Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
415892663
label
[Medal Citation Applications 1992-Innovation/Partnership]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
415892663
contentType
document
title
[Medal Citation Applications 1992-Innovation/Partnership]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13895-017
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Tony Snow Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
415892663
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
60816f1012b33fab
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Snow, Tony, Files
Subseries:
Subject File, 1988-1993
OA/ID Number:
13895
Folder ID Number:
13895-017
Folder Title:
[Medal Citation Applications 1992-Innovation/Partnership]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
18
29
2
3
Application Summary
ID Number: I.007
Project:
Chrysler's Jefferson North Project
Contact:
Mr. Mark A. Bindbeutel
Good the Sept
Chrysler Corporation
12000 Chrysler Dr., CIMS 416-15-14
Telephone:
Highland Park, MI 48288-1919
(313) 956-0549
Summary:
Chrysler's objective was to build a world-class manufacturing
facility to produce the Jeep (R) Grand Cherokee. Chrysler
reclaimed an urban site to construct the Jefferson North
Assembly Plant. Pollution prevention was factored into
decisions about plant design, raw materials, manufacturing
processes, and the product built at the new facility.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments: Pollution prevention concepts innovatively used to fit a major
industrial plant in an urban renewal area.
True demonstration of environmental leadership from the top.
Totality of approach is innovative and striking. Replacement
of paints with water-based formulation is now common, but
overall Chrysler did a great job that won them EPA
recognition.
I,007
PROJECT SUMMARY
Chrysler Corporation's objective for the Jefferson North Assembly Plant (JNAP) was to build a "world-class"
manufacturing facility to produce the Jeep® Grand Cherokee. At a time when new assembly plants are built on rural
"greenfield" sites, in air quality attainment areas, Chrysler chose to recycle a 283 acre urban site in Detroit, Michigan.
Chrysler seized the opportunity to build pollution prevention into the design of the facility as well as the Grand
Cherokee, an approach providing added value to the product. JNAP not only represents a renewed commitment to
the City of Detroit and Chrysler's experienced workforce, but it also represents a clear commitment to environmental
stewardship. Examples of the innovative approaches and technologies employed at JNAP to prevent the release of
pollution to the air, land and water include:
Powder anti-chip coating that eliminates 172 tons/year of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions
associated with conventional solvent based paint technology.
Introducing reformulated clear coat paint that excludes all of the 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) listed
in the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) amendments.
Water based paint area and equipment clean-up materials which, in conjunction with more resourceful cleaning
techniques, reduce VOC emissions by about 80% or 500 tons/year from releases in typical assembly plant
paintshops. These materials are also being reformulated to reduce the CAA listed HAPs.
VOC controls for automatic spray painting operations representing the lowest achievable emission rate (LAER)
based on worldwide technology at the time of permit application approval.
Returnable containers are used to ship parts to JNAP. This effort alone diverts 50,000 tons of expendable
packaging (e.g., wooden pallets, cardboard, plastic and paper) normally sent to landfill.
Chrysler's suppliers provide products in bulk containers that are refilled and returned to JNAP for reuse.
An innovative sludge handling system which reduces the volume of paint sludge by more than 90%. The unit
produces a dry powder that is recycled into products such as roofing materials, sealers, and concrete products.
Process and wastewater pipelines and storage tanks are above ground to allow for visual leak inspection.
All underground wastewater conveyance systems incorporate secondary containment with leak detection. This
design is a first in the automotive industry and virtually eliminates the potential for contamination.
The Grand Cherokee is the first high volume domestic vehicle to roll off the line without chlorofluorocarbon
(CFC) air conditioning refrigerant (134a).
The Grand Cherokee was designed with fewer exterior body seams and therefore requires less sealer and sealer
clean-up material usage.
The Grand Cherokee is equipped with asbestos-free brake linings and cadmium-free fasteners.
The design parameters of JNAP and the Grand Cherokee set new standards for environmental excellence for industry.
This project demonstrates an evolution in Chrysler's approach to environmental protection and recognizes pollution
prevention as the cornerstone to industrial competitiveness.
NAP is a showcase for pollution prevention efforts that are underway throughout Chrysler Corporation. The
novative technologies and management practices of this project exemplify Chrysler's commitment to preventing
pollution in the lifecycle of its facilities and products.
5
6. C. Innovation
6.C.1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or service?
Chrysler's mission was to design a "world-class" manufacturing facility that would exceed today's
environmental requirements, as well as provide the flexibility to adapt to and meet new requirements.
This proactive approach is an investment in the future and will ensure environmental excellence well
into the 21st century. The project established pollution prevention and "no-landfill" as key design goals.
The basic strategy employed was to prevent pollution rather than control it after it had been created.
The tactics to implement this strategy were to eliminate or reduce the use of environmentally sensitive
materials, reduce raw material usage and make improvements in manufacturing processes. Chrysler
recognizes pollution prevention as key to remaining competitive in an increasingly global market.
6.C.2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinctive or innovative? What
obstacles environmentally or otherwise does it overcome?
At a time when most new automobile plants are located in ozone attainment areas and built on
"greenfield" sites, Chrysler chose to reclaim a 283 acre urban industrial site in Detroit, Michigan.
Chrysler recognized the environmental responsibility and added costs associated with constructing its
new assembly plant in a "moderate" ozone nonattainment area, and seized the opportunity to build
pollution prevention into the facility and the vehicle to be produced there. The project is distinctive
in that the best of existing, as well as innovative technology have been brought together at an urban
renewal site, exemplifying Chrysler's commitment to both the environmental and socioeconomic well
being of our nation.
6.C.3. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior to other approaches?
Does it offer a viable alternative to a problem for which no solutions previously
existed?
The Jefferson North Project provides a tangible example of the environmental, as well as social and
economic benefits of implementing pollution prevention measures. Chrysler reclaimed land and
provided industrial jobs in an urban area by designing a facility and product, selecting materials, and
implementing innovative technologies and management practices to ensure protection of the
environment well into the 21st century. The Jefferson North Project addressed pollution prevention in
the design of processes involving machinery, materials and methods ensuring the best and most
efficient use of resources. A number of the measures incorporated in the facility and its product
represent automotive industry firsts, and will set a standard of environmental excellence for others to
follow.
6
6.C.4. Can the technology, program, project, or service be replicated in an economically
feasible manner?
The project recognizes pollution prevention as the cornerstone to industrial competitiveness because
preventing pollution before it is created minimizes the need for evermore costly treatment and waste
disposal alternatives. This approach to environmental protection can lower operating costs and provide
added value to the product. The accomplishments at JNAP are both a culmination of Chrysler's past
successes of implementing pollution prevention, and the incorporation of new initiatives, the most
promising of which are serving as a template for technology transfer throughout Chrysler. JNAP will
serve as a model of environmental stewardship and set the industry standard for years to come.
6.C.5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental benefits or results of the
technology, program, project, or service?
The measurable, net long-term environmental benefits resulting from the pollution prevention initiatives
implemented at JNAP include eliminating:
Use of 189 listed Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants on an ongoing basis.
1,000 tons of VOC emissions from typical assembly plant permitted levels.
Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) air conditioning refrigerant in Grand Cherokee.
Lead from topcoats, and hexavalent chromium from phosphate pretreatment.
Asbestos from Grand Cherokee brake linings.
50,000 tons per year of expendable packaging normally landfilled.
15,000 drums per year of paint sludge normally landfilled.
Long-term environmental benefits which are indirect and not easily quantifiable will result from transfer
of the technology initiated at JNAP to other facilities. JNAP will serve as a model for urban renewal,
conservation of resources and environmental stewardship for industry to follow.
7
MAY 21 1992 I. 007
CHRYSLER CORPORATION'S APPLICATION
FOR THE
PRESIDENT'S 1992 ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION CHALLENGE AWARD
1.
Award category:
2101 Conner 48215 ml
(03) Innovation
2.
Name of project:
as fot 5
Chrysler's Jefferson North Project
Chrysler Center Technology
cimse483-03-10]
3.
Name of Award Applicant:
Mr. Peter R. Gilezan
Director, Environmental & Energy Affairs
Chrysler Corporation
483-01-08
800 Chrysler Drive East
12000 Chrysler Drive CIMS 416-15-14
Highland Park, Michigan 48288-1919
576
tubum Hills, MI
Tel: (313) 956-5473 Fax: (313) 252-7928
313 576-8050; 2488
48236-2757
4.
Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
Mr. Mark A. Bindbeutel
Pollution Prevention Manager
Connie Powell
Chrysler Corporation
12000 Chrysler Drive CIMS 416-15-14
Highland Park, Michigan 48288-1919
Tel: (313) 956-0549 Fax: (313) 252-7928
(313)576-8083 FAX 576-7928
7.
How long has the technology, program, project or service been operational?
The planning process began in 1987 when the decision was made to build a plant; production was launched
on January 6, 1992.
8.
Which of the following most accurately describes the applicant? (Check more than one, if applicable.)
(01) X
National Business or Industry
(02)
Regional or Local Business or Industry
(03)
National Nonprofit Organization or Foundation
(04)
Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05)
Local or State Government/Government Agency
(06)
Educational Organization
(07)
Voluntary Civic Organization
(08)
Trade or Professional Society
(09)
Youth Organization
(10)
Labor Organization
(11)
Individual
(12)
Other (Please describe):
1
9.
If business or industry, which of the following best describes the type of business or industry?
(01)
Agriculture/Forestry
(02)
Aerospace
(03)
Communications
(04)
Construction
(05)
Electronics/Computers
(06)
Energy
(07)
Engineering
(08)
Environmental Services
(09)
Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10)
Manufacturing Chemical
(11)
Manufacturing - Other
(12)
Mining
(13)
Recreation
(14)
Trade - Wholesale
(15) X
Transportation
(16)
Utilities - Electric, Gas or
(17)
Other (Please describe):
10.
Which of the following most accurately describes the environmental program under consideration for an award?
(Check more than one, if applicable.)
(01)
agriculture
(02) X air quality
(03) X conservation
(04)
education - general public
(05)
education - academic
(06) X energy
(07) X
environmental quality management
(08)
forestry
(09)
hazardous waste remediation
(10)
international
(11)
natural resources,
(12) X
pollution control
(13)
recreation
(14) X recycling
(15) X solid waste
(16) X
source reduction/pollution prevention
(17) X
water quality
(18)
wetlands
(19)
wildlife and fish resources
(20) X Other (Please describe): urban site renewal
2
1.
If applicable, list the sources of the program's support and the percentage of support provided, including grants
and in-kind contributions of goods and services.
Source: Chrysler Corporation
100%*
Chrysler was responsible for all design and construction costs for the Jefferson North Assembly Plant,
including those associated with the environmental equipment installed in the plant. However, various units
of government cooperated with Chrysler in this project. The City of Detroit was the primary mover in
assembling the various parcels making up the site and providing infrastructure (i.e., water and sewer lines)
support. The State of Michigan also provided grants to the City as did the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development through a loan and an Urban Development Action Grant to support site assembly.
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project, including approximate value of in-kind contributions
of goods and services:
The Jefferson North Project costs were in excess of one billion dollars.
13. If the project is ongoing, what is the annual cost?
The innovative technology and practices referenced in our application are now in place, with specific measures
cited complete/operational. Chrysler does not discretely identify environmental operating and maintenance
costs in its accounting systems.
14. Please indicate which of the following are the primary audiences, beneficiaries, or users of the program or
service, and estimate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
Type
How Many People
(01) X Business or Industry
Unlimited
(02)
Trade or Professional Society
(03)
Government
(04)
Educational Organizations
(05)
Youth
(06)
Community or Public Interest Groups
(07) X Local Community or Local Public
1,065,000*
(08)
General Public
(09) X Employees
2100*
(10)
Customers or Clients
(11)
Other (Please describe):
*
Reflects population of the City of Detroit
** Reflects Jefferson North Assembly Plant employment
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental or conservation awards in the past five years?
In April 1992, Chrysler Corporation received a U.S. EPA Administrator's Award for progress and innovation
in pollution prevention design in the Jefferson North Assembly Plant project.
16. Summary of program, its objectives and what it has accomplished (not to exceed 50 words).
Chrysler's objective was to build a world-class manufacturing facility to produce the Jeep® Grand Cherokee.
Chrysler reclaimed an urban site to construct the Jefferson North Assembly Plant. Pollution prevention was
factored into decisions about plant design, raw materials, manufacturing processes, and the product built at
the new facility.
3
17. Letters of recommendation provided by:
The Honorable
John H. Engler
Governor, State of Michigan
Lansing, Michigan 48909
Tel: (517) 373-3400
Fax: (517) 335-6949
Mr. Stan Marshall
Vice President and Director
UAW Chrysler Department
8000 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, Michigan 48214
Tel: (313) 926-5000
Fax: (313) 331-2498
Mr. John Camardella
President
ABB Paint Finishing
One Ravinia Drive
Suite 1110
Atlanta, Georgia 30346
Tel: (404) 393-6130
Fax: (404) 393-6139
18.
Please sign below to indicate that all applicants agree a) to abide by the rules and requirements of the awards
competition, and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the best of their knowledge.
Signature
Date 5/20/92
PeterR Gilezan
Title:
Director, Environmental & Energy Affairs.
Organization:
Chrysler Corporation
Telephone:
(313) 956-5473
4
PROJECT SUMMARY
Chrysler Corporation's objective for the Jefferson North Assembly Plant (JNAP) was to build a "world-class"
manufacturing facility to produce the Jeep® Grand Cherokee. At a time when new assembly plants are built on rural
"greenfield" sites, in air quality attainment areas, Chrysler chose to recycle a 283 acre urban site in Detroit, Michigan.
Chrysler seized the opportunity to build pollution prevention into the design of the facility as well as the Grand
Cherokee, an approach providing added value to the product. JNAP not only represents a renewed commitment to
the City of Detroit and Chrysler's experienced workforce, but it also represents a clear commitment to environmental
stewardship. Examples of the innovative approaches and technologies employed at JNAP to prevent the release of
pollution to the air, land and water include:
Powder anti-chip coating that eliminates 172 tons/year of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions
associated with conventional solvent based paint technology.
Introducing reformulated clear coat paint that excludes all of the 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) listed
in the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) amendments.
Water based paint area and equipment clean-up materials which, in conjunction with more resourceful cleaning
techniques, reduce VOC emissions by about 80% or 500 tons/year from releases in typical assembly plant
paintshops. These materials are also being reformulated to reduce the CAA listed HAPs.
VOC controls for automatic spray painting operations representing the lowest achievable emission rate (LAER)
based on worldwide technology at the time of permit application approval.
Returnable containers are used to ship parts to JNAP. This effort alone diverts 50,000 tons of expendable
packaging (e.g., wooden pallets, cardboard, plastic and paper) normally sent to landfill.
Chrysler's suppliers provide products in bulk containers that are refilled and returned to JNAP for reuse.
An innovative sludge handling system which reduces the volume of paint sludge by more than 90%. The unit
produces a dry powder that is recycled into products such as roofing materials, sealers, and concrete products.
Process and wastewater pipelines and storage tanks are above ground to allow for visual leak inspection.
All underground wastewater conveyance systems incorporate secondary containment with leak detection. This
design is a first in the automotive industry and virtually eliminates the potential for contamination.
The Grand Cherokee is the first high volume domestic vehicle to roll off the line without chlorofluorocarbon
(CFC) air conditioning refrigerant (134a).
The Grand Cherokee was designed with fewer exterior body seams and therefore requires less sealer and sealer
clean-up material usage.
The Grand Cherokee is equipped with asbestos-free brake linings and cadmium-free fasteners.
The design parameters of JNAP and the Grand Cherokee set new standards for environmental excellence for industry.
This project demonstrates an evolution in Chrysler's approach to environmental protection and recognizes pollution
prevention as the cornerstone to industrial competitiveness.
JNAP is a showcase for pollution prevention efforts that are underway throughout Chrysler Corporation. The
innovative technologies and management practices of this project exemplify Chrysler's commitment to preventing
pollution in the lifecycle of its facilities and products.
5
6. C. Innovation
6.C.1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or service?
Chrysler's mission was to design a "world-class" manufacturing facility that would exceed today's
environmental requirements, as well as provide the flexibility to adapt to and meet new requirements.
This proactive approach is an investment in the future and will ensure environmental excellence well
into the 21st century. The project established pollution prevention and "no-landfill" as key design goals.
The basic strategy employed was to prevent pollution rather than control it after it had been created.
The tactics to implement this strategy were to eliminate or reduce the use of environmentally sensitive
materials, reduce raw material usage and make improvements in manufacturing processes. Chrysler
recognizes pollution prevention as key to remaining competitive in an increasingly global market.
6.C.2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinctive or innovative? What
obstacles environmentally or otherwise does it overcome?
At a time when most new automobile plants are located in ozone attainment areas and built on
"greenfield" sites, Chrysler chose to reclaim a 283 acre urban industrial site in Detroit, Michigan.
Chrysler recognized the environmental responsibility and added costs associated with constructing its
new assembly plant in a "moderate" ozone nonattainment area, and seized the opportunity to build
pollution prevention into the facility and the vehicle to be produced there. The project is distinctive
in that the best of existing, as well as innovative technology have been brought together at an urban
renewal site, exemplifying Chrysler's commitment to both the environmental and socioeconomic well
being of our nation.
6.C.3. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior to other approaches?
Does it offer a viable alternative to a problem for which no solutions previously
existed?
The Jefferson North Project provides a tangible example of the environmental, as well as social and
economic benefits of implementing pollution prevention measures. Chrysler reclaimed land and
provided industrial jobs in an urban area by designing a facility and product, selecting materials, and
implementing innovative technologies and management practices to ensure protection of the
environment well into the 21st century. The Jefferson North Project addressed pollution prevention in
the design of processes involving machinery, materials and methods ensuring the best and most
efficient use of resources. A number of the measures incorporated in the facility and its product
represent automotive industry firsts, and will set a standard of environmental excellence for others to
follow.
6
6.C.4. Can the technology, program, project, or service be replicated in an economically
feasible manner?
