A
three-year experiment-involving discussions with more than 80 public, private, and nonprofit organizations-has m o duced a broad series of recommendations on wavs to immove water quality in the United ‘States (see ES6-T 1991, 25, 1540). The recommendations are collected in A National Water Agenda for the 21st Century, which was released in November by Water Quality 2000, the umbrella organization for this effort. The report proposes a mix of regulations, educational programs, institutional reorganizations, incentives, and voluntary programs that address water quality issues. “While consensus was not achieved on every subject, there is broad support for the major conclusions-especially the call for an integrated, holistic national water resources policy,” said Paul Woodruff, chair of Water Quality 2000.
1
7
1
I
A L-
Blueprint
Federal agenda Woodruff divides the a5 recommendations listed in the document into strategies for pollution prevention, increased individual and collective responsibility for actions affecting water quality, and watershed planning and management. For each strategy the report touches on issues involving energy, land management, education, research, and government programs. “We looked at all activities of human society that affect water quality,” added Robert Adler of the Natural Resources Defense Council. At the federal level, Water Quality 2000 recommends that Congress create “a new interagency water policy coordinating council comprised of the major federal water resources agencies and other federal agencies that can affect water resources.” Currently, says the report, water quality issues are handled by 18 agencies in seven departments Pr6cis articles are reports of meetings of unusual significance, international or national developments of environmental importance, significant public policy developments, and related items. 0013-936w93/0927-223$04.00/00 1993 American Chemical Society
Environ. Sci. Technol.. Vol. 27. No. 2.1993
m
plus seven independent agencies with 25 separate water programs. Congress is also urged to establish a national goal for groundwater protection (with EPA leading an intergovernmental group dedicated to protecting groundwater], develop water policy on the basis of managing watersheds (see Figure 11, give EPA primary responsibility for tackling the difficult issue of urban and rural runoff, promote water conservation as a national goal, and direct the National Academy of Sciences to study the effect of population on water quality. Moreover, EPA is asked to develop sediment criteria (for more information on sediments see ESbT 1991, 25, 1540) aimed at locating “hot spots” and lead the development of a national ecosystem monitoring program. To support these efforts, the report recommends increased funding for water
research, public transportation, and renewable energy sources. However, many of these programs will need to be implemented at the state or local level. As an example, Woodruff said, “the problem of urban and agricultural runoff makes a standardized, national approach impractical and unlikely to be successful.” Furthermore states should legislate laws covering surface and groundwater rights. Financing change Congress is not the only group being asked to spend more money on water quality. The group advocates assessing water permit fees for discharging wastes so that they reflect the costs of the program and training personnel: charging ranchers a grazing fee on public lands that accounts for actual “land expenses”; requiring mine owners to cover the
.FlRllRF .- -. . 1.
Dividing the map Into 21 watershed regions
224 Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 27, No. 2, 1993
costs of cleanup and remediation through bonds or self-insurance: charging forestry a n d agribusinesses the “full costs of roads, water, predator and pest control, power generation and transmission, and fish passage facilities”: encouraging local governments to charge for solid waste collection based on volume rather than flat fees: and billing water customers the true cost of operating water utilities. To offset some of these costs, the report recommends a renewable energy tax credit, providing rebates for consumers purchasing water and energy-efficient items, and increased federal support of pollution prevention programs. The group combines its support for pollution prevention with other proactive ideas, including reconstructing wetlands and treating the bilge water on ships to prevent introducing foreign species.
