should be regularly inspected to enforce the ban on the sail of these illegal OSDS products and an education/ outreach effort initiated for these establishments and consumers. Additional research and investigations are needed regarding the placement of treated lumber in the marine environment. Natural shoreline and non toxic structures should be encouraged, consistent with PEP's overall policy no net increase of shoreline hardening structures. Guidelines should be developed to address the disposal of treated lumber following demolition. The Federal government's efforts to eliminate the use of the gasoline octane booster, MTBE, should continue. Structurally sound home heating oil tanks currently exempted from current replacement requirements still present a potential threat to groundwater and ultimately surface water resources. Voluntary and incentive based programs should be developed to encourage replacements and upgrades of these tanks.

Pollution Prevention: More aggressive pollution prevention programs should be established and implemented, particularly for industries/ establishments that use, generate or discharge toxic substances. Existing town " Stop Throwing Out Pollutant" type programs are necessary and should continue. Mosquito Control programs should first encourage good housekeeping methods of control. The use of pesticides for mosquito control should be reduced to the maximum extent practicable that still adequately protects human health.

Dredged Materials: Existing programs at the Federal and state level are adequate for ensuring that applications and permits for dredged material are evaluated with respect to toxics. Permits and applications should be critically evaluated with respect to their potential to cause adverse toxic effects to the Peconic Ecosystem, and particularly to pelagic and benthic organisms and their food chains, including humans. The EPA and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers have identified the likely need to continue marine placement of dredged material in the Long Island Sound area. In 1999, the EPA in cooperation with U. S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement to consider the potential identification of one or more placement sites for Long Island Sound dredged material. The EPA and the Corps have decided to consider the use of four existing sites and their identification as dredged material placement sites under Section 102( c) of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act. Other alternatives will also be evaluated, including other open water placement sites and other placement and management options. Identification of a site does not itself result in placement of any particular material, it serves only to make the Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 56 identified site a placement option available for consideration in the alternatives analysis for each individual dredging project in the area. The PEP participants consider it unlikely a placement site will be proposed within the PEP study area, but the PEP should continue to participate in the EPA/ Corps efforts to identify potential placement sites for Long Island Sound dredged material. Peconic Estuary Program CCMP A P P E N D I X K K 57 Post CCMP Description of Regulatory/ Institutional Framework Three alternative frameworks were considered for post CCMP management:   Continuation of Existing Management Conference Structure ( Policy Committee; Management Committee; Citizens, Technical and Local Government Advisory Committees; and Program Office);   Formation of a Regional Advisory Commission ( formal, non regulatory commission of East End town and village representatives);   Modification of the Pine Barrens Maritime Reserve Commission ( Modification of the Pine Barrens Maritime Reserve Act as a mechanism to involve State, County, and local governments in a regional implementation process)

State Agencies and Programs Pine Barrens Maritime Reserve Act Through the Pine Barrens Maritime Reserve Act, the New York State Legislature declared that the Long Island Pine Barrens should be protected in a comprehensive plan adopted by the state and individual local governments. The Long Island Pine Barrens encompasses over one hundred thousand acres in the county of Suffolk and overlies the largest source of pure groundwater in New York. The Pine Barrens are interconnected to the Peconic Bay system by the Peconic River, the longest groundwater river in New York.

The Act calls for a state supported regional comprehensive land use plan providing for the preservation of the core preservation area, protection of the Central Pine Barrens area and for the designation of compatible growth areas to accommodate appropriate patterns of development and regional growth. The legislature intended that the comprehensive regional land use plan would include provisions for private landowners whose property is located within the Central Pine Barrens area. The landowners will be afforded an opportunity to receive benefits from the plan such as transferable development rights, conservation easements, rights and values transfers, purchase of development rights and/ or fee acquisition with monetary compensation.

A Long Island Pine Barrens Maritime Reserve Council was established to help local governments and the state coordinate the efforts of all municipal, county, state and Federal agencies involved in the management of the preserve. The Council was also charged with overseeing and preparing a comprehensive intergovernmental management plan for the Long Island Pine Barrens maritime reserve for state and local governments to adopt.