The project recognizes pollution prevention as the cornerstone to industrial competitiveness because
preventing pollution before it is created minimizes the need for evermore costly treatment and waste
disposal alternatives. This approach to environmental protection can lower operating costs and provide
added value to the product. The accomplishments at JNAP are both a culmination of Chrysler's past
successes of implementing pollution prevention, and the incorporation of new initiatives, the most
promising of which are serving as a template for technology transfer throughout Chrysler. JNAP will
serve as a model of environmental stewardship and set the industry standard for years to come.
6.C.5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental benefits or results of the
technology, program, project, or service?
The measurable, net long-term environmental benefits resulting from the pollution prevention initiatives
implemented at JNAP include eliminating:
Use of 189 listed Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants on an ongoing basis.
1,000 tons of VOC emissions from typical assembly plant permitted levels.
Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) air conditioning refrigerant in Grand Cherokee.
Lead from topcoats, and hexavalent chromium from phosphate pretreatment.
Asbestos from Grand Cherokee brake linings.
50,000 tons per year of expendable packaging normally landfilled.
15,000 drums per year of paint sludge normally landfilled.
Long-term environmental benefits which are indirect and not easily quantifiable will result from transfer
of the technology initiated at JNAP to other facilities. JNAP will serve as a model for urban renewal,
conservation of resources and environmental stewardship for industry to follow.
7
CHRYSLER
CORPORATION
RECLAIMING 283 ACRES OF INDUSTRIAL LAND IN THE HEART OF DETROIT
THE JEFFERSON NORTH ASSEMBLY PLANT COMPLEX
04/22/1992 14:17 FROM EPA-OFFICE PUBLIC AFFAIRS TO
83132527928 P.01
United States
Communications, Education,
Environmental Protection
And Public Affairs
Agency
(A-:07)
EPA
Environmental News
FOR RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 1992
EPA ANNOUNCES WINNERS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S AWARDS PROGRAM
Gwen Brown (202) 260-1384
EPA Administrator William K. Reilly today announced the
national winners of the Agency's Administrator's Awards program.
The annual awards program established in 1991 by Administrator
Reilly recognizes excellence in efforts to work toward a cleaner
environment. This year's program focused on outstanding
achievements in pollution prevention.
"Pollution prevention is a central part of the Bush
Administration's environmental strategy for protecting human health
and the environment," said Administrator Reilly. "Prevention helps
cut pollution before it becomes a problem requiring costly
treatment or cleanup."
Awards were given in the categories of environmental,
community and nonprofit organizations, large and small business,
industry, trade and professional organizations, educational
institutions and federal, state and local governments. A list of
the winners is attached.
"We are delighted with the tremendous response to this year's
awards program and with the high quality of pollution prevention
projects which made the selection of our winners a very difficult
task. In fact, all of the finalists were outstanding," said
Reilly.
Over 840 applications were received for the awards program.
Renew American convened a panel of experts to review over 225
regional nominations. They selected 35 finalists.
The winners will receive a plaque and will be honored in a
ceremony at EPA in Washington, D.C., on May 13, 1992.
R-81
Automotive News
May 27, 1991
Paint It Green
Powder coating and sludge
recycling may clean up
environmental problems
By: Jack Keebler
he Decade of the En-
in a powder coating.
T
vironment has arrived.
"You have to keep in mind that
One of areas in auto-
powdered paints are still a devel-
motive manufacturing
opment program," says (Mike)
that traditionally has been an en-
Malcolm Hay, marketing man-
vironmental hot spot is the paint
ager for automotive powdered
Experimental
line. But two developing techno-
coatings at PPG Industries of
powder clearcoat is
logies will greatly minimize the
Pittsburgh. "It's going to take a
applied at PPG Industries' automotive
environmental impact of this vital
lot of work to bring it home. Is it
applications test facility in Flint, Mich.
operation: powdered paint and
ready to go now? I would say no.
paint sludge recycling.
Will it be ready in the next few
total elimination of paint sol-
ingredients as a typical liquid
There are several major bene-
years? We hope so."
vents. According to Morton Inter-
paint, but without solvents or liq-
fits from powder paint. But re-
But Hays and others are opti-
national's Powder Coatings
uid carriers.
been targeted by environmenta-
searchers caution that much de-
mistic that progress will be made.
Group in Warsaw, Ind., powder
The solvents, or carrier liquids,
lists as both ozone predators and
velopment work remains before
The most important benefit of
coatings are essentially a form of
used in most paints are volatile
toxic substances.
an entire vehicle can be executed
powdered coatings is the near-
dry paint. They contain the same
organic compounds. These have
Powdered paint is sprayed
But pow
I paints are not
before the technology is ma
m a gun as a solid, with no
fully deve
I for the body.
Until powder paint pro
uquid carrier. The powder parti-
One of the problems that still
self, overspray will continue to be
cles are attracted to the part by an
needs to be solved is mainte-
a waste product and an environ-
electrostatic process, which helps
nance of a specified thickness.
mental liability to manufacturers.
to minimize overspray. The part
Some of the experts say the
is then baked in an oven and
But that's not happening at
paints tend to go on too thickly.
Chrysler's truck assembly plant
the paint particles fuse together.
Others say the thickness is sim-
in Warren, Mich.
An important benefit of pow-
ply hard to control.
In November 1988, Chrysler in-
dered paint is the ease of recov-
Another problem, says one GM
stalled a radical equipment there
ery and recycling of the overs-
expert, involves the "bells," or
that separates the paint pigment
pray powder. With liquid paint,
guns that spray the paint onto
from the carrier solvents and
airborne overspray is forced into
the surface. These still require
water carrier liquids. Chrysler
a water trough under the spray
much development work.
claims that so far, 5.2 million
booth by strong down drafts. The
pigment and partially dissolved
At PPG, they say one of the
pounds of sludge has been re-
original problems was containing
duced to 616,000 pounds of re-
solvents are then carried to the
plant's waste-water treatment fa-
the powder in the spray booth.
cyclable powder.
Like fine desert sand, it tended to
Chrysler developed the system
cility. There, the water is cleaned
of the pigment and solvents and
escape the booth and get into
jointly with Haden Environmen-
recirculated back through the
other parts of the assembly plant.
tal Corp. of Troy, Mich.
spray booth's water troughs. The
An expert at Buick-Oldsmobile-
Originally, Chrysler believed it
Cadillac says that the flake in me-
would simply be reducing the
sludge is carted off to a landfill.
volume of material hauled out
Chrysler Corp. experts main-
tallic powder paints can not be
properly oriented at present, so
of the plant and landfilled at high
tain that about 40 percent of liq-
uid paint sprayed never reaches
only clear coats and solid colors
cost. But a few companies have
the vehicle. With many landfills
can be sprayed.
expressed interest in the powder
closing and existing high-priced
Another paint expert cautions
as a filler in polymer concrete,
landfills becoming more selective
that painting metallics with pow-
roofing materials and thermoset
about what they will accept,
der could be dangerous. The ex-
plastics. And Chrysler is looking
pert says aluminum powder
into using the powder as a filler
sludge disposal has become a
major liability for carmakers.
(used in some metallic paints) is
in underbody paints and sealers.
highly explosive and some work
The recovery process begins
And liabilities don't end after
was going on to encapsulate the
when paint that does not adhere
landfills accept the waste materi-
als. Many companies are being
aluminum flake in resin, but did
to the vehicle is conducted by
tracked down by state and federal
not elaborate on any progress.
spray booth downdrafts into
And some paint researchers
water channels under the spray
agencies years after dumping ma-
booth floor.
terials and are being asked to
say it is difficult to achieve a
The water is circulated through
fund clean-up at what were legal
class-A finish with high gloss.
dumping sites.
GM has been using powdered
a sludge pit. The sludge concen-
Powdered paints already are
primer-surfacers and lower-body
trate is then pumped into a flota-
heavily used by the appliance in-
anti-chip powdered paints for
tion chamber and into a dryer.
dustry and in some special auto-
years. Experts there hope pow-
Solvents and gasses generated by
350-degree-Fahrenheit heat flow
motive applications. Automotive
dered clear coats might even add
to environmental resistance.
into an afterburner, which oxi-
components now wearing pow-
der finishes include vacuum
Paint gurus are extremely sen-
dizes them. There they are bro-
booster housings, door handles,
sitive about predicting when
ken down into more benign
powdered coatings will be ready.
chemicals and vented away.
steering columns, oil filters, alu-
minum wheels, shock absorbers,
Many refuse to comment on the
The sludge moves through a
antennae and, in some special
record or to have their companies
hollow, heated, screw-type
cases, vehicle bodies.
associated with optimistic fore-
mechanism. In an hour, the
casts for production methods.
sludge is reduced to a fine pow-
Sources at the paint companies
They say their reluctance is
der, passes through a fine mesh
say Toyota, General Motors and
Chrysler use powdered paint on
caused by fears that "overzealous
screen and is collected in 2,000-
door frames and, in some cases,
government people" might force
pound bags.
for lower body anti-chip coatings.
carmakers to adopt the technol-
ogy for its environmental benefits
Jack Keebler is engineering editor for
Automotive News.
At Chrysler, the pollution prevention process is
fully integrated within our long-range strategic
product, process and facility plans. It encom-
passes the full spectrum of Chrysler's activities
from procurement of materials, through
manufacturing and sales of our products.
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT
ELIMINATION/SUBSTITUTION
Root-cause elimination is the key to pollution pre-
vention. Chrysler has consistently worked with its
suppliers to identify materials of concern, and to
eliminate these materials where possible; reduce
volumes where not feasible to eliminate completely,
or to substitute with less toxic, non-hazardous
materials. Successes include:
Elimination of cadmium-plated fasteners in
Chrysler vehicles;
POLLUTION PREVENTION
Elimination of hexavalent chromium from all
Chrysler believes pollution prevention is a
materials and processes;
process, fully integrated within our long-range
Reformulating paints and solvent cleaners to
product plans, which encompasses all aspects
exclude the majority of listed toxic solvents;
of the business from basic materials, through
Reformulating new coatings to reduce odor
manufacturing operations, and including the
potential with each approval and subsequent
vehicles produced.
introduction into Chrysler facilities;
Chrysler is committed to the protection of health
Elimination of lead from all paints except
and welfare, natural resources and the global
electrocoat primer where less than two percent
environment. Our products and our production
by weight is used for corrosion protection;
facilities utilize the latest technologies to assure
Reformulation of air conditioner refrigerants;
that any pollution is reduced to the lowest levels
And, the phased elimination of PCB-containing
possible, often well below the levels required by
electrical apparatus from Chrysler facilities by 1998.
government standards.
A fundamental and indispensable basis of our
WATER POLLUTANT REDUCTIONS
approach to manufacturing operations is
Chrysler facilities have "state-of-the-art" water
pollution prevention. Pollution prevention
treatment facilities, which treat almost three billion
through source reduction is the first step in the
gallons of process wastewater annually. Environ-
hierarchy of options for reducing risks to human
mentally-sensitive constituents have been signifi-
health and the environment. The next step is
cantly reduced or eliminated from the manufacturing
responsible recycling or reuse of any wastes
process because of water discharge concerns. All
that cannot be reduced at the source. Wastes
materials used in the plants must pass wastewater
CHRYSLER
that cannot feasibly be recycled are treated in
treatability testing prior to introduction into manufac-
CORPORATION
accordance with environmental standards that
turing facilities.
are designed to reduce both the toxicity and/or
USED OIL RECYCLING
Environmental
volume of wastes generated. Finally, any
More than eight million gallons of used oil from
residues remaining from the treatment of waste
Chrysler stamping, machining and engine plants are
Programs
are disposed of safely, to minimize their
recycled annually. Chrysler has developed compre-
potential for release into the environment.
hensive recycling programs for waste oils with
outside suppliers. Several of our plants recover and
remanufacture waste oil on-site for return to the
HAZARDOUS WASTE REDUCTIONS
Chrysler has been an industry leader in the
process. Oil waste has also been reduced by
Chrysler has reduced the volume and toxicity of
introduction of new paint technology. Chrysler was
replacing petroleum based metal working fluids with
hazardous waste generated at its locations
the first U.S. automotive manufacturer to convert to
longer lasting synthetic materials. Purchasing
significantly through:
high solids basecoat/clearcoat technology. Since
programs have also been developed to promote the
use of recycled oils.
Increased transfer efficiency of materials at the
the early 1980's, this technology and subsequent
point of application to reduce emissions and
process improvements have resulted in a 50
SOLID WASTE RECYCLING
avoid waste;
percent reduction in the amount of paint and
Chrysler has eliminated 55 percent of the
Inventory control improvements;
solvents used per vehicle produced. This has been
expendable packaging wastes generated from
accomplished through progressive improvements to
Substitution of hazardous materials with non-
assembly plants through the use of durable
the materials, the equipment and the methods used
hazardous materials (i.e. coating and cleaning
returnable containers. Significant volumes of paper,
solvents);
Chrysler has made improvements to equipment to
cardboard, plastic and wood were saved from
increase the transfer efficiency of paint applied,
landfill. Chrysler has new product programs
Reformulating to water-based adhesives and
thereby using less paint and reducing the amount O1
planned to eliminate 95 percent of packaging
sealants to dramatically reduce toxic solvent
paint overspray, or waste. New equipment includes
waste.
usage;
high voltage, high speed turbo bells for both
Elimination of virtually all chlorinated solvents
Each year Chrysler recycles more than 35,000 tons
clearcoat and basecoat, robotic spray applicators
of wooden pallets and 26,000 tons of cardboard
from electronics manufacture, parts cleaning
and electrostatic application.
and degreasing;
from its plants. The corporation has instituted one
Changes in materials have been made by Chrysler
of the largest paper recycling programs in the U.S.,
Elimination of heavy metals in cleaning,
to increase solids levels, which decrease Volatile
recycling more than 1,000 tons of paper per year.
phosphating and painting operations;
Organic Compounds (VOC) (and other
In addition more than 700,000 tons of scrap metal is
Reduction of volume through the use of
environmentally sensitive constituents) in coatings
salvaged each year.
dewatering devices on wet sludges;
applied to the vehicle. Other changes in materials
In 1987, Chrysler and Haden Corporation piloted an
Recycling and reuse of waste solvents;
include: surface primer elimination, low VOC
innovative new paint sludge drying system, which
And segregation and recycling of lead acid
Electrocoat (water based) primer being used, low
has turned 5.2 million pounds of previously landfilled
batteries through secondary lead smelters.
VOC, non-toxic booth and body cleaners,
wastes into 616,000 pounds of materials recycled
elimination of hexavalent chromium from phosphate
ENERGY
into such products as roofing material and sealers.
treatment and elimination of lead from topcoats.
During the 1980's, energy usage per Chrysler
Each of Chrysler's
Chrysler has modified its painting methods to
vehicle built was reduced by 40 percent. This was
plastic injection
reduce the amount of coating required, thereby
accomplished by downsizing of vehicles, more
molding plants
reducing VOC emissions. These modifications
energy efficient equipment and processes and
regrinds and reuses
incorporate block painting, process control, air
energy conservation programs.
its own production
purging and innovative paint booth cleanup
wastes. White
Each Chrysler plant has a conservation committee,
techniques.
sheet foam packing
whose goal is to reduce energy usage and costs.
material is accepted
Typical examples of conservation projects include
Chrysler's focus on future technology puts pollution
prevention first, thereby eliminating the need for
back with empty
high efficiency lighting systems, energy
costly end-of-pipe controls such as incineration.
shipping containers
management systems, plus heating and ventilating
modifications.
This new focus avoids generation of greenhouse
to be reground,
gases, and prevents energy waste from end-of-pipe
pelletized and
More than 75 percent of Chrysler's fuel use is clean-
incineration. Several of the future technologies
returned to the
burning natural gas; 16 percent is low sulfur coal
currently being evaluated by Chrysler include:
manufacturer to
and the balance is distillate oil used primarily as
make new foam
boiler fuel.
Materials that cure at lower temperature, thus
packing sheets.
using less energy and expanding the range of
PAINT TECHNOLOGY
Glass cullet, or
useable plastics;
broken glass, from
Painting operations are a major source of air-borne
The elimination of lead and chrome from E-Coat.
Chrysler's glass
emissions. As such, Chrysler has placed an
Expanded use of powder anti-chip which has "0"
Paint Sludge Reduced to Powder In
plant is segregated
increased focus on a progressive set of
VOC's and improved chip resistance;
Chrysler Plants
and recycled each
technologies to deal with the problem right at the
Lower VOC water-based basecoats and
source.
day.
clearcoats;
TUFFOR
STATE OF MICHIGAN
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
JOHN ENGLER
GOVERNOR
May 8, 1992
Attention:
Award Reference
I am writing to recommend Chrysler Corporation for a President's Environment and
Conservation Challenge Award for its Jefferson North Assembly Plant project. This project is an
outstanding example of what can be achieved to benefit our environment when government and
industry work together.
Every industrial state faces the challenge of revitalizing industrial sites. Often, industry
opts to locate or relocate on previously undeveloped "greenfield" sites. Indeed, it would have been
easier for Chrysler to choose this course. Instead, Chrysler, working in cooperation with federal,
state and local government, elected to reclaim and reuse land for industrial purposes in the heart of
Detroit, Michigan.
Chrysler "recycled" the site where the Jefferson North Assembly Plant is located, and it
will provide jobs to approximately 2200 Detroit area workers. Additionally, Chrysler designed the
new plant with the environment as a priority. The facility incorporates pollution prevention
measures and the best pollution control technology. It is also representative of the efforts that are
underway at other Chrysler facilities, many of which are in Michigan.
The Jefferson North Assembly Plant project provides a model for managing old industrial
sites. We also believe that it will set standards for environmental excellence in industry for years to
come.