Environmental education Augmenting the big stick of regulation and fees, the report promotes increased environmental education for all segments of society as a means to get individuals to voluntarily protect water resources. For instance, the agenda asks that public agencies, such as the Department of Agriculture and Land Grant universities, provide information to farmers, miners, loggers, developers, and rural landowners on ways to minimize water degradation. The difficult problem of farm runoff would be addressed through education programs and technical assistance from state and Department of Agriculture extension services. Other educational efforts would explain the benefits of wetlands or specifically target Native Americans on reservations. The report also suggests the establishment of a Peace Corps for the environment, composed of water professionals and targeted at rural and poor communities. Schools would also play a major role in educating the next generation on the environment, particularly as part of an interdisciplinary curriculum. For instance, literature classes might read works by Aldo Leopold and Rachel Carson. Elementary and secondary schools could take advantage of information supplied by groups such as the National Wildlife Fund or the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. Universities should integrate environmental education into all degree programs, following the model of Tufts and the Colorado School of Mines (for more on education, see ESbT 1992, 26,1108 and ESbT 1992,27,1296). To attract young people to the profession, Water Quality 2000 urges water utilities to provide internships for high school and college students and the federal government to fund graduate student traineeships. Water Quality 2000’s agenda also examines the way we live. Targeting developers, the group recommends that local and state governments s h o u l d legislate against suburban sprawl into low-populated areas and along shorelines. Where new housing is constructed, plans should include open spaces, retention basins, and other landscape features that limit runoff. Farmers are also asked to leave land as greenbelts to protect waterways and to rotate crops. Missing pieces Despite the broad sweep of the agenda, Woodruff admits that it has
two weaknesses: There are n o “price tags” or priorities set for the programs. These same concerns were echoed in the minority report filed by several of the industrial members of Water Quality 2000. This industrial contingent, which included the Chemical Manufacturers Association and the National Agricultural Chemicals Association, also complained about the agenda’s energy policy, which recommended avoiding fossil fuels and nuclear power. They argue that a growing economy needs “access to competitively priced energy supplies,” rather t h a n still-to-beproven renewable energy sources. Moreover, the minority report preferred that state and local officials set groundwater policy and that additional scientific studies should be undertaken before remediating contaminated sediments. On the other hand, several environmental organizations filed their own minority report recommending a tougher groundwater policy with explicitly defined national goals. A stronger criticism of the report was registered by The Fertilizer Institute (TFI),which refused to ratify the recommendations. In a letter to Water Quality 2000, TFI president Gary Meyers complained about the increased governmental controls and fees advocated in the recommendations. “TFI believes promotion of this increasingly legislative and regulatory approach is unimaginative, a disservice to taxpaying consumers and will only serve to expand an already expensive and bloated bureaucratic solution to what is, in most cases, local and site-specific water quality problems,” wrote Meyers. Despite the controversies over the recommendations, the consensus process and many of the report’s broad principles have been widely praised. The group has established an implementation committee to translate the recommendations into programs. Warns Woodruff, “Implementing the vision will in many instances require fundamental changes in our government institutions, manufacturing or farming practices, and individual lifestyles.” “A National Water Agenda for the 21st Century” is available from Water Quality 2000, 601 Wythe Street, Alexandria, VA 22314; (703) 684-2492.
Alan Newman is an associate editor on the Washington Staffof ES&T.
Consulting estructuring in the chemical industry has created a wealth of opportunities for consultants. Companies are now more wiiling to seek outside help than in the past as they recognize the value of experienced specialists. But what constitutes the efficient use of a consultant?And is consulting for you? Trends in Chemical Consulting explores these issues through contributions from chemical consultants, those who have used the services of a consultant,and participants in cooperative arrangements. Presentations focus on those considerations specific to consulting relationships between scientific professionals. Chemists,chemical engineers, and other scientific professionals in support areas to the chemical industry will find this an indispensible resource of information on chemical consulting.
R
Contents 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
Consulting t o the Chemical Industry Industrial Expectations for Consultants and Consulting Services Understanding, Selecting, Managing, and Compensating Consultants An Academic Perspective on Consulting University-Industrial Relationships Accessing Federal Laboratories Know-How What Consulting Practices Look Like Defining and Marketing Your Consulting Specialty Opportunities for Retired Chemists Using Consultants to Interpret Regulatory Initiatives Major Chemical Company Retirees as Consultants and Market Developers Robotic Servicing on the Space Station Freedom Consultation in Sensory Evaluation Chemical Information Consultants
Charles S. Sodano and David M. Sturmer, Editors 174 pages (1991) Paperbound
ISBN 0-8412-2106-5 $29.95 American Chemical Society Distribution Office, Dept. 11 1155 Sixteenth St., N.W. Washington, DC 20036
ir
CALL TOLL FREE
800-227-5558 :in Washington, D.C. 872-4363) and use yo6 credit card!
Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 27, No. 2, 1993 225