Evaluation of Effectiveness The existing Management Conference Structure has been successful in integrating concerns and building consensus in an often complex and contentious process. For the foreseeable future, the Management Conference has recommended continuation of the existing management structure, at least until a different approach is sanctioned by the Policy Committee.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 155 (Friday, August 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47853-47854]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19639]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0781]

Request for Notification From Industry Organizations Interested
in Participating in Selection Process for Nonvoting Industry
Representative on the Pediatric Advisory Committee and Request for
Nominations for Nonvoting Industry Representatives on the Pediatric
Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting that any
industry organizations interested in participating in the selection of
a nonvoting industry representative to serve on the Pediatric Advisory
Committee for the Office of the Commissioner (OC) notify FDA in
writing. FDA is also requesting nominations for a nonvoting industry
representative(s) to serve on the Pediatric Advisory Committee. A
nominee may either be self-nominated or nominated by an organization to
serve as a nonvoting industry representative. Nominations will be
accepted for current vacancies effective with this notice.

DATES: Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests must send a letter stating that interest to FDA by September
10, 2012, for the vacancy listed in this notice. Concurrently,
nomination materials for prospective candidates should be sent to FDA
by September 10, 2012.

ADDRESSES: All letters of interest and nominations should be submitted
in writing to Walter Ellenberg (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Walter Ellenberg, Office of the
Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 32, Rm. 5154, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX: 301-
847-8640<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agency intends to add a nonvoting
industry representative(s) to the following advisory committee:

I. OC Advisory Committee

Pediatric Advisory Committee

    The Committee reviews and evaluates and makes recommendations to
the Commissioner of Food and Drugs

regarding: (1) Pediatric research conducted under sections 351, 409I,
and 499 of the Public Health Service Act and sections 501, 502, 505,
505A, and 505B, 510K, 515, and 520m of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act; (2) identification of research priorities related to
pediatric therapeutics (including drugs and biological products) and
medical devices for pediatric populations and the need for additional
diagnostics and treatments of specific pediatric diseases or
conditions, (3) the ethics, design, and analysis of clinical trials
related to pediatric therapeutics (including drugs and biological
products) and medical devices, (4) pediatric labeling disputes as
specified in Public Law 107-109 and Public Law 110-85, (5) pediatric
labeling changes as specified in Public Law 107-109 and Public Law 110-
85, (6) adverse event reports for drugs studied under Public Law 107-
109 and 110-85 and labeled, (7) any safety issues that may occur as
specified Public Law 107-109 and Public Law 110-85, (8) any other
pediatric issue or pediatric labeling dispute involving FDA-regulated
products, (9) pediatric ethical issues including research involving
children as subjects as specified in 21 CFR 50.54; and (10) any other
matter involving pediatrics for which FDA has regulatory
responsibility.
    The Committee also advises and makes recommendations to the
Secretary directly or to the Secretary through the Commissioner on
research involving children as subjects that is conducted or supported
by the Department of Health and Human Services as specified in 45 CFR
46.407.

II. Selection Procedure

    Any industry organization interested in participating in the
selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry
interests should send a letter stating that interest to the FDA contact
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of publication of
this document (see DATES). Within the subsequent 30 days, FDA will send
a letter to each organization that has expressed an interest, attaching
a complete list of all such organizations; and a list of all nominees
along with their current resumes. The letter will also state that it is
the responsibility of the interested organizations to confer with one
another and to select a candidate, within 60 days after the receipt of
the FDA letter, to serve as the nonvoting member to represent industry
interests for the committee. The interested organizations are not bound
by the list of nominees in selecting a candidate. However, if no
individual is selected within 60 days, the Commissioner will select the
nonvoting member to represent industry interests.

III. Application Procedure

    Individuals may self nominate and/or an organization may nominate
one or more individuals to serve as a nonvoting industry
representative. Contact information, a current curriculum vitae, and
the name of the committee of interest should be sent to the FDA contact
person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) within 30 days of
publication of this document (see DATES). FDA will forward all
nominations to the organizations expressing interest in participating
in the selection process for the committee. (Persons who nominate
themselves as nonvoting industry representatives will not participate
in the selection process).
    FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all
racial and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities
on its advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of
appropriately qualified candidates from these groups. Specifically, in
this document, nominations for nonvoting representatives of industry
interests are encouraged from the pediatric pharmaceutical research and
biotechnology manufacturing industry.

    Authority: This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to
advisory committees.

    Dated: August 7, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-19639 Filed 8-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P