Sincerely,
John Engler
Governor
JE/jb
PRINTED ON
RECYCLED PAPER
CABLE: "UAW DETROIT
Polidarity House
8000 EAST JEFFERSON AVE.
DETROIT. MICHIGAN 48214
PHONE (313) 926-5000
Fax 313-331-2498
UAW
INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA-UAW
OWEN F. BIEBER, PRESIDENT
BILL CASSTEVENS, SECRETARY-TREASURER
VICE-PRESIDENTS: ODESSA KOMER
ERNEST LOFTON
STAN MARSHALL
STEPHEN P. YOKICH
May 12, 1992
Attention: Award References
The United Auto Workers (UAW) wishes to recommend that Chrysler
Corporation be recognized by the President's Environment and Conservation
Challenge Awards Committee for its environmental achievements in the
Jefferson North Assembly Plant project. This project represents a
commitment of Chrysler's experienced UAW workforce and a commitment
to the environment.
At a time when most new automobile manufacturing facilities
are being located in rural areas that are far removed from existing plants
and union influences, Chrysler chose to keep its commitment to 2100 workers
and reclaim and reuse a site in Detroit, Michigan.
The UAW and Chrysler worked in cooperation from the start of
the project to ensure the protection of human health and the environment.
The end result is a world class manufacturing facility that incorporates
the best pollution prevention strategies and pollution control technologies
in the industry. The accomplishments at Jefferson North are representative
of pollution prevention efforts that UAW workers are involved in throughout
Chrysler Corporation.
The Jefferson North Assembly Plant project successfully reconciled
environmental, as well as social and economic concerns. It provides an
example of what can be accomplished through the commitment and
cooperation of labor, management and goverment.
Star Sincerely, Marshall
Stan Marshall
Vice President and Director
UAW Chrysler Department
SM/bw
opeiu494
PRINTED IN USA
ABB
ASEA BROWN BOVERI
ATTENTION: AWARD REFERENCES
ABB, as a major supplier of paint finishing equipment to the automotive industry worldwide, is pleased
to provide this reference.
Automotive assembly plants and their paint shops in particular are potential large sources of various
pollutants to the ambient environment: paint particles, organic solvents, processed water and other
fluids, sludge, etc. Chrysler Corporation made dedicated, all penetrating efforts in the design of the
Jefferson North Assembly Plant in Detroit to reduce such emissions to levels setting new standards
for the industry.
Pollution prevention awareness including energy conservation directed efforts from the early planning
stages of the assembly plant. ABB Paint Finishing's involvement relates to the paint shop which is
normally by far the largest source of emissions in an automotive assembly plant.
Chrysler implemented innovative technology in many areas of the paint shop to prevent or reduce
pollutants in a cost effective way. MATERIALS used were selected to minimize emissions: water
borne or low solvent paints and cleaners, powder anti-chip paint, omission of air toxics in paint
formulations, selection of filter material for minimum disposal, and use of long lasting construction
materials for reliable operation.
Painting PROCESSES employed were optimized to increase paint transfer efficiency to the body surface
areas, thereby reducing paint usage. The use of flushing solvents was minimized by painting. blocks
of consecutive cars in the same color and capturing/recycling the resulting reduced volumes of flushing
solvent.
An energy management system controls the operating efficiency of major energy consuming
equipment. RECYCLING AND RECOVERY approaches were included in the paint shop; incinerator
exhaust is used to heat ovens and other process flows to improve energy efficiency; cleaning and
flushing liquids containing solvents are recycled; overspray paint sludge is dried and inertized so that
it can be recycled; activated carbon is regenerated and reused. Further, all equipment was engineered
to reduce interior and exterior noise levels.
SOLVENT EMISSION ABATEMENT, fulfilling LAER criterion, was installed for the exterior body painting
which is the major source of solvent emissions. The abatement concept is based on activated carbon
rotors removing the solvent and incinerators destroying the solvents. Challenging targets of safety,
reliability, energy efficiency and solvent removal/destruction efficiency required innovative approaches.
Chrysler Corporation's pollution prevention measures using many technologically new concepts make
the Jefferson North Assembly Plant an environmental trendsetter for industry. In light of these
achievements, ABB Paint Finishing truly recommends that Chrysler be considered for the President's
Environment and Conservation Challenge Award.
John Camardella
President
ABB Paint Finishing
One Ravinia Drive
Telephone (404) 393-6130
Suite 1110
Fax (404) 393-6139
Atlanta, Georgia 30346
CHRYSLER
CORPORATION
Chrysier Corporation
Chrysler Center
May 20, 1992
The President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
Re:
Chrysler Corporation's Application for the President's 1992 Environment and
Conservation Challenge Award
Dear President's Challenge Awards Selection Committee:
Chrysler Corporation is pleased to submit the attached application for the President's
1992 Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards program. We believe that the
subject of our application, Chrysler's Jefferson North Project, exemplifies progress and
innovation in the area of pollution prevention and is a showcase for efforts underway
throughout Chrysler Corporation.
I would like to take this opportunity to extend an invitation to the Awards Selection
Committee to visit the Jefferson North Assembly Plant. We would be happy to
arrange for a first-hand look at some of the technologies described in the attached
materials.
In preparing our application, we made every effort to provide technical information
that best reflects the Jefferson North program goals and accomplishments. If I can
be of further assistance, please contact me at (313) 956-0549.
Sincerely,
Mack Billeuth
Mark A. Bindbeutel
Pollution Prevention Manager
Environmental & Energy Regulatory Planning
12000 Chrysler Drive
Highland Park MI 48288-1919
Printed on Recycled Paper
I.
I.007
UNITED STATES.
AGENCY
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
PROTECTION
MAY 26 1992
THE ADMINISTRATOR
The President's Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20503
Attention: Award References
Design of the Jefferson North Assembly Plant Project
Chrysler Corporation
The EPA Administrator's Awards Program recognizes excellence
in working toward a cleaner environment. This year, the Awards
program focussed on achievements in pollution prevention. Nothing
has proved more effective in abating pollution than preventing it
in the first place.
Overall, I selected seventeen winners for the EPA awards
program. The Chrysler Corporation was one of only four winners in
the large business/industry category. Chrysler was selected for
its outstanding design of the Jefferson North Assembly Plant
project. From the outset, pollution prevention was incorporated in
the design of this plant. Prevention was factored into decisions
about raw materials, distribution, manufacturing, and product line.
Thus, Chrysler designed a facility, selected materials, and
implemented innovative technologies and management practices with
the goal of making the most efficient use of resources while
eliminating unnecessary pollution and waste. In addition, a number
of the measures incorporated into the facility and its product
represent automotive industry firsts.
I am pleased to endorse Chrysler Corporation for the
President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards. The
Jefferson North Assembly Plant design exemplifies a strong
commitment to pollution prevention and will serve as a national
model to inspire others to find innovative solutions in this vital
area of environmental activity.
sincerely yours
William K. Reilly
Printed on Recycled Paper
Application Summary
ID Number: I.030
Project:
Great Lakes Recycle
Contact:
Mr. John Heyde
Council of Great Lake Governors
35 East Wacker Dr., #1850
Telephone:
Chicago, IL 60601-
(312) 407-0177
Summary:
"Great Lakes Recycle" stimulates market development for
recycled products through a joint purchase, unprecedented in
size, of recycled products. It marks a pivotal step towards
the emergence of an ecologically sound economy in the region
by creating common specifications and stimulating investment
in environmentally sound technologies.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
Project involves the joint action of Great Lakes States to
develop common purchase specifications for recycled products,
to provide assistance to manufacturers of recycled products
and to establish multi-state standards board which will work
to expand concept to as many recycled products as possible.
One of major barriers to effective recycling is lack of market
potential. This kind of project is what is needed to break
barrier. Concept could be replicated widely and easily.
8 state governors have taken practical steps to overcome
obstacles to recycling. Combined state government purchasing
power for recycled paper to stimulate market, coordinated
state technical assistance to aid market and infrastucture,
and insitutioanlized actions in "Great Lakes Standards Board"
to expand targeted products. Commendable regional approach
with practical goals, concrete near term targets, and
long-term institutional framework. Merits close look to
compete for a citation.
I. I.030
Summary
On May 18, 1992, the Great Lakes Governors signed the "Great Lakes Recycle" Agreement and
initiated the largest joint purchase of recycled paper to date. This innovative agreement is
unprecedented in its size and scope. The agreement addresses the most critical challenge to
expanding recycling, the need for market development, without relying on traditional regulatory
approaches. The agreement also establishes a long term effort to stimulate the adoption of clean
production technologies, integrating recycling efforts with the critical need for reductions in toxic
emissions. As noted by Governor John Engler, the sponsor of the effort, the use of joint
purchasing power of the eight states marks a pivotal step towards the emergence of an
ecologically sound economy in the region and provides a model for the nation.
There are three components to the "Great Lakes Recycle" program:
Use the combined purchasing power of state governments to create new demand for
recycled products while providing manufacturers with a common specification for
these recycled products. Through the Great Lakes Recycle program, the states intend
to expand markets of recycled products with uniform specifications while setting an
example for local governments and business that buying recycled products is smart
economic and environmental policy.
Cooperatively target existing state programs which provide assistance to
manufacturers of recycled products. Successful recycling markets require a "recycling
infrastructure" - processing equipment which turns recyclable waste into a usable
product. By targeting state technical assistance in market and infrastructure development,
the states can reduce duplication, increase efficiency, and focus scarce state resources.
Establish an institutional mechanism for expanding targeted products, content levels
and encouraging clean technology. The agreement establishes a Great Lakes standards
board. This innovative institution will target additional products for joint purchasing,
establish a process for upgrading levels of recycled content, and the adoption of
purchasing standards which stimulate investment in clean production technologies.
The Council starts its recycling initiative with three very practical activities. First, the eight
states issued the largest ever multi-state solicitation for recycled copy paper on May 15, 1992.
Together, the states seek bids for some 30 million pounds of copy paper with 50 percent
recycled content and 10 percent post-consumer content. This multi-state purchase is premised
on the belief that eight states working together have far greater power to boost demand for
recycled paper than any of one does working alone. Second, the states are undertaking a
commitment to use only re-refined motor oil on passenger vehicles serviced at state-owned
facilities. Again, the states want to work together to create new demand for re-refined oil and
to signal the market that buyers exist to purchase additional supplies of recycled materials.
Finally, the states, through the Council, are creating a regional "standards board" which will
harmonize standards for recycled materials throughout the region. This means that, with
common standards, manufacturers will not have to produce one recycled product for one state
and another product in another state.
Criteria Questions
Cl.
What is the purpose of the project?
The project addresses the two major environmental challenges facing the Great Lakes region--
waste and toxic reduction. By creating an expanded market for recycled goods, the agreement
aims to stimulate investment in the production of recycled products and compliment aggressive
recycling projects at the state and local levels. By instituting a commitment to encourage the
use of clean technologies, the agreement seeks to stimulate investment in toxic reduction
processes.
C2.
How is the project innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or otherwise does it
overcome?
The project is innovative in its scale, and in its institutionalization of a process for setting and
increasing procurement standards. It directly links state policy to real action. The project
addresses a real problem, what to do with waste, by having state governments exercise their
power as consumers in the marketplace rather than as regulators of the market. The copy paper
solicitation is the largest multi-state solicitation for a recycled product, but the solicitation is not
an end in itself. It is part of an on-going process to ensure that manufacturers do not get mixed
signals about market demand from varying state procurement specifications.
The Council's recycling agreement attempts to overcome aspects of the "garbage crisis". The
"garbage crisis" captures the immediacy environmental issues hold for people. The traditional
practice of burying or incinerating solid waste translates directly into requests to site new
landfills or build new incinerators. However, residents worry that a new disposal site or
incinerator in their community will create groundwater or air contamination, increase noise and
traffic, and lower property values. Recycling is just one way to reduce the amount of waste
destined for landfills. However, if there is no economical means to recycle waste, the waste will
be burned, stored in warehouses or placed in discrete piles in landfills. This initiative attempts
to create a demand for the waste at one end, while creating a mechanism for the states to jointly
find ways to achieve waste reduction at the beginning of the waste stream.
The governors' commitment to have passenger vehicles serviced at state facilities use only re-
refined oil is an way to keep used oil from being landfilled or burned. Currently, much of the
used oil that is "recycled" is burned in cement kilns or other furnaces. Environmental groups
have argued that burning releases heavy metals into the air which, among other concerns, are
critical pollutants in the Great Lakes. The governors are committing the states to use oil again
for its original purpose -- as lubricating oil in vehicles. By focusing efforts on promoting re-
refined oil, we're creating closed-loop recycling for oil. Our goal is not only to reduce
improper disposal of oil - throwing it down a drain, for instance -- but also to prefer re-refining
over burning the oil that is recycled.
C3.
How is the project superior to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to
a problem for which no solutions previously existed?
This effort will focus on practical actions that trigger action by industry supply in response to
state demand. Our cooperative paper purchase was developed in a period of only four months.
Our procurement officials didn't argue over what the specifications should be for the paper
because they didn't approach the problem as one of definition -- "how much recycled content
must 'recycled' paper have?" -- but rather as a pragmatic purchasing question - "what's the
highest percentage of recycled content we can have and still be able to find enough supply for
our states?" The same logic will be applied to other products the standards board addresses.
Their mission is simple: set purchasing standards for products which encourage manufacturers
to push the envelope in terms of incorporating recycled content in to their products, yet make
sure the market can supply a product, as well. This is a simple mission, and we believe we will
avoid the seemingly endless debates other groups have encountered over the question of "what
is recycled."
The governors are committed to revisiting the copy paper standards. We want to keep our Great
Lakes purchase at the "cutting edge" of industry's ability to make the most environmentally-
sound paper. We want to open the market to manufacturers who are willing to make paper with
higher and higher percentages of recycled content, by signalling that our standards will also get
higher each year. And as part of that review of our standards, we'll consider requiring the use
of environmentally. sensitive technology (clean technology) a part of our paper purchases.
C4.
Can the project or service be replicated in an economically feasible manner?
The standards board will institutionalize what was done already for copy paper and used oil --
it will create common standards for a range of recycled products and link those common
standards to state efforts to promote recycling. For instance, we will provide price preferences
and set-asides to products that meet the requirements set by the standards board. We will
develop a Great Lakes Recycle logo which can be used by manufacturers on products that meet
the standards. And we will target our states' recycling grants and loans toward manufacturers
who are willing to produce products that meet the standards. The standards board will be made
up of a spectrum of people with an interest in strong, market-oriented moves to boost recycling:
environmentalists, industry representatives, and some of the people who purchase products for
state government every day.
C5.
What are the measurable, net long-term environmental benefits or results of the project?
We expect that, in the first year of cooperative purchase, our eight states will purchase at least
30 million pounds of paper. This purchase will divert over 3 million pounds of waste paper
from disposal. This is the equivalent of at least 130,000 trees and the energy equivalent of
771,000 gallons of gasoline. We believe this will send a significant signal to paper mills: some
of our states have committed more than half of their office paper purchases to this cooperative
purchase, and we expect the quantity purchased to rise in the next few years.
Application Summary
ID Number: I.030
Project:
Great Lakes Recycle
Contact:
Mr. John Heyde
Council of Great Lake Governors
35 East Wacker Dr., #1850
Telephone:
Chicago, IL 60601-
(312) 407-0177
Summary:
"Great Lakes Recycle" stimulates market development for
recycled products through a joint purchase, unprecedented, in
size, of recycled products. It marks a pivotal step towards
the emergence of an ecologically sound economy in the region
by creating common specifications and stimulating investment
in environmentally sound technologies.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
Project involves the joint action of Great Lakes States to
develop common purchase specifications for recycled products,
to provide assistance to manufacturers of recycled products
and to establish multi-state standards board which will work
to expand concept to as many recycled products as possible.
One of major barriers to effective recycling is lack of market
potential. This kind of project is what is needed to break
barrier. Concept could be replicated widely and easily.
8 state governors have taken practical steps to overcome
obstacles to recycling. Combined state government purchasing
power for recycled paper to stimulate market, coordinated
state technical assistance to aid market and infrastucture,
and insitutioanlized actions in "Great Lakes Standards Board"
to expand targeted products. Commendable regional approach
with practical goals, concrete near term targets, and
long-term institutional framework. Merits close look to
compete for a citation.
GEMERNUR ENGLER'S
I,030
Application Form-1992
6. A-D: Please answer only the following Award criteria
questions pertaining to the specific Award category for
which you are applying. (For example: Partnership category,
ease read the application form carefully and provide all information
answer questions A1-A5; EQM, BI-B7; Innovation, C1-C5;
requested. Please type or print clearly. Supplementary pages should
Education, D1-D5).
follow the format of this form as closely as possible. Incomplete applica-
tions will not be considered.
Answers should be clear, concise and should emphasize
quantifiable results or benefits of the program. Each
1. Select the Award category for which you are competing:
answer to a sub-question should not exceed 100 words.
(Note: A program may be entered in only one category. See descriptions of
Taken as a whole, all answers to criteria questions should
categories in Question 6.)
not exceed two pages.
(01) Partnership
(02) Environmental Quality Management
A. PARTNERSHIP: awarded to diverse organizations or
(03) X Innovation
groups that have fostered cooperative approaches to envi-
(04)
Education and Communication
ronmental needs at the local, regional, or national level.
2. Name of the project or program described in this application:
1. Who are the partnership's members? What are their
roles? What resources do they bring to the partnership?
Great Lakes Recycle
2. What are the partnership's specific environmental or
3. Name of Award Applicant(s): (Use separate sheet, if needed)
conservation objectives? Has a sustainable plan of con-
Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
certed action for meeting these needs been established?
Name:
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative?
What obstacles, environmental or otherwise, does it
Title:
overcome?
ganization: Council of Great Lakes Governors
4. What measurable environmental or conservation
benefits has the partnership produced?
Street: 35 East Wacker Drive Suite 1850
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by
City: Chicago
State:
IL
Zip:
60601
others and transferred to other settings?
Telephone:
(312) 407-0177
Fax: (312) 407-0038
B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT:
awarded to organizations which have demonstrated that
environmental values can be integrated into sound man-
4. Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
agement decisions and objectives. (Note: This category
X Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
reflects broad-based organizational approaches. Special
programs or projects may be more appropriate for entry
Name:
John Heyde
in one of the other three award categories.)
Title:
Environmental Policy Director
1. What are the organization's environmental policies
and objectives?
Organization:
Council of Great Lakes Governors
2. How has the organization's top management
Street:
35 East Wacker Dr Suite 1850
demonstrated commitment to these policies and objec-
tives? Do the policies demonstrate commitment
City:
Chicago
State:
IL
Zip:
60601
beyond legal compliance?
Telephone: (312) 407-0177
Fax:
(312) 407-0038
3. What are the organization's environmental stan-
dards for its product(s) and operations? (Explain how
NOTE: The Selection Committee will rely heavily on Questions 5-6 in
they go beyond legal constraints and how they relate to man-
ermining how well the application meets the award criteria.
agement control mechanisms.)
5. Please attach a one-page (not to exceed 500 words) summary, suitable
4. How are these policies and objectives incorporated in
for publication. which provides a complete overview of the application.
the: a) Day-to-day management of the organization: bl Orga-
The one-page response should be clear, concise, and should emphasize
nization's decision-making about research and development,
quantifiable results or benefits of the program.
long-range planning, capital, and operating budgets?
05/15/92
16:34
GUVERNUR ENGLER'S
5. How are these policies and objectives reflected in the orga-
NOTE: The following questions are for informational purposes.
nization's relationships with employees, customers, suppliers,
and the general public?
7. How long has the technology, program, project or service been
operational?
Since May 18, 1992
6. What are the organization's control mechanisms that give
decision makers objective data to measure continuous perfor-
mance improvement toward its short- and long-term environ-
8. Which of the following most accurately describes the appli-
mental objectives?
cant(s)? (Check more than one, if applicable.)
(01) National Business or Industry
7. What quantifiable, sustained environmental quality results
(02) Regional or Local Business or Industry
in products and processes have resulted from the organiza-
(03) National Nonprofit Organization or Foundation
tion's environmental approach?
(04) XX Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05) Local or State Government/Government Agency
C. INNOVATION-awarded to individuals, organizations and
(06)
Educational Organization
groups who have demonstrated exceptional creativity or pio-
(07) Voluntary Civic Organization
neered new approaches in the development and/or execution of
(08) Trade or Professional Society
technologies, programs, projects, or services that are environ-
(09)
Youth Organization
mentally sound and economically sensible?
(10) Labor Organization
(11) Individual
1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or
(12) Other (Please describe):
service?
9. If business or industry, which of the following best describes
2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinc-
the type of business or industry?
live or innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or other-
(01) Agriculture/Forestry
wise, does it overcome?
(02)
Aerospace
(03)
Communications
3. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior
(04)
Construction
to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a
(05) Electronics/Computers
problem for which no solutions previously existed?
(06) Energy
(07)
Engineering
4. Can the technology, program, project or service be replicated
(08)
Environmental Services
in an economically feasible manner?
(09) Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10) Manufacturing-Chemical
5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental ben-
(11)
Manufacturing-Other
efits or results of the technology, program, project, or service?
(12)
Mining
(13) Recreation
D. EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION-awarded to indi-
(14) Trade-Wholesale
viduals, organizations, or groups which have developed educa-
(15)
Transportation
(16)
Honal or informational programs that inspire respect for the
Utilities-Electric, Gas or
(17) Other (Please describe):
environment and raise the public's environmental literacy.
1. What is the program? What are its environmental or conser-
10. Which of the following must accurately describes the environ-
vation objectives?
mental program under consideration for an award? (Check more
than one, if applicable.)
2. Who is the program's audience? How large is the audience?
(01)
agriculture
How is the program's effect on the audience determined?
(02) air quality
(03)
conservation
3. What is original or distinctive about the program?
(04)
education-general public
(05)
education-academic
4. What are the measurable results or benefits produced by the
(06) energy
program? How does the program promote the development
(07) environmental quality management
of an environmental ethic and make a positive contribution to
(08) forestry
environmental awareness?
(09) hazardous waste remediation
(10) international
5. How can the program be used or modeled by others?
(11) natural resources
05/15/92
16:35
GOVERNOR ENGLER'S OFFICE
010
(12)
pollution control
14. Please indicate which of the following are the primary audi-
(13)
recreation
ences, beneficiaries, or users of the program or service, and esti-
(14) X recycling
mate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
(15)
solid waste
(16) source reduction/pollution prevention
Type
How Many People
(17) water quality
(18) wetlands
(01) Business or Industry
(19) wildlife and fish resources
(02) Trade or Professional Society
(20) Other (Please describe):
(03) X Government
(04) Educational Organizations
11. If applicable, list the sources of the program's support and the
(05) Youth
percentage of support provided, including grants and in-kind
(06) Community or Public Interest Groups
contributions of goods and services. (Use separate sheet if needed).
(07) Local Community or Local Public
(08) X General Public
Source
see attached sheet
%
(09) Employees
(10) Customers or Clients
Source
%
(11) X Other (Please describe): Clean technology
companies
Source
%
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project,
or conservation awards in the past five years?
including approximate value of in-kind contributions of goods
and services:
$ 100,000
If the project is ongoing, what is the annual cost?
$ 75,000
16. In one paragraph (not to exceed 50 words), please summarize the program, its objectives and what it has accomplished. Use space
provided below. This paragraph should be suitable for use in a catalog, database or brochure.
"Great Lakes Recycle" stimulates market development for recycled products through a joint
purchase, unprecedented in size, of recycled products. It marks a pivotal step towards the
emergence of an ecologically sound economy in the region by creating common specifications
and stimulating investment in environmentally sound technologies.
11)
Sources:
State of Illinois
10%
State of Indiana
10%
State of Michigan
20%
State of Minnesota
12%
State of Ohio
10%
State of New York
4%
State of Pennsylvania
4%
State of Wisconsin
20%
Council of Great Lakes Governors 10%
Please include 3 one-page letters of recommendation attached
How to Apply
to the application when it is submitted for consideration. Letters
should be addressed: "Attention: Award References." References
Completed applications must be postmarked
should have first-hand knowledge of the environmental program,
by May 22, 1992 and mailed to the:
service, or technology and should offer a candid evaluation of its
The President's Environment and
success or effectiveness. References may also include users or
Conservation Challenge Awards
beneficiaries of your program.
Council on Environmental Quality
NOTE: Letters of recommendation must accompany the applica-
The White House
tion when It is submitted to CEQ. Letters sent directly to CEQ
722 Jackson Place, NW
will not be considered. Please list the references in the spaces
Washington, DC 20503
below.
All information submitted with the application should be
Name: Donna Wise
considered public information and becomes property of
the President's Challenge Awards program.
Title:
Vice-President for Policy Affairs
World Resources Institute
Award recipients will be notified in Fall 1992. Recipients
1709 New York Ave., N.W.
must be willing to assist the President's Challenge Awards
Street:
program in making nonproprietary information about
City: Washington,
State: D.C. Zip: 20006
their environmental programs available to others who
wish to replicate their success.
Telephone: (202) 638-6300 Fax: (202) 638-0036
Application Format
ne: Bill Brah
Please submit one original and four photocopies of your
application. You may include up to 10 pages of supporting
Time:
President, Center for the Great Lakes
materials. (NOTE: Photocopying both sides of a sheet of
paper will be considered two-pages.) Any oversized items
Street: 35 East Wacker Drive, Suite 1870
must be reduced to fit a standard 8.5" x 11" page format.
City: Chicago
State: IL Zip: 60601
Supporting materials may include items such as brochures,
photographs, press clippings, and graphs depicting the
Telephone: (312) 263-0785 Fax:
program's results. The materials may not be used as a
substitute for written responses to Questions 5 and 6.
Name: William Warstler
The order of pages in the submitted application should be
President, National Association of
as follows:
Title:
State Purchasing Officials
1. 4-page application (Questions 1-20)
2. 500-word overview summary (Question 5)
Street: P.O. Box 30026
3. 2-page responses to criteria questions (Question 6)
4. 10 pages of supporting materials
City: Lansing
State: MI
Zip:
48909
5. 3 letters of recommendation (Question 17)
Telephone: (517) 373-0300 Fax: (517) 335-0046
NOTE: The entire package should be stapled in the upper,
left-hand corner. Any items sent over the 10-page limit of
supporting materials will be disregarded and not reviewed
18. Please sign below to indicate that all applicants agree a) to
by the technical evaluators and selection committee. Do
abide by the rules and requirements of the awards competition,
not put the application or backup materials into a binder,
and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the
notebook or plastic cover.
best of their knowledge.
OMB Control No. 0331-0002, (Exp. 2/95); As required by the
nature: J. Heyole
Date: 5/22/92
Paperwork Reduction Act, CEQ estimates that completion of this
application will take 10 hours. Send comments regarding the col-
Environmental Policy
lection of this information, including suggestions for reducing the
Title: Director
Organization: CGLG
paperwork burden, to CEQ and also to: Paperwork Reduction Pro-
ject, Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and
Telephone: (312) 407-0177
Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., 20503
Summary
On May 18, 1992, the Great Lakes Governors signed the "Great Lakes Recycle" Agreement and
initiated the largest joint purchase of recycled paper to date. This innovative agreement is
unprecedented in its size and scope. The agreement addresses the most critical challenge to
expanding recycling, the need for market development, without relying on traditional regulatory
approaches. The agreement also establishes a long term effort to stimulate the adoption of clean
production technologies, integrating recycling efforts with the critical need for reductions in toxic
emissions. As noted by Governor John Engler, the sponsor of the effort, the use of joint
purchasing power of the eight states marks a pivotal step towards the emergence of an
ecologically sound economy in the region and provides a model for the nation.
There are three components to the "Great Lakes Recycle" program:
Use the combined purchasing power of state governments to create new demand for
recycled products while providing manufacturers with a common specification for
these recycled products. Through the Great Lakes Recycle program, the states intend
to expand markets of recycled products with uniform specifications while setting an
example for local governments and business that buying recycled products is smart
economic and environmental policy.
Cooperatively target existing state programs which provide assistance to
manufacturers of recycled products. Successful recycling markets require a "recycling
infrastructure" - processing equipment which turns recyclable waste into a usable
product. By targeting state technical assistance in market and infrastructure development,
the states can reduce duplication, increase efficiency, and focus scarce state resources.
Establish an institutional mechanism for expanding targeted products, content levels
and encouraging clean technology. The agreement establishes a Great Lakes standards
board. This innovative institution will target additional products for joint purchasing,
establish a process for upgrading levels of recycled content, and the adoption of
purchasing standards which stimulate investment in clean production technologies.
The Council starts its recycling initiative with three very practical activities. First, the eight
states issued the largest ever multi-state solicitation for recycled copy paper on May 15, 1992.
Together, the states seek bids for some 30 million pounds of copy paper with 50 percent
recycled content and 10 percent post-consumer content. This multi-state purchase is premised
on the belief that eight states working together have far greater power to boost demand for
recycled paper than any of one does working alone. Second, the states are undertaking a
commitment to use only re-refined motor oil on passenger vehicles serviced at state-owned
facilities. Again, the states want to work together to create new demand for re-refined oil and
to signal the market that buyers exist to purchase additional supplies of recycled materials.
Finally, the states, through the Council, are creating a regional "standards board" which will
harmonize standards for recycled materials throughout the region. This means that, with
common standards, manufacturers will not have to produce one recycled product for one state
and another product in another state.
Criteria Questions
CI.
What is the purpose of the project?
The project addresses the two major environmental challenges facing the Great Lakes region--
waste and toxic reduction. By creating an expanded market for recycled goods, the agreement
aims to stimulate investment in the production of recycled products and compliment aggressive
recycling projects at the state and local levels. By instituting a commitment to encourage the
use of clean technologies, the agreement seeks to stimulate investment in toxic reduction
processes.
C2.
How is the project innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or otherwise does it
overcome?
The project is innovative in its scale, and in its institutionalization of a process for setting and
increasing procurement standards. It directly links state policy to real action. The project
addresses a real problem, what to do with waste, by having state governments exercise their
power as consumers in the marketplace rather than as regulators of the market. The copy paper
solicitation is the largest multi-state solicitation for a recycled product, but the solicitation is not
an end in itself. It is part of an on-going process to ensure that manufacturers do not get mixed
signals about market demand from varying state procurement specifications.
The Council's recycling agreement attempts to overcome aspects of the "garbage crisis". The
"garbage crisis" captures the immediacy environmental issues hold for people. The traditional
practice of burying or incinerating solid waste translates directly into requests to site new
landfills or build new incinerators. However, residents worry that a new disposal site or
incinerator in their community will create groundwater or air contamination, increase noise and
traffic, and lower property values. Recycling is just one way to reduce the amount of waste
destined for landfills. However, if there is no economical means to recycle waste, the waste will
be burned, stored in warehouses or placed in discrete piles in landfills. This initiative attempts
to create a demand for the waste at one end, while creating a mechanism for the states to jointly
find ways to achieve waste reduction at the beginning of the waste stream.
The governors' commitment to have passenger vehicles serviced at state facilities use only re-
refined oil is an way to keep used oil from being landfilled or burned. Currently, much of the
used oil that is "recycled" is burned in cement kilns or other furnaces. Environmental groups
have argued that burning releases heavy metals into the air which, among other concerns, are
critical pollutants in the Great Lakes. The governors are committing the states to use oil again
for its original purpose -- as lubricating oil in vehicles. By focusing efforts on promoting re-
refined oil, we're creating closed-loop recycling for oil. Our goal is not only to reduce
improper disposal of oil throwing it down a drain, for instance -- but also to prefer re-refining
over burning the oil that is recycled.
C3.
How is the project superior to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to
a problem for which no solutions previously existed?
This effort will focus on practical actions that trigger action by industry supply in response to
state demand. Our cooperative paper purchase was developed in a period of only four months.
Our procurement officials didn't argue over what the specifications should be for the paper
because they didn't approach the problem as one of definition - "how much recycled content
must 'recycled' paper have?" - but rather as a pragmatic purchasing question -- "what's the
highest percentage of recycled content we can have and still be able to find enough supply for
our states?" The same logic will be applied to other products the standards board addresses.
Their mission is simple: set purchasing standards for products which encourage manufacturers
to push the envelope in terms of incorporating recycled content in to their products, yet make
sure the market can supply a product, as well. This is a simple mission, and we believe we will
avoid the seemingly endless debates other groups have encountered over the question of "what
is recycled."
The governors are committed to revisiting the copy paper standards. We want to keep our Great
Lakes purchase at the "cutting edge" of industry's ability to make the most environmentally-
sound paper. We want to open the market to manufacturers who are willing to make paper with
higher and higher percentages of recycled content, by signalling that our standards will also get
higher each year. And as part of that review of our standards, we'll consider requiring the use
of environmentally sensitive technology (clean technology) a part of our paper purchases.
C4.
Can the project or service be replicated in an economically feasible manner?
The standards board will institutionalize what was done already for copy paper and used oil --
it will create common standards for a range of recycled products and link those common
standards to state efforts to promote recycling. For instance, we will provide price preferences
and set-asides to products that meet the requirements set by the standards board. We will
develop a Great Lakes Recycle logo which can be used by manufacturers on products that meet
the standards. And we will target our states' recycling grants and loans toward manufacturers
who are willing to produce products that meet the standards. The standards board will be made
up of a spectrum of people with an interest in strong, market-oriented moves to boost recycling:
environmentalists, industry representatives, and some of the people who purchase products for
state government every day.
C5.
What are the measurable, net long-term environmental benefits or results of the project?
We expect that, in the first year of cooperative purchase, our eight states will purchase at least
30 million pounds of paper. This purchase will divert over 3 million pounds of waste paper
from disposal. This is the equivalent of at least 130,000 trees and the energy equivalent of
771,000 gallons of gasoline. We believe this will send a significant signal to paper mills: some
of our states have committed more than half of their office paper purchases to this cooperative
purchase, and we expect the quantity purchased to rise in the next few years.
GREAT LAKES RECYCLE
GOVERNORS' AGREEMENT
MAY 18, 1992
INTRODUCTION
More than any other environmental problem, the "garbage crisis" captures the immediacy
environmental issues hold for our citizens. The traditional practice of burying or incinerating
solid waste translates directly into requests to site new landfills and build new incinerators in
local communities - requests which are increasingly volatile.
At the local level, the disposal of solid waste is an environmental and an economic problem.
Residents worry that a new disposal site in their community will create groundwater or air
contamination, increase noise and traffic, and lower property values. Taxpayers see the cost of
managing waste rising so high that in some areas, localities pay more for waste management
than for police protection.
In response to the escalating crisis of solid waste management and disposal, governments are
struggling to reduce the quantity of waste destined for landfills. In 1988, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency offered a waste "hierarchy" to guide management decisions
with the first priority to reduce the amount of waste generated, the second priority to recycle,
and lastly, to dispose or incinerate what cannot be reduced, reused, or recycled.
As governors, each of us is working to improve waste reduction and recycling in our states. In
addition to intensive state action, we maintain that a regional effort can enhance our ability to
address the solid waste disposal crisis. We believe that the Great Lakes states can and should
become the nation's leading region in environmental protection and pollution prevention as we
set an example for the private sector, local governments, and citizens on the sound
environmental, mental, and economic principles behind the procurement of recycled products.
Through the Council of the Great Lakes Governors, we have already launched a regional
pollution prevention effort, the Great Lakes Pollution Prevention Challenge, as the first element
of our regional strategy for environmental protection. In addition, as the manufacturing
heartland of North America, we already possess much of the infrastructure we need to greatly
increase the role recycling plays in protecting our environment.
THE "GREAT LAKES RECYCLE" PROGRAM
The next element of our regional strategy for environmental protection is an initiative that laps
the power our states hold individually and collectively as a region. The "Great Lakes Recycle"
program's primary goal is to pool individual state efforts to boost recycling by drawing on
"Great Lakes Recycle" Governors' Agreement
May 18, 1992
Page 2
economies of scale created by joint state procurement power. The purchasing power of eight
state governments can wield greater muscle in stimulating markets for goods made from recycled
materials and will signal to manufacturers that a stable and growing market for recycled products
exists.
Components of the "Great Lakes Recycle" Program include:
Use the combined purchasing power of state governments to create new demand for
recycled products while providing manufacturers with a common specification for
these recycled products. While each Great Lakes state has some preference for
"purchasing recycled products," each state also purchases slightly different products,
making it difficult for manufacturers to produce a single recycled product in large
quantity. Through the Great Lakes Recycle program, we intend to expand markets of
recycled products with uniform specifications while setting an example for local
governments and business that buying recycled products is smart economic and
environmental policy.
Cooperatively target existing state programs which provide assistance to
manufacturers of recycled products. Successful recycling markets require "recycling
infrastructure" - processing equipment which turns recyclable waste into a usable
product. By targeting state technical assistance in market and infrastructure development,
we can reduce duplication, increase efficiency, and focus scarce state resources.
Targeting market development assistance will also focus efforts in developing products
that meet state and regional procurement standards.
Ensure that waste reduction is the region's number one priority for waste
management. Many of our states support initiatives to encourage the re-design of
products and packaging to reduce waste at the primary level. "Great Lakes Recycle" will
explore the possibility of regional action to establish uniform standards and guidelines
for packaging reduction and re-design.
SPECIFIC AGREEMENTS
"Great Lakes Recycle" will evolve as our states find innovative methods to promote waste
reduction and increase recycling. We intend to capitalize and act on available opportunities
while maintaining sensitivity to changing technologies and environmental demands.
The following three projects form the foundation of Great Lakes Recycle:
"Great Lakes Recycle" Governors' Agreement
May 18, 1992
Page 3
1. BOOSTING THE MARKET FOR RECYCLED COPY PAPER
The Great Lakes Governors will:
Combine state purchase power to execute the largest ever multi-state cooperative
purchase of recycled high-speed copy paper. On May 15, the eight Great Lakes states
issued, for the first time, a single solicitation to purchase high-speed copy paper with at
least 10 percent post-consumer waste. Although each state retains the right to forgo use
of the joint procurement process if they can achieve a lower price on their own, we
expect that the solicitation will result in a purchase of over 30 million pounds of recycled
paper. This historic joint purchase confirms our commitment to building a credible
regional market for paper with high recycled content.
Annually review the joint purchase solicitation for recycled copy paper with the intent
of increasing the demand for recycled and post-consumer content, subject to a
cooperative purchase remaining financially more attractive than single-state purchases.
We desire to purchase paper with the highest recycled and post-consumer content
possible, consistent with technology and the capability of manufacturers to supply the
paper. By reviewing our specifications annually, we send a strong signal to
manufacturers that growing markets exists and will continue to exist for recycled copy
paper.
In addition to reviewing waste content, future joint purchasing specifications could
include requiring the use of environmentally sensitive technology (clean technology).
Expand the initiative to include additional paper products. We intend to create a uniform
market for a full range of paper products, through additional cooperative purchase
arrangements and/or standardization of purchasing specifications.
In cases where states do not already do so, provide the opportunity to include local units
of government, schools, universities, and others in the purchasing pool.
2. BOOSTING THE MARKET FOR RE-REFINED LUBRICATING OIL
The Great Lakes Governors will:
Purchase, for use at state facilities by state owned or leased passenger vehicles, only re-
refined lubricating oil, subject to the price of re-refined oil remaining comparable with
the price of virgin lubricating oil. The Great Lakes region already boasts the nation's
largest oil re-refinery, and the private sector is considering building other re-refineries.
"Great Lakes Recycle" Governors' Agreement
May 18, 1992
Page 4
Confident in the quality of re-refined oil, we intend to lead by example, by converting
all state-owned or leased passenger vehicles to exclusive use of re-refined oil.
Ensure that all waste oil generated at state facilities is properly recycled. Improper
disposal releases more oil into the U.S. environment each year than did the Exxon
Valdez spill. To avoid this needless pollution, our intent is to illustrate that used oil
recycling can be a closed loop - purchased as re-refined and then recycled by the
supplier.
Explore other innovative ways to boost the market for re-refined oil such as coordinating
a multi-state cooperative purchase of re-refined oil and, where possible, induce private
contractors who service state fleets outside of state facilities to use only re-refined oil for
state-owned or leased vehicles.
Require environmental compliance at re-refineries who supply the re-refined oil for state
government purchase.
Demonstrate the quality and reliability of re-refined oil through use in state-owned or
leased vehicles.
3. "GREAT LAKES RECYCLE" STANDARDS BOARD:
Commission a "Standards Board" for the Great Lakes Recycle program. The Standards
Board will draw its membership from state procurement officials, state recycling policy
officials, knowledgeable citizens, industry, and noted recycling experts. The Standards
Board will propose common standards to the governors to encourage the manufacture of
products with large amounts of recycled content. The standards will be based on a
pragmatic decision balancing the desire to achieve high percentage of recycled content
with the need to insure that the standards can be reasonably achieved at economically
feasible prices. These standards will specify minimum amount of recycled and post-
consumer content, for specific products.
Tie purchase of recycled products in state procurement programs to the standards
developed by the Standards Board. Specifically, for products where the governors adopt
a recycled-content standard, use of state price preferences and procurement "set aside"
policies will apply only to products which meet the adopted standard. In planning this
program, we recognize that, in some cases, legislation may be required in order to
accomplish this element.
"Great Lakes Recycle" Governors' Agreement
May 18, 1992
Page 5
Target existing state market development programs for recycled products toward
manufacturers which produce or will produce products meeting standards adopted by the
Standards Board and ensure state market development assistance is coordinated on a
regional basis to avoid duplication.
Require the Standards Board to conduct the annual reviews of specifications for recycled
paper products (and other products as necessary) as described above to ensure that
specifications reflect the best available technology.
Promote Great Lakes recycling standards nationwide and encourage other states and
private businesses to embrace the standards.
Ask the Standards Board to develop a Great Lakes regional position on recycled and
market development to promote at the national level.
Develop and adopt a "Great Lakes Recycle" seal and/or logo for products meeting the
boards standards.
CONCLUSION
In launching the "Great Lakes Recycle" program, we have identified initial steps which will have
an impact on the markets of two important commodities: recycled paper products and re-refined
lubricating oil. Both are critical to reducing solid waste and pollution in our states.
Paper makes up an estimated 40 percent of all municipal solid waste generated in the United
States. The improper disposal of used oil threatens to contaminate ground water supplies and
the Great Lakes with toxic heavy metals. Collectively, we can make a positive impact on the
management of these materials. "Great Lakes Recycle" is one major step in that direction.
We intend to expand the impact of the "Great Lakes Recycle" program to embrace more
commodities and to encourage recycling over the full range of state programs. We believe this
program also sends a strong signal to manufacturers that they have stable product specifications
with expanding markets. It also demonstrates to the private sector, local governments, and
citizens that buying "recycled" not only is feasible but can be economically environmentally
sound.
Recycling plays a positive role in our states, not only in reducing the amount of waste we must
manage, but also by stimulating a new, highly efficient industry in our region. "Great Lakes
"Great Lakes Recycle" Governors' Agreement
May 18, 1992
Page 6
Recycle" is a testimony to our belief that by working together, we can realize our region's
potential to boost recycling, better utilize our natural resources, and protect our environment.
Evan Bayh, Governor
And Arne H. Carlson, Darlson. Governor
State of Indiana
State of Minnesota
Robert P. Casey, Governor
Mario M. Cuomo, Governor
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
State of New York
Jim Jim Edgar, Governor Edgar
State of Illinois
JASB John Engler, Governor
State of Michigan
Du
Tommy G Thompson, Governor
George Voinovich, Governor
State of Wisconsin
State of Ohio
LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION
WORLDRESOURCESINSTITUTE
1709 New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006, Telephone: 202-638-6300
Facsimile: 202-638-0036 Telex: 64414 WRIWASH
May 22, 1992
Governor John Engler
Council of Great Lakes Governors
35 East Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Dear Governor Engler,
On behalf of the World Resources Institute, I am pleased to support the Great Lakes
Recycle Agreement for the President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards.
As you know, government leadership and policies are crucial elements in our efforts to
reduce and prevent pollution. WRI recognizes this Agreement as a strong first step toward
regional, intergovernmental cooperation in the reduction of wastes and the development of
pollution prevention programs. The efforts of the Great Lakes Standards Board to encourage the
use of clean technologies through purchasing criteria will help stimulate investment in prevention
processes.
In its recent report, Beyond Compliance, WRI documented the leading efforts of
companies to develop prevention programs as part of an overall competitiveness strategy. The
Great Lakes Recycle Agreement's focus on clean technologies may create additional market
incentives for investments in such technologies.
Best wishes on your application and this important project.
Sincerely,
DennaWise
Donna Wise
Vice President for Policy Affairs
Printed on Recycled Paper
The Center
La Fondation
for the
des
Great Lakes
Grands Lacs
Anthony S. Earl, CHAIRMAN
Quarles & Brady
Madison
Governor of Wisconsin. 1983-86
John T. Anderson. SECRETARY
Lord. Bissell & Brook
Chicago
William J. Brah. PRESIDENT
May 21, 1992
John F. Angus
Stonehenge Corp.
Toronto
James J. Blanchard
Verner. Liipfert, Bernhard.
The President's Environment and Conservation
McPherson-and Hand
Washington, D.C.
Challenge Awards
Governor of Michigan, 1983-91
Council on Environmental Quality
Sandra K. Butler
The White House
Butler Family Foundation
St. Paul
722 Jackson Place, N.W.
Peter R. Cresswell
Washington, DC 20503
Algoma Central Corp.
Sault Ste. Marie. Ontario
Dear Selection Committee:
Dr. James E. Crowfoot
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor
This is in support of the Council of Great Lakes Governor's nomination of its new
Edward P. Curtis, Jr.
"Great Lakes Recycle" program for a President's Environment and Conservation
Genesee Public Affairs Inc.
Rochester
Challenge Award. This program is an outstanding contribution to the nation's
James G. Laidlaw
environmental quality.
Goodwood Boatworks Ltd.
Vancouver
We believe "Great Lakes Recycle" is an innovative use of joint state procurement
Clifford Lincoln
Beaconsfield
power to stimulate markets for goods made from recycled materials and signal to
Quebec Environment Minister
1985-89
manufactures that a stable and growing market for recycled products exist. It is
already resulting in the largest ever multi-state purchase of recycled high-speed
Phillip B. Lind
Rogers Communications Inc.
copy paper.
Toronto
Dr. Thomas H. Moss
Case Western Reserve University
In a larger sense, "Great Lakes Recycle" shows that the governors of the eight
Cleveland
states in the region understand that todays's environmental problems are too critical
David R. Peterson
to be dealt with one nation at a time, and that leaders must join hands to achieve
Cassels. Brock and Blackwell
Toronto
sustainable development on a global scale.
Ontario Premier. 1985-90
Donald A. Schenkenberger
The Council of Great Lakes Governors deserves recognition of the highest order
Ameritech Corp.
Chicago
for its initiative.
Thomas E. Wagner
Calfee. Haiter and Griswold
Sincerely,
Cleveland
W.J.Brah Brah
William J. Brah
President
bcc:
Sheila Leahy
Anne Armstrong
35 East Wacker Drive
77 Harbor Square
Suite 1870
Suite 2408
Chicago. Illinois 60601
Toronto, Ontario M5J.2H2
(312) 263-0785
(416) 868-0550
The National Association of State Purchasing Officials
Milli
May 28, 1992
EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE
PRESIDENT:
William & Warstor
Director
The President's Environment and
Office of Purchasing
Conservation Challenge Awards
Department of Management
and Budget
Council on Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 30026
the White House
Lansing, Michigan 48909
722 Jackson Place, N.W.
(517) 373-0300
(517) 335-0048 (FAX)
Washington, DC 20503
PRESIDENT-ELECT
Attention: Award References
Paula Moskowitz
New York
Dear Sir or Madam:
FINANCE CHAIRPERSON
N. Kent Rose
Alacama
On behalf of the National Association of State Purchasing
Officials (NASPO), I want to express our support for and
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT
Robert J. Link CPPO, C.P.M.
endorsement of the Council of Great Lakes Governors' "Great Lakes
Alaska
Recycle" program. This program represents a bold regional
approach to promoting recycling that puts government into the
AT-LARGE
Margaret E McConnell
regulators. role of market developer and participant, rather than the role of
Arizona
Michael Ghourdjian
Colorado
The program, with Great Lakes Governors at the helm, sends a
strong supportive signal to the state purchasing professionals
John W. Haggerty
and the business community that eight state governments will use
Minnesota
their purchasing power to buy recycled products though joint
Glulio Mazzone
cooperative development of specifications, joint solicitations
New Jaracy.
and contracting. While the vast majority of states have passed
William J. Stuckey
mandatory legislation to purchase recycled paper, supplies and
North Carolina
equipment, the strong support of the Governors sends a clear
message to the business community the state has the highest level
Janice L Harber
Tennessee
of commitment to do its part in improving the environment though
purchasing environmentally viable products with a positive side
Douglas G Richins, C.P.M.
benefit of solid waste reduction.
Utah
1992 HOST STATE CHAIRPERSON
The Council of Great Lakes Governors' "Great Lakes Recycle"
Mable Martin
program elevates the visibility of State purchasing programs
Indiana
aimed at securing additional recycled products and makes the jobs
of my colleagues and I easier. Perhaps the most critical problem
in boosting recycling today is to provide real markets for
recycled products. I sincerely believe this program is a strong
and innovative multi-state approach which will serve as a model
for the country.
recycled paper
SECRETARIAT: The Council of State Governments, Adnee Hamilton, NASPO Staff,
Iron Works Pike, P.O. Box 11910. Lexington, KY 40578-1910. (605) 231-1906, [FAX 231-1928].
CSG
** 74101 **
The President's Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards
Page 2
May 28, 1992
On behalf of NASPO, and particularly the Great Lakes States
members, we are extremely pleased that the Great Lakes Governors
have shared their vision and support to a most worthwhile
program. I am certain that in the months ahead, this model will
be duplicated by other regions of the county. The old adage,
"imitation is the highest from of approval" will certainly apply
to the "Great Lakes Recycle" program.
Sincerely,
William S. Warstler
NASPO President
CC: Executive Committee
Council of Great Lakes Governors
Application Summary
ID Number: I.063
Project:
Innovative Source Reduction
Contact:
Mr. Edward A. Fox
Procter & Gamble Company
6110 Center Hill Avenue
Telephone:
Cincinatti, OH 45224-
(513) 634-2376
Summary:
Innovation in reducing the volume of material going to solid
waste is a hallmark of Procter & Gamble's thrust in
environmental quality. With the largest known Source
Reduction program ever, it has eliminated .5% in the volume of
the total U.S. waste stream. P&G has applied this innovation
and high technology to use less material in its products and
packages while at the same time delivering quality products.
In partnership with retailers and consumers, P&G uses new
concepts for source reduction to deliver striking new
improvements for the environment.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
Innovation, applicable and with substantial environmental
impact.
Good overall program, but not specific innovation.
Use of refill and 2-in-1 products to reduce waste stream.
Good support letters.
PAGE 10
AWARD CRITERIA QUESTIONS (cont'd)
S. A. (continued)
The problems addressed by Procter & Gamble's program for Source Reduction are:
(1) in the short-term, to reduce solid waste, and (2) in the long-term, to
to benefit the environment by decreasing our demand on all natural resources,
including air, water, land, atmosphere, as well as the more commonly discussed
natural resources, for every product made.
There are other ways to approach the same objective, such as by Recycling,
for which Procter & Gamble received a Citation in the President's Environment
and Conservation Challenge Awards in 1991. Composting is another approach.
But, Source Reduction is the most preferred solution because it treats the
problem at the source --- before it is created. Source reduction is valued
because of its "trickle-down" effect, i.e. it eliminates energy, transport,
emissions, water usage, etc. which accompany the elimnation of material use.
There are no alternative solutions in Source Reduction that currently show a
level of results (percent volume reduction in materials) that match anything
as robust and significant as a 50 to 80% reduction, with no loss in product
performance. Existing alternatives to Source Reduction abound in efforts
to "lightweight" or use less material in the same package, or to simply
replace one kind of package material with another. These alternatives tend
to yield smaller reductions in volume and are often accompanied by a lower
quality of product. In some cases, existing alternatives can still be used.
The P&G approach focuses first on re-design of the combined product and
package to significantly increase the potential for Source Reduction. This
means looking at the entire system of performance, not only the package.
4. Q. Can the technology, program, project, or service be replicated in an
economically feasible manner?
A. Yes, the technology and the program to make this kind of Source Reduction
can be replicated not only across all areas of the grocery goods business,
but it can also be extended to durable goods, including houses, automobiles,
furniture, clothing, appliances, hardware, utensils, office supplies, beds,
and carpeting, as well as newspapers, and magazines. It takes re-looking
and re-designing whole systems. While there may be capital costs involved,
an important part of the innovation process is to adapt new products to the
existing production facilities just as much as possible.
Where capital costs are involved, they can generally be offset by reduced
cost of less material being purchased for manufacture. This reduction can
be found in both product and package. At a production rate of 10 MM units
per year, the money available for amortizing equipment, after sharing the
reduced costs with the customers, are still significant.
5. Q. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental benefits or results
of the technology, program, project, or service?
The program at Procter & Gamble has resulted in about 2.5 Million cu yd
less material (crushed) going into the MSW stream. That is about 1/2% of
500 MM cubic yards of waste landfilled annually in the U.S. The same kind
of source reduction can be replicated in all parts of durable AND non-
durable industries, which is projected to a maximum reduction of 10% of
all MSW. Although a very significant factor, this still points to the
need to press forward with all other methods of waste management, after
Source Reduction has contributed its maximum.
INNOVATIVE SOURCE REDUCTION
I.063
PAGE 7
A Meaningful Improvement for the Environment
500-Word Overview
The Procter & Gamble Company
DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM
A to reduce the volume of material going into the stream of solid waste
became program a hallmark of Procter & Gamble's thrust in Environmental Quality beginning
in 1988. This program directly addresses the issue of waste disposal by simply not
creating a portion of solid waste that would need disposal. In a broader sense,
its aim is to use resources better. Focusing on products and packages that make up
solid waste, the program requires innovation and high technology that is applied to
both product formulation and to package design. As benefits are thus maximized,
using less material and less natural resources helps to improve the total environ-
ment, in the longer term. In the immediate present, it eliminates a significant
part of the Municipal Solid Waste stream.
DISTINCTIVENESS AND INNOVATION
The distinctiveness in Procter & Gamble's approach to Source Reduction lies not
in just changing the kind or amount of material used in a package, but requires
high creativity in re-design of product AND package in its effort to optimize that the
reduction in materials used. For example, P&G formulates improved products
are smaller and more compact by 50% or more, and then changes the package design
itself, using the minimum, most effective materials needed for the new product.
The key to success in re-formulating the product and re-designing the package is
to create a new product that performs at least as well as the one replaced, and
to be able to sell it at less cost. A partnership with retailers and consumers
is vital in originating and finalizing these kinds of changes. Iterations in
design are essential, i.e. to go back and confirm that the satisfactions of all
customers are indeed being met. Using this process, two highly distinctive and
innovative concepts in source reduction were developed within Procter & Gamble:
(1) CONCENTRATES, compacts, products with super performance, and 2-in-1 products,
so that a smaller amount delivers at least the same result as previously.
(2) "REFILL" packages, designed as transport packages needed only to get products
to the home, where they are placed in durable "parent" packages that may
have desired dispensing features and need be purchased only once since they
are used over and over. This permits reductions of 50 to 80% in materials.
QUANTIFIABLE RESULTS WITH PRODUCTS IN MARKET: EXAMPLES
CRUSHED VOLUME
REDUCTION
PRODUCT
CONCENTRATE/COMPACT AND REFILL
MILLION
CU
YD/YR
Powder
Detergents
(e.g.
40% Concentrate/ Reduced Package
1.29
Tide)
Fabric Softeners
(e.g.
Downy)
80% Concentrate in Refill Pack
0.25
Liquid Detergent
(e.g. Tide)
40% Concentrate in Refill Pack
0.25
Paper Diapers
(e.g.
50% Reduced Product and Package
1.39
Pampers)
Total
3.18
Conservatively summing the crushed volume above, we say 2.5 Million cu yd/yr
are eliminated. This is about equal to one half of 1% of all MSW, which is
500 Million cu/yd per year. Although significant, this still points to the
need to work all other methods of waste management after Source Reduction.
I,063
PAGE 9
AWARD CRITERIA QUESTIONS
1. Q. What is purpose of the technology, program, project, or service?
A. The purpose of this technology and program at Procter & Gamble is to
reduce the amount of material going to solid waste through a process
of more effective use of all natural resources. This must be done in
meaningful ways that can be measured, just as well recommended by the
Conservation Foundation of the World Wildlife Fund in its publication
"Getting at the Source." It requires a complete program for examining
all consumer goods to find opportunities for both products and packages
to use much less material, while delivering the same or better quality
and performance, as judged by the users. This is the first and most
important step in the process of becoming capable of delivering all
the goods that all the people of this world want, with an improved
environment and with no waste of natural resources. Innovation is key.
2. Q. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinctive or
innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or otherwise, does it
overcome?
A. The technology and program described here are firstly distinctive and
innovative because they had not been done before in broadscale commercial
practice. The innovative program involves more than just "lightweighting"
or less material in the same design. It involves more than just replacing
one material with another. P&G does those things also, although common
and generally capable of reducing materials by 10 to 20%. The program of
this application at P&G involves basic re-design of packages so that
desired performance can be delivered while using 50 to 80% less materials.
That takes a good deal more innovation. It takes analyzing whole systems.
Procter & Gamble Company introduced distinctive and innovative concepts
for formulating products that are now in concentrate or compact form so
they deliver the result required while using 50 to 80% less material in
product and package. In addition, the concept of "RE-FILL" products,
where a "temporary" package is used to distribute a product which, after
being taken to the home, is filled into a durable or permanent dispenser
that is used over and over. These things are new to the grocery industry.
The most innovative step of all is taken when the CONCENTRATE or compact
product is combined with a REFILL package, such as for fabric softeners
and detergents, Downy and Tide, for example, to get the compounded effect
of using less material.
The obstacle in all of this was to prevent loss of product quality when
less volume of material is used. That requires more innovation. The
customer must be pleased with the over-all effort in order to succeed.
3. Q. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior to other
approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a problem for which
no solutions previously existed?
A. Procter & Gamble's approach is superior to other attempts at reducing
the use of materials because it brings the level of reduction averagely
from 10 to 20% to that of 50 to 80%, with not only no loss of quality
and performance in the product being delivered, but in some cases even
an increase or gain in performance.
I. 063
PAGE 2
6. A-D: Please answer only the following Award criteria
Application Form-1°
questions pertaining to the specific Award category for
which you are applying. (For example: Partnership category.
ise read the application form carefully and provide all information
answer questions A1-A5; EQM. B1-B7; Innovation. C1-C5:
uested. Please type or print clearly. Supplementary pages should
Education, D1-D5).
follow the format of this form as closely as possible. Incomplete applica-
tions will not be considered.
Answers should be clear, concise and should emphasize
quantifiable results or benefits of the program. Each
1. Select the Award category fór which you are competing:
answer to a sub-question should not exceed 100 words.
(Note: A program may be entered in only one category. See descriptions of
Taken as a whole, all answers to criteria questions should
categories in Question 6.)
not exceed two pages.
(01) Partnership
A. PARTNERSHIP: awarded to diverse organizations or
(02) Environmental Quality Management
groups that have fostered cooperative approaches to envi-
(03) X Innovation
ronmental needs at the local, regional, or national level.
(04) Education and Communication
1. Who are the partnership's members? What are their
2. Name of the project or program described in this application:
INNOVATIVE SOURCE REDUCTION
roles? What resources do they bring to the partnership?
A Meaningful Improvement for the Environment
2. What are the partnership's specific environmental or
3. Name of Award Applicant(s): (Use separate sheet, if needed)
conservation objectives? Has a sustainable plan of con-
Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss X Dr.
certed action for meeting these needs been established?
Name: Deborah D. Anderson
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative?
What obstacles, environmental or otherwise, does it
Title:
Vice President, Environmental Quality
overcome?
4. What measurable environmental or conservation
ganization: The Procter & Gamble Company
benefits has the partnership produced?
Street:
Two Procter Plaza
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by
others and transferred to other settings?
City: Cincinnati
State:
Ohio
Zip:
45202
Telephone: (513) 983-6666
Fax: (513) 983-6312
B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT:
awarded to organizations which have demonstrated that
environmental values can be integrated into sound man-
4. Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
agement decisions and objectives. (Note: This category
X Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
reflects broad-based organizational approaches. Special
programs or projects may be more appropriate for entry
Name:
Edward A. Fox
in one of the other three award categories.)
Title: Associate Director, Corporate Packaging
1. What are the organization's environmental policies
and objectives?
Organization: The Procter & Gamble Company
2. How has the organization's top management
6110 Center Hill Avenue
demonstrated commitment to these policies and objec-
Street:
tives? Do the policies demonstrate commitment
City: Cincinnati
State:
Ohio
Zip:
45,224
beyond legal compliance?
Telephone: (513) 634-2376
Fax:
(513) 634-5712
3. What are the organization's environmental stan-
dards for its product(s) and operations? (Explain how
they go beyond legal constraints and how they relate to man-
NOTE: The Selection Committee will rely heavily on Questions 5-6 in
agement control mechanisms.)
termining how well the application meets the award criteria.
Please attach a one-page (not to exceed 500 words) summary, suitable
4. How are these policies and objectives incorporated in
or publication, which provides a complete overview of the application.
the: a) Day-to-day management of the organization; b) Orga-
e one-page response should be clear, concise, and should emphasize
nization's decision-making about research and development,
atifiable results or benefits of the program.
long-range planning, capital, and operating budgets?
PAGE 3
5. How are these policies and objectives reflected in the orga-
NOTE: The following questions are for informational purposes.
nization's relationships with employees, customers, suppliers,
7. How long has the technology, program, project or service beer
and the general public?
operational?
3½ Years
6. What are the organization's control mechanisms that give
decision makers objective data to measure continuous perfor-
8. Which of the following most accurately describes the appli-
mance improvement toward its short- and long-term environ-
cant(s)? (Check more than one, if applicable.)
mental objectives?
(01) X National Business or Industry
7. What quantifiable, sustained environmental quality results
(02) Regional or Local Business or Industry
in products and processes have resulted from the organiza-
(03) National Nonprofit Organization or Foundation
tion's environmental approach?
(04) Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05) Local or State Government/Government Agency
(06) Educational Organization
C. INNOVATION-awarded to individuals, organizations and
(07) Voluntary Civic Organization
groups who have demonstrated exceptional creativity or pio-
(08) Trade or Professional Society
neered new approaches in the development and/or execution of
(09) Youth Organization
technologies, programs, projects, or services that are environ-
(10) Labor Organization
mentally sound and economically sensible?
(11) Individual
(12) Other (Please describe):
1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or
service?
9. If business or industry, which of the following best describes
the type of business or industry?
2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinc-
tive or innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or other-
(01)
Agriculture/Forestry
wise, does it overcome?
(02) Aerospace
(03) Communications
3. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior
(04) Construction
to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a
(05)
Electronics/Computers
problem for which no solutions previously existed?
(06) Energy
(07) Engineering
4. Can the technology, program, project or service be replicated
(08) Environmental Services
in an economically feasible manner?
(09) Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10) Manufacturing-Chemical
5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental ben-
(11) X Manufacturing-Other
efits or results of the technology, program, project, or service?
(12) Mining
(13) Recreation
(14) Trade-Wholesale
D. EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION-awarded to indi-
(15) Transportation
viduals, organizations, or groups which have developed educa-
(16) Utilities-Electric, Gas or
tional or informational programs that inspire respect for the
(17) Other (Please describe): Consumer Products
environment and raise the public's environmental literacy.
10. Which of the following most accurately describes the environ-
1. What is the program? What are its environmental or conser-
mental program under consideration for an award? (Check more
vation objectives?
than one, if applicable.)
2. Who is the program's audience? How large is the audience?
(01) agriculture
How is the program's effect on the audience determined?
(02) air quality
(03) X conservation
3. What is original or distinctive about the program?
(04) education-general public
(05) education-academic
4. What are the measurable results or benefits produced by the
(06) energy
program? How does the program promote the development
(07) X environmental quality management
of an environmental ethic and make a positive contribution to
(08) forestry
environmental awareness?
(09) hazardous waste remediation
(10) international
5. How can the program be used or modeled by others?
(11) X natural resources
PAGE 1
(12) pollution control
14. Please indicate which of the following are the primary audi-
(13)
recreation
ences, beneficiaries, or users of the program or service, and esti-
(14)
recycling
mate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
(15) X solid waste
(16) X source reduction/pollution prevention
Type
How Many People
(17)
water quality
(18)
wetlands
(01) X Business or Industry
Thousands
(19) wildlife and fish resources
(02) Trade or Professional Society
(20) Other (Please describe):
(03) Government
(04) Educational Organizations
11. If applicable, list the sources of the program's support and the
(05) Youth
percentage of support provided, including grants and in-kind
(06) Community or Public Interest Groups
contributions of goods and services. (Use separate sheet if needed).
(07) Local Community or Local Public
(08) X General Public
Millions
Source Company Resources
% 100
(09) X Employees - U.S.
60,000
(10) Customers or Clients
Source
%
(11) Other (Please describe):
Source
%
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project,
or conservation awards in the past five years?
including approximate value of in-kind contributions of goods
This program along with other environmental
and services: Environmental programs are such an
initiatives:
integral part of our business that it is not
1) World Environmental Center,
$ possible to break this out.
Gold Medal Award
2) Keep America Beautiful,
If the project is ongoing, what is the annual cost?
Vision For America Award
3) Packaging Education Foundation,
$ None
Packaging Leader of the Year Award
16. In one paragraph (not to exceed 50 words), please summarize the program, its objectives and what it has accomplished. Use space
provided below. This paragraph should be suitable for use in a catalog, database or brochure.
Innovation in reducing the volume of material going to solid waste is a
hallmark of Procter & Gamble's thrust in Environmental quality. It
pervades all areas of the Company. The largest known Source
Reduction program ever, it has eliminated one half of 1% in the volume of
the total waste stream in the United States. The uniqueness of this result,
in addition to its size, is that Procter & Gamble has applied innovation
and high technology to use less material in its products and packages
AND at the same time is delivering products of quality that are equal to or
better than before. In partnership with retailers and consumers, P&G
uses new concepts for source reduction to deliver striking new
improvements for the environment.
PAGE 5
17. Please include 3 one-page letters of recommendation attached
How to Apply
to the application when it is submitted for consideration. Letters
should be addressed: "Attention: Award References." References
Completed applications must be postmarked
should have first-harid knowledge of the environmental program,
by May 22, 1992 and mailed to the:
service, or technology and should offer a candid evaluation of its
The President's Environment and
success or effectiveness. References may also include users or
Conservation Challenge Awards
beneficiaries of your program.
Council on Environmental Quality
NOTE: Letters of recommendation must accompany the applica-
The White House
tion when it is submitted to CEQ. Letters sent directly to CEQ
722 Jackson Place, NW
will not be considered. Please list the references in the spaces
Washington, DC 20503
below.
All information submitted with the application should be
Name: Dr. James D. Idol
considered public information and becomes property of
the President's Challenge Awards program.
Title:
Director, School of Packaging
Science and Engineering
Award recipients will be notified in Fall 1992. Recipients
Street:
Rutgers University
must be willing to assist the President's Challenge Awards
program in making nonproprietary information about
City:
Piscataway
State:
NJ
Zip:
08855
their environmental programs available to others who
wish to replicate their success.
Telephone:
908/932-3224
Fax:
908/932-5636
Application Format
Name: Frances H. Irwin
Please submit one original and four photocopies of your
application. You may include up to 10 pages of supporting
Director, Pollution Prevention
materials. (NOTE: Photocopying both sides of a sheet of
Title:
World Wildlife Fund
paper will be considered two-pages.) Any oversized items
Street: 1250 Twenty-Fourth St. N.W.
must be reduced to fit a standard 8.5" X 11" page format.
City:
Washington
State: DC Zip: 20037
Supporting materials may include items such as brochures,
photographs, press clippings, and graphs depicting the
Telephone:
202/293-4800
Fax:
202/293-9211
program's results. The materials may not be used as a
substitute for written responses to Questions 5 and 6.
Name: Ms. Cloann Russell
The order of pages in the submitted application should be
as follows:
Title:
Environmental Manager
1. 4-page application (Questions 1-20)
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
2. 500-word overview summary (Question 5)
Street: 702 W. 8th Street
3. 2-page responses to criteria questions (Question 6)
4. 10 pages of supporting materials
City:
Bentonville
5. 3 letters of recommendation (Question 17)
State: AR Zip: 72716
Telephone: 501/273-4000 Fax:
NOTE: The entire package should be stapled in the upper,
left-hand corner. Any items sent over the 10-page limit of
supporting materials will be disregarded and not reviewed
by the technical evaluators and selection committee. Do
18. Please sign below to indicate that all applicants agree a) to
not put the application or backup materials into a binder,
abide by the rules and requirements of the awards competition,
notebook or plastic cover.
and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the
best of their knowledge.
OMB Control No. 0331-0002, (Exp. 2/95): As required by the
Signature: Edward Octoy Date: 5-22-92
Paperwork Reduction Act, CEQ estimates that completion of this
application will take 10 hours. Send comments regarding the col-
Associate
Corporate
lection of this information, including suggestions for reducing the
Title: Director
Organization: Packaging
paperwork burden, to CEQ and also to: Paperwork Reduction Pro-
ject, Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and
513/634-2376
Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., 20503
Telephone
printed on recucled paper containing more shan 50% post-consumer waste
INNOVATIVE SOURCE REDUCTION
PAGE 7
A Meaningful Improvement for the Environment
The Procter & Gamble Company
500-Word Overview
DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM
A program to reduce the volume of material going into the stream of solid waste
became a hallmark of Procter & Gamble's thrust in Environmental Quality beginning
in 1988. This program directly addresses the issue of waste disposal by simply not
creating a portion of solid waste that would need disposal. In a broader sense,
its aim is to use resources better. Focusing on products and packages that make up
solid waste, the program requires innovation and high technology that is applied to
both product formulation and to package design. As benefits are thus maximized,
using less material and less natural resources helps to improve the total environ-
ment, in the longer term. In the immediate present, it eliminates a significant
part of the Municipal Solid Waste stream.
DISTINCTIVENESS AND INNOVATION
The distinctiveness in Procter & Gamble's approach to Source Reduction lies not
in just changing the kind or amount of material used in a package, but requires
high creativity in re-design of product AND package in its effort to optimize the
reduction in materials used. For example, P&G formulates improved products that
are smaller and more compact by 50% or more, and then changes the package design
itself, using the minimum, most effective materials needed for the new product.
The key to success in re-formulating the product and re-designing the package is
to create a new product that performs at least as well as the one replaced, and
to be able to sell it at less cost. A partnership with retailers and consumers
is vital in originating and finalizing these kinds of .changes. Iterations in
design are essential, i.e. to go back and confirm that the satisfactions of all
customers are indeed being met. Using this process, two highly distinctive and
innovative concepts in source reduction were developed within Procter & Gamble:
(1) CONCENTRATES, compacts, products with super performance, and 2-in-1 products,
SO that a smaller amount delivers at least the same result as previously.
(2) "REFILL" packages, designed as transport packages needed only to get products
to the home, where they are placed in durable "parent" packages that may
have desired dispensing features and need be purchased only once since they
are used over and over. This permits reductions of 50 to 80% in materials.
QUANTIFIABLE RESULTS WITH PRODUCTS IN MARKET: EXAMPLES
CRUSHED VOLUME
REDUCTION
PRODUCT
CONCENTRATE/COMPACT AND REFILL
MILLION
CU
YD/YR
Powder Detergents (e.g. Tide) 40% Concentrate/ Reduced Package
1.29
Fabric
Softeners
(e.g.
Downy)
80% Concentrate in Refill Pack
0.25
Liquid Detergent
(e.g.
Tide)
40% Concentrate in Refill Pack
0.25
Paper Diapers (e.g. Pampers) 50% Reduced Product and Package
1.39
Total
3.18
Conservatively summing the crushed volume above, we say 2.5 Million cu yd/yr
are eliminated. This is about equal to one half of 1% of all MSW, which is
500 Million cu/yd per year. Although significant, this still points to the
need to work all other methods of waste management after Source Reduction.
PAGE 9
AWARD CRITERIA QUESTIONS
1. Q. What is purpose of the technology, program, project, or service?
A. The purpose of this technology and program at Procter & Gamble is to
reduce the amount of material going to solid waste through a process
of more effective use of all natural resources. This must be done in
meaningful ways that can be measured, just as well recommended by the
Conservation Foundation of the World Wildlife Fund in its publication
"Getting at the Source." It requires a complete program for examining
all consumer goods to find opportunities for both products and packages
to use much less material, while delivering the same or better quality
and performance, as judged by the users. This is the first and most
important step in the process of becoming capable of delivering all
the goods that all the people of this world want, with an improved
environment and with no waste of natural resources. Innovation is key.
2. Q. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinctive or
innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or otherwise, does it
overcome?
A. The technology and program described here are firstly distinctive and
innovative because they had not been done before in broadscale commercial
practice. The innovative program involves more than just "lightweighting"
or less material in the same design. It involves more than just replacing
one material with another. P&G does those things also, although common
and generally capable of reducing materials by 10 to 20%. The program of
this application at P&G involves basic re-design of packages so that
desired performance can be delivered while using 50 to 80% less materials.
That takes a good deal more innovation. It takes analyzing whole systems.
Procter & Gamble Company introduced distinctive and innovative concepts
for formulating products that are now in concentrate or compact form so
they deliver the result required while using 50 to 80% less material in
product and package. In addition, the concept of "RE-FILL" products,
where a "temporary" package is used to distribute a product which, after
being taken to the home, is filled into a durable or permanent dispenser
that is used over and over. These things are new to the grocery industry.
The most innovative step of all is taken when the CONCENTRATE or compact
product is combined with a REFILL package, such as for fabric softeners
and detergents, Downy and Tide, for example, to get the compounded effect
of using less material.
The obstacle in all of this was to prevent loss of product quality when
less volume of material is used. That requires more innovation. The
customer must be pleased with the over-all effort in order to succeed.
3. Q. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior to other
approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a problem for which
no solutions previously existed?
A. Procter & Gamble's approach is superior to other attempts at reducing
the use of materials because it brings the level of reduction averagely
from 10 to 20% to that of 50 to 80%, with not only no loss of quality
and performance in the product being delivered, but in some cases even
an increase or gain in performance.
AWARD CRITERIA QUESTIONS (cont'd)
PAGE 10
3. A. (continued)
The. problems addressed by Procter & Gamble's program for Source Reduction are:
(1) in the short-term, to reduce solid waste, and (2) in the long-term, to
to benefit the environment by decreasing our demand on all natural resources,
including air, water, land, atmosphere, as well as the more commonly discussed
natural resources, for every product made.
There are other ways to approach the same objective, such as by Recycling,
for which Procter & Gamble received a Citation in the President's Environment
and Conservation Challenge Awards in 1991. Composting is another approach.
But, Source Reduction is the most preferred solution because it treats the
problem at the source ---- before it is created. Source reduction is valued
because of its "trickle-down" effect, i.e. it eliminates energy, transport,
emissions, water usage, etc. which accompany the elimnation of material use.
There are no alternative solutions in Source Reduction that currently show a
level of results (percent volume reduction in materials) that match anything
as robust and significant as a 50 to 80% reduction, with no loss in product
performance. Existing alternatives to Source Reduction abound in efforts
to "lightweight" or use less material in the same package, or to simply
replace one kind of package material with another. These alternatives tend
to yield smaller reductions in volume and are often accompanied by a lower
quality of product. In some cases, existing alternatives can still be used.
The P&G approach focuses first on re-design of the combined product and
package to significantly increase the potential for Source Reduction. This
means looking at the entire system of performance, not only the package.
4. Q. Can the technology, program, project, or service be replicated in an
economically feasible manner?
A. Yes, the technology and the program to make this kind of Source Reduction
can be replicated not only across all areas of the grocery goods business,
but it can also be extended to durable goods, including houses, automobiles,
furniture, clothing, appliances, hardware, utensils, office supplies, beds,
and carpeting, as well as newspapers, and magazines. It takes re-looking
and re-designing whole systems. While there may be capital costs involved,
an important part of the innovation process is to adapt new products to the
existing production facilities just as much as possible.
Where capital costs are involved, they can generally be offset by reduced
cost of less material being purchased for manufacture. This reduction can
be found in both product and package. At a production rate of 10 MM units
per year, the money available for amortizing equipment, after sharing the
reduced costs with the customers, are still significant.
5. Q. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental benefits or results
of the technology, program, project, or service?
The program at Procter & Gamble has resulted in about 2.5 Million cu yd
less material (crushed) going into the MSW stream. That is about 1/2% of
500 MM cubic yards of waste landfilled annually in the U.S. The same kind
of source reduction can be replicated in all parts of durable AND non-
durable industries, which is projected to a maximum reduction of 10% of
all MSW. Although a very significant factor, this still points to the
need to press forward with all other methods of waste management, after
Source Reduction has contributed its maximum.
PAGE 21
SECTION 5
LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION
NEXT 3 PAGES
THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY
RUTGERS
PAGE 22
Center for Packaging Science and Engineering
Busch Campus
Building 3529
Piscataway
New Jersey 08855
908/932-3224
FAX:
908/932-5636
May 14, 1992
The President's Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards Program
The White House, Council of Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, DC 20505
Attention: Awards References
Via Edward A. Fox
The Procter & Gamble Company
Cincinnati, Ohio 45224
This is to provide a letter of recommendation for an application
being submitted by the Procter & Gamble Company for the President's
Award for Innovation in the Environment and Conservation
Challenges.
As Director of the School of Packaging Science & Engineering at
Rutgers University, I am a teacher of package design. Against this
background, I commend and applaud the broad program which the
Procter & Gamble Company has so professionally demonstrated with
the successful design and production of new kinds of packages with
major environmental advantages. Procter & Gamble's thrust has been
to re-design its products and packages so that they use minimum
package materials. They have succeeded in this beyond expectations
because they have looked at whole systems, including the product,
not just the package.
Procter & Gamble has pioneered two distinctive and innovative ways
to reduce the amount of material required for their packages. One
has been their development of concentrated or compact products.
The other has been their introduction of the "refill" concept in
which minimum package design is used to get the product to the
home, where the product is emptied into a permanent and durable
dispenser that is well designed and used again and again. Each
concept has applications now in production. They reduce the amount
of package material by 50 to 80%, while delivering product
performance that is no less than that previously provided, all of
which is highly preferred by consumers.
These package design concepts from Procter & Gamble set outstanding
examples of innovation in source reduction. The same methods can
now be replicated in numerous other applications through the entire
consumer goods industry. This is producing major advantages in
reducing solid waste and in preserving the natural resources of
this country, measured in millions of tons each year.
Sincerely,
Jame James D. D Idol, solol Ph.D.
Director
PAGE 23
WWF
May 21, 1992
President's Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
772 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
Attention: Award References
This is a letter of reference for an application for the President's Environment and Conservation
Challenge Award on behalf of the Procter & Gamble Company.
Ed Fox and Tom Rattray of Procter & Gamble Company actively participated in the Strategies for Source
Reduction Steering Committee that guided the World Wildlife Fund & The Conservation Foundation
project to identify opportunities to reduce municipal waste at the source. We are pleased that they have
taken very seriously the message of the report that reduction at the source is the way to deal with "too
much stuff".
The report, called Getting at the Source: Strategies for Reducing Municipal Solid Waste, urged that
producers change the design and packaging of the products themselves in order to reduce the amount
and toxicity of material used. Procter & Gamble's application for an award demonstrates their success
in eliminating at the source more than a million tons of material that would have required siting more
landfills. At the same time the company is demonstrating for others the potential for making products
with reduced materials which help the environment and perform their function for consumers equally or
better to those they replace.
Sincerely,
Frances H. Irwin
Director
Pollution Prevention Program
World Wildlife Fund
1250 Twenty-Fourth St., NW Washington, DC 20037-1175 USA
Tel: (202) 293-4800 Telex: 64505 PANDA FAX: (202) 293-9211
Incorporating The Conservation Foundation. Affiliated with World Wide Fund for Nature.
From : WAL-MART PACKAGE DESIGN
PHONE No. : 501 273 8175
"ay. 20 1992
PAGE 24
WAI -MART STORES INC CORPORATE OFFICES
WAL-MART
702 S.W. BTH STREET
BENTONVILLE, AR 72716
PHONE (501) 273.4000
May 18. 1992
The President's Environment and Conscrvation Challenge
Awards Program
The White House, Council on Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place NW
Washington, DC 20503
Attn: Edward Fox
On behalf of the Procter and Gamble Company, this letter of
recommendation is provided to accompany their application in The
President's Environment and Conservation Chailenge for innovation in
packages designed to improve environmental quality.
As a retailer in the United States. Wal-Mart is keenly aware of the
complex needs for package design in goods, because we handle millions
of packages in our stores every day. Customers tell us in very clear
terms just what they think of our goods in the stores on every one of
those days, and they register their votes at the checkout. The
groundswell of customer opinion in the last four years has been strongly
tied to a concern for the environment in all the goods we sell.
The Procter & Gamble Company has been an outstanding leader and a
rcal partner in helping us respond to this customer expectation. Procter
& Gamble's innovative response has been to re-design products and
packages so that less materials are used to deliver the same product
performance.
One of P&G's distinctive and innovative approaches to this has been the
design and production of "refill" packs in which optimized design is used
to get the product through the distribution system and into the homes.
where the refill package is emptied into a more permanent dispenser
kept in the home for continued re-use. Another innovative approach has
been the design of concentrated or compact products that reduce the
size. Both the design of concentrated or compact products that reduce
the size. That of course, also already conserves natural resources and
reduces solid waste.
We and our customers are more than excited with this thrust in design
at Procter & Gamble. We're even more pleased to know that it can be
repeated in numerous other applications throughout the industry. We
commend the Procter & Gamble Company for their outstanding results
in this innovative approach to product and package design for
environmental benefit to all.
Very truly yours.
Cloan Ressell
Cloann Russell
Environmental Marketing Manager
PAGE 11
SECTION 4
SUPPORTING MATERIALS
NEXT 9 PAGES
8 PHOTOGRAPHS, BEFORE AND AFTER VOLUME CHANGE
1 CALCULATION OF VOLUME REDUCTION
REGULAR PRODUCT
Clothesline Fresh
Exciting News
on Tide
Tide
CONCENTRATED
PRODUCT
Out.
Tide
Tide's in...Dirt's Out®
ULTRA
LARGE
TERGENT
ide
AFTER
BEFORE
PAGE 12
40% LESS VOLUME
TWO-IN-ONE
TWO-IN-ONE
PRODUCT
REGULAR PRODUCT
PRODUCT
REGULAR PRODUCT
CONDITIONER
TO
VIDAL
VIDAL
SASSOON
SASSOON
PERT in fir
ADVAN
11'
ALON FORM
PLUS
CONDITIONING RINS! ADVANCED A
SHAMPU
shompoo Plus
conditioner
(see
Special Card
For Normal Ha"
THE
15.FL OZ
11 FL OZ
BEFORE
AFTER
BEFORE
AFTER
50% LESS VOLUME
50% LESS VOLUME
JJ PART
MULTI-REFILL
PACKAGE
REGULAR PACKAGE
IV TRY
IVORY
LIQUID
1 3 3
softer Leaves
hands feeling
LIQUID
IVORY
SOAP
II
feeling Leaves hands
softer and
smoother
1212594
REFILL SIZE 16 FL. OZ.
accents 7.5 FL. FL. OZ.
(1 PT.)
BEFORE
AFTER
ELIMINATES PUMP AND CARTON
PAGE 18
SUPER-ABSORBENT
PRODUCT
REGULAR PRODUCT
SUPER
Ultra
Pampers
Phases
Pampers Pampers
16-24 lbs
HAPERS FOR BOYS
40
16.24 lbs.
AFTER
CONT
BEFORE
50% LESS VOLUME
PAGE 15
TWO-IN-ONE PRODUCT
TWO-IN-ONE PRODUCT
COMPOUNDED WITH
CONCENTRATE
CONCENTRATED
PRODUCT
Tide
ULTRA
with
Bleach
CAUTION
EYE IRRITANT
10 LOADS
MARMFUL IF
SWALLOWED See caution
with Bleach
side panel
on
14
LOADS
BEFORE
AFTER
PAGE 16
70% LESS VOLUME
REGULAR PRODUCT
CONCENTRATED
PRODUCT
(11)
Same Downy Softness
and Freshness
Less parkaging to them away
45'off
Downy Fabric Softener
123833
Regular Concentration
nill 114 is 200
Befiny Liquid Fabric Softener
BEFORE
AFTER
PAGE 13
80% LESS VOLUME
CONCENTRATED
REGULAR PRODUCT
PRODUCT
CONCENTRATED
PRODUCT
REFILL PACKAGE
FULL
water
POWERFUL
Less Packaging 10 Throw
Great Tide Cleaning AWAY
ULTRA
Tide
ULTRA
Tide
&
64FL.OZ.(2QT.)
AFTER
PAGE 14
BEFORE
AFTER
40% LESS VOLUI
REGULAR PACKAGE
BAG PACKAGE
Original
Original
PRINGLES
Original
Potato
Crisps
DTATO CRIS
TATO CRISPS
/
NET.WT 7 OZ (198g)
NET WT 7 OZ (198g)
AFTER
BEFORE
30% LESS VOLUME
SAMPLE DATA FOR SOURCE REDUCTION
PAGE 20
P&G
PACKAGED
CU IN
MILLIONS
CRUSHED VOLUME
TOTAL SHELF
PERCENT
VOLUME
CU YD/YR
REDUCTION/YR
PRODUCTS OF
PRODUCT
UNITS PRODUCED
VOLUME
REDUCTION
REDUCTION
MILLION CU YD
PROCTER & GAMBLE
CHANGE
PER YEAR
REDUCTION
PER SHELF
TOTAL SHELF
(AVERAGE
(MILLIONS)
NOMINAL
PACKAGE
PACKAGES
50% FACTOR)
Powder Detergents
Concentrate
360 *
40%
334
2.57
1.29
Fabric Softeners
Concentrate/Refill
115 *
80%
200
0.50
0.25
Liquid Detergents
Concentrate/Refill
132 *
40%
180
0.51
0.25
Paper Diapers
Compact/Absorbent
130
*
(40)
50%
1000
2.78
1.39
* Published Nielsen ScanTrack Data
Total
6.36
3.18
Notes:
Average Density of Municipal Solid Waste = 783 lbs. cu yd. One ton of waste is 2.5 Cubic Yards,
Franklin Associates, Report on Average Density of all Municipal Solid Waste in Landfills.
Number of landfills in U.S. in 1991 = 5812 Bio-Cycle Magazine. Call this number 6000.
Volume is used throughout this presentation because volume, not weight, fills up landfills.
1. Sample Calculations, Tide Powder Detergent Concentrate: (Shelf Volume)
Volume reduction per box averages 695 cu in - 361 cu in = 334 cu in (meas) = -48%, say 40%
Total Volume reduction = 334 X 360 MM
= 120 MMM cu in = 2.57 MM Cu Yd
2. Sample Calculations, Downy Fabric Softener Concentrate in Refill Carton: (Shelf Volume)
Volume reduction per bottle averages 242 cu in - 42 cu in = 200 cu in (meas) = -83%, say 80%
Total Volume reduction = 200 X 115 MM
= 23 MMM cu in = 0.50 MM Cu Yd
3. Sample Calculations, Liquid Detergents, Concentrate in Refill Bottle: (Shelf Volume)
Volume reduction per bottle averages 240 cu in - 60 cu in = 180 cu in (meas) = -46%, say 40%
Total Volume reduction = 180 X 132 MM
= 23.8 MMM cu in = 0.51 MM Cu Yd
4. Sample Calculations, Diapers from Regular to Ultra-Absorbent: (Shelf Volume)
Volume reduction per box averages 50% across line, from box specifications
Average cubic inch reduction per diaper. = 25 cubic inches per diaper, from box specs
Average number of diapers per box = 40
Volume reduction per shelf box = 25 X 40 = 1000 cu in
Total volume reduction = 1000 X 130 MM
= 130 MM cu in = 2.78 Cu Yd
Calculated volume reduction above totals 6.36 MM cubic. yards. Conservatively, it can be estimated
that crushed volume, mixed with all other waste, is a maximum of 50% of initial volume for municipal
waste, from shelf to landfill. Summing the reductions shown above downward, we call this 2.5 cu yds
per year. A reduction of 2.5 Million cu yd/yr in crushed waste is equal to one half of 1% of all
Municipal Solid Waste, which is approaching 500 Million cubic yards per year. Photographs of
specific applications made by Procter & Gamble are illustrated as backup, pages 12 to 19, attached.
Application Summary
ID Number: P.026
Project:
Florida Save Our Everglades Program
Contact:
Mr. Estus D. Whitfield
Governor's Office of Planning and Budgeting
The Capitol
Telephone:
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001
(904) 488-5551
Summary:
The Florida Save Our Everglades program was created to
preserve and -restore the Everglades. The program objectives
are: restore the Kissimmee River and Everglades National Park;
and protect Lake Okeechobee, the Water Conservation Areas, the
Big Cypress Swamp, the Florida panther and other endangered
wildlife. Since the program's initiation, 290,000 acres of
land have been acquired; landmark federal and state
legislation has been passed; the President and U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers have approved a restoration plan for the
Kissimmee River; and 36 wildlife crossings/bridges have been
constructed in the conversion of State Road 84 to Interstate
Highway 75 (I-75) to protect endangered species and improve
hydrology.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
Impressive undertaking, but more of an example of innovative
government action and leadership that a "partnership" across
diverse groups.
Very significant and sustained (since 1983) effort that has
achevied significant, measurable results: Acquisition of
290,000 acres, major environmental and wetlands restoration
programs, accomplished projects to protect endangered species.
Applicants should consider seeking industrial support.
P.026
5. THE FLORIDA SAVE OUR EVERGLADES PROGRAM - SUMMARY:
The Florida Everglades and its interrelated lakes, rivers,
marshes, freshwater swamps, mangrove forests and coastal
estuaries stretches from Orlando to Florida Bay, and from Ft.
Myers to Ft. Lauderdale, covering an area of approximately 9,000
square miles on the South Florida peninsula. A sub-tropical
climate, flat terrain, and some 60 inches of annual rainfall
created a water-dependent ecological system in South Florida with
a rich and productive species diversity, unique to the
continental United States. The interrelated hydrological system,
characterized by overland sheet flow of freshwater, is the only
source of drinking water for Southeast Florida. More than one-
hundred years of drainage and development have severely damaged
the Everglades ecological system. Dredging, filling, and
draining for agriculture, urban development, and flood control
destroyed large portions of the historic Kissimmee River
floodplain, the Everglades, and Big Cypress Swamp, with negative
effects on water quality and supplies, fish and wildlife habitat
and the quality of human life.
The Save Our Everglades program was initiated in August 1983.
The goal of the program is to restore and preserve the Everglades
so that by the year 2000 it will look and function more as it did
in the year 1900. It is a strategic program with six primary
objectives, which are: 1. Re-establish the natural values of the
Kissimmee River; 2. Protect Lake Okeechobee; 3. Protect the
Water Conservation Areas; 4. Protect the Big Cypress Swamp; 5.
Restore Everglades National Park; and, 6. Protect the Florida
Panther and other endangered wildlife.
The Save Our Everglades Program has achieved remarkable success.
A $420 million, expansive restoration of the Kissimmee River has
begun, with the support of President Bush and the Corps of
Engineers. Legislation has been enacted by Congress adding
146,000 acres to the Big Cypress National Preserve and 107, 600
acres to Everglades National Park. Two new National Wildlife
Refuges have been created. To improve the quality of water in
Lake Okeechobee, pollution control measures are being installed
on all dairies north of Lake Okeechobee, and some 14,039 COWS
have been removed from the Lake's watershed. In converting State
Road 84 to I-75 across the Everglades, hydrological improvements
and wildlife underpasses have been constructed. Some 290,000
acres of land have been acquired for preservation and protection
of the Everglades ecosystem. National, State and local
environmental organizations, and the general public support the
program. The environmental organizations have been instrumental
in working with government agencies, the United States Congress
and the Florida Legislature to enact programs and legislation to
further the goals of the program.
6A. 1. The members of the partnership, their roles and
contributions are as follows:
State of Florida:
The Office of the Governor of Florida
coordinates the program. Resources provided by the State include
Legislative appropriations and ad valorem taxes levied by the
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) for land
acquisition, pollution control, dairy farm buyouts, and
restoration research, planning and implementation. Florida
invests over $300 million per year in the acquisition of
environmental lands and appropriates $10 million for surface
water cleanup.
The SFWMD, a sub-state regional agency, is
responsible for implementing many of the objectives of the Save
Our Everglades Program.
Federal Agencies:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - provides
funds appropriated by Congress for restoration planning, design
and implementation; and, pursuant to the Flood Control Act of
1948, regulates water levels in portions of the Everglades.
Under Section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act, $17.3
million has been appropriated to the Corps for the restoration of
the Kissimmee River.
National Park Service - provides funds
and staff for land acquisition and restoration projects, manages
Everglades National Park and the Big Cypress Preserve, and works
with State, federal and local governments to protect and restore
the Everglades National Park, Big Cypress National Preserve and
the Preserve Addition.
Fish and Wildlife Service - manages the
Loxahatchee, Florida Panther and Ten-Thousand Islands National
Wildlife Refuges and protects endangered and threatened species.
The Everglades Coalition: Twenty-two national and state
conservation organizations have joined the coalition to support
the program. It has advocated federal legislation and funding to
accomplish the program objectives. The Coalition members have
worked with Congress and the Administration for passage of the
Big Cypress Addition Act, the Florida/Arizona Land Exchange Act
and the Everglades National Park Expansion and Protection Act.
2. The Save Our Everglades Program was created to restore and
preserve the Everglades so that by the year 2000, it will look
and function more as it did in the year 1900. Objectives: 1. Re-
establish the natural values of the Kissimmee River; 2. Protect
Lake Okeechobee; 3. Protect the Water Conservation Areas;
4. Protect the Big Cypress Swamp; 5. Restore Everglades National
Park; and, 6. Protect the Florida Panther and other endangered
wildlife. The program has been planned to protect and restore
the entire Everglades ecological system and has succeeded in
generating strong State, federal and public support. Activities,
accomplishments and needs of the program are reported to the
Florida Cabinet in the quarterly Everglades Status Report (most
recent report attached as supporting information)
3. Innovative partnership: The Save Our Everglades program is
unusual in the magnitude and scope of its goal and objectives,
and in the approach to implementing those objectives. Consensus
has been developed among the partners on the needs of the
Everglades ecosystem and actions required to restore it. The
program is structured to acquire large tracts of land necessary
for the protection and restoration of the Everglades. Once these
tracts are acquired, restoration and management plans are
developed. Funding for the program is provided by South Florida
Water Management District ad valorem tax revenues, State funds
and federal funds. The Save Our Everglades Program will continue
to be funded by a combination of sources. Corrective actions are
taken to restore water flow whenever opportunities arise. For
example, hydrological improvements and wildlife crossings have
been constructed in the conversion of State Road 84 to I-75. The
National Park Service, with State funding, has restored sheetflow
in the Turner River Basin and other areas of the Big Cypress
National Preserve. In a pilot program to demonstrate river
restoration techniques, the SFWMD restored a section of the
original Kissimmee River channel with assistance from the Corps
of Engineers.
The Save Our Everglades Program has created a dynamic partnership
to combat and reverse nearly 100 years of draining, dredging,
filling and diking in the Everglades ecological system. The
effects of these activities include the loss of six species of
fish and 30,000 to 40,000 acres of wetlands from the Kissimmee
River, adverse effects on the quality of water in Lake
Okeechobee, and the over-drainage of Everglades marshes and
wetlands.
4. Measurable benefits:
Since August, 1983, approximately 290,000 acres of land in the
Everglades region have been acquired by the State of Florida,
federal agencies and the SFWMD.
Three federal laws have been enacted by the Congress: The Big
Cypress National Preserve Addition Act of 1988, the Florida/
Arizona Land Exchange Act of 1988, and the Everglades National
Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989.
President Bush, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and
the Corps of Engineers have approved a restoration plan for the
Kissimmee River. The Corps of Engineers has agreed to contribute
fifty percent of the total costs, including land acquisition and
construction.
36 bridges, bridge extensions and wildlife crossings have been
constructed on I-75. Waterflow has been restored to more than
3,500 acres of land south of the highway (a conservative
estimate). The Florida Department of Transportation has
documented the use of wildlife crossings by the endangered
Florida panther and other species, such as the Florida black
bear, American alligator and bobcat. Six more wildlife crossings
are planned for State Road 29, a north-south road forming part of
the western border of the Big Cypress National Preserve.
The Florida Preservation 2000 Act, passed in 1990 has
significantly increased the State acquisition of lands in the
Everglades region.
The Florida Surface Water Improvement and Management Act has
provided funding for the protection and restoration of surface
waters, such as Lake Okeechobee and the Water Conservation Areas.
Two Governor and Cabinet resolutions and 5 Executive Orders
have implemented, supported and encouraged the Save Our
Everglades program (see page 19, Everglades Status Report).
Of 49 dairies within the Lake Okeechobee watershed, 19 have
been relocated, 14,039 COWS have been removed from the basin, and
the 30 dairies remaining have constructed pollution control and
treatment systems.
5. Program model: Lessons learned from the Save Our Everglades
program are being used in Florida to protect other ecosystems.
Key elements of the program are: 1. A comprehensive, strategic
ecosystems approach; 2. Strong leadership and policy direction by
the Governor through creation of task forces; 3. Participation
of appropriate agencies, and private economic and citizen
interests; and 4. Frequent reports to the Governor and Cabinet,
members of Congress, federal agencies and citizens. The
Econlockhatchee, Suwannee and Wekiva river initiatives and the
Lake Jackson program are examples of the use of this program
approach.
P026
Application Form-1992
6. A-D: Please answer only the following Award criteria
questions pertaining to the specific Award category for
which you are applying. (For example: Partnership category,
Please read the application form carefully and provide all information
answer questions A1-A5; EQM, B1-B7; Innovation, C1-C5;
equested. Please type or print clearly. Supplementary pages should
Education, D1-D5).
follow the format of this form as closely as possible. Incomplete applica-
tions will not be considered.
Answers should be clear, concise and should emphasize
quantifiable results or benefits of the program. Each
1. Select the Award category for which you are competing:
answer to a sub-question should not exceed 100 words.
(Note: A program may be entered in only one category. See descriptions of
Taken as a whole, all answers to criteria questions should
categories in Question 6.)
not exceed two pages.
(01) X Partnership
(02) Environmental Quality Management
A. PARTNERSHIP: awarded to diverse organizations or
(03)
Innovation
groups that have fostered cooperative approaches to envi-
(04) Education and Communication
ronmental needs at the local, regional, or national level.
2. Name of the project or program described in this application:
1. Who are the partnership's members? What are their
roles? What resources do they bring to the partnership?
The Florida Save Our Everglades Program
2. What are the partnership's specific environmental or
3. Name of Award Applicant(s): (Use separate sheet, if needed)
conservation objectives? Has a sustainable plan of con-
X Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
certed action for meeting these needs been established?
Name: Honorable Lawton Chiles
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative?
What obstacles, environmental or otherwise, does it
Title:
Governor
overcome?
Organization: State of Florida
4. What measurable environmental or conservation
benefits has the partnership produced?
Street:
The Capitol
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by
City: Tallahassee State: FL
Zip: 32399-0001
others and transferred to other settings?
Telephone: (904)488-2272
Fax: (904)922-4292
B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT:
awarded to organizations which have demonstrated that
environmental values can be integrated into sound man-
4. Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
agement decisions and objectives. (Note: This category
X Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
reflects broad-based organizational approaches. Special
programs or projects may be more appropriate for entry
Name: Estus D. Whitfield
in one of the other three award categories.)
Title: Policy Coordinator, Environmental Policy/Commu-
1. What are the organization's environmental policies
nity and Economic Development Unit
and objectives?
Organization: Governor's Office of Planning and
Budgeting
2. How has the organization's top management
Street:
The Capitol
demonstrated commitment to these policies and objec-
tives? Do the policies demonstrate commitment
City: Tallahassee State: FL
Zip: 32399-0001
beyond legal compliance?
Telephone: (904)488-5551
Fax: (904)922-6200
3. What are the organization's environmental stan-
dards for its product(s) and operations? (Explain how
NOTE: The Selection Committee will rely heavily on Questions 5-6 in
they go beyond legal constraints and how they relate to man-
determining how well, the application meets the award criteria.
agement control mechanisms.)
5. Please attach a one-page (not to exceed 500 words) summary, suitable
4. How are these policies and objectives incorporated in
for publication, which provides a complete overview of the application.
the: a) Day-to-day management of the organization; b) Orga-
The one-page response should be clear, concise, and should emphasize
nization's decision-making about research and development,
quantifiable results or benefits of the program.
long-range planning, capital, and operating budgets?
5. How are these policies and objectives reflected in the orga-
NOTE: The following questions are for informational purposes.
nization's relationships with employees, customers, suppliers,
7. How long has the technology, program, project or service been
and the general public?
operational?
Eight years
6. What are the organization's control mechanisms that give
decision makers objective data to measure continuous perfor-
8. Which of the following most accurately describes the appli-
mance improvement toward its short- and long-term environ-
cant(s)? (Check more than one, if applicable.)
mental objectives?
(01)
National Business or Industry
7. What quantifiable, sustained environmental quality results
(02)
Regional or Local Business or Industry
in products and processes have resulted from the organiza-
(03)
National Nonprofit Organization or Foundation
tion's environmental approach?
(04)
Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05) X Local or State Government/Government Agency
(06)
Educational Organization
C. INNOVATION-awarded to individuals, organizations and
(07)
Voluntary Civic Organization
groups who have demonstrated exceptional creativity or pio-
(08)
Trade or Professional Society
neered new approaches in the development and/or execution of
(09)
Youth Organization
technologies, programs, projects, or services that are environ-
(10)
Labor Organization
mentally sound and economically sensible?
(11)
Individual
(12)
Other (Please describe):
1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or
service?
9. If business or industry, which of the following best describes
the type of business or industry?
2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinc-
tive or innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or other-
(01)
Agriculture/Forestry
wise, does it overcome?
(02)
Aerospace
(03)
Communications
3. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior
(04)
Construction
to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a
(05)
Electronics/Computers
problem for which no solutions previously existed?
(06)
Energy
(07)
Engineering
4. Can the technology, program, project or service be replicated
(08)
Environmental Services
in an economically feasible manner?
(09)
Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10)
Manufacturing-Chemical
5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental ben-
(11)
Manufacturing-Other
efits or results of the technology, program, project, or service?
(12)
Mining
(13)
Recreation
(14)
Trade-Wholesale
D. EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION-awarded to indi-
(15)
viduals, organizations, or groups which have developed educa-
Transportation
(16)
Utilities-Electric, Gas or
tional or informational programs that inspire respect for the
(17)
Other (Please describe):
environment and raise the public's environmental literacy.
1. What is the program? What are its environmental or conser-
10. Which of the following most accurately describes the environ-
vation objectives?
mental program under consideration for an award? (Check more
than one, if applicable.)
2. Who is the program's audience? How large is the audience?
(01)
agriculture
How is the program's effect on the audience determined?
(02)
air quality
(03)
X
conservation
3. What is original or distinctive about the program?
(04)
education-general public
(05)
education-academic
4. What are the measurable results or benefits produced by the
(06)
energy
program? How does the program promote the development
(07)
environmental quality management
of an environmental ethic and make a positive contribution to
(08)
forestry
environmental awareness?
(09)
hazardous waste remediation
(10)
international
5. How can the program be used or modeled by others?
(11) X natural resources
(12)
pollution control
14. Please indicate which of the following are the primary audi-
(13) X recreation
ences, beneficiaries, or users of the program or service, and esti-
(14) recycling
mate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
(15) solid waste
(16) source reduction/pollution prevention
Type
How Many People
(17) X water quality
(18) X wetlands
(01) Business or Industry
(19) X wildlife and fish resources
(02) Trade or Professional Society
(20) X Other (Please describe): Ecosystems restoration
(03) Government
(04) Educational Organizations
11. If applicable, list the sources of the program's support and the
(05) Youth
percentage of support provided, including grants and in-kind
(06) Community or Public Interest Groups
contributions of goods and services. (Use separate sheet if needed).
(07) Local Community or Local Public
(08) X General Public
13.5 million
Source State of Florida
% 50
(09) Employees
(10) Customers or Clients
Source Federal Government
% 40
(11) Other (Please describe):
Source Everglades Coalition
% 10
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project,
or conservation awards in the past five years? Yes
including approximate value of in-kind contributions of goods
1990: National Parks and Conservation
and services:
Association Conservationist of the
Year Award was presented to Governor
$ 163.3 million
Bob Martinez for the Save Our Everglades
Program
13. If the project is ongoing, what is the annual cost?
23.3 million (estimated)
16. In one paragraph (not to exceed 50 words), please summarize the program, its objectives and what it has accomplished. Use space
provided below. This paragraph should be suitable for use in a catalog, database or brochure.
The Florida Save Our Everglades Program was created to preserve and restore the Everglades.
The program objectives are: restore the Kissimmee River and Everglades National Park; and
protect Lake Okeechobee, the Water Conservation Areas, the Big Cypress Swamp, the Florida
panther and other endangered wildlife. Since the program's initiation, 290,000 acres of
land have been acquired; landmark federal and state legislation has been passed; the
President and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have approved a restoration plan for the
Kissimmee River; and 36 wildlife crossings/bridges have been constructed in the conversion
of hydrology. State Road 84 to Interstate Highway 75 (I-75) to protect endangered species and improve
17. Please, include 3 one-page letters of recommendation attached
How to Apply
to the application when it is submitted for consideration. Letters
ould be addressed: "Attention: Award References." References
Completed applications must be postmarked
ould have first-hand knowledge of the environmental program,
by May 22, 1992 and mailed to the:
service, or technology and should offer a candid evaluation of its
The President's Environment and
success or effectiveness. References may also include users or
Conservation Challenge Awards
beneficiaries of your program.
Council on Environmental Quality
NOTE: Letters of recommendation must accompany the applica-
The White House
tion when it is submitted to CEQ. Letters sent directly to CEQ
722 Jackson Place, NW
will not be considered. Please list the references in the spaces
Washington, DC 20503
below.
All information submitted with the application should be
Name: Steven J. Parcells
considered public information and becomes property of
the President's Challenge Awards program.
Title: Chairman, The Everglades Coalition
Award recipients will be notified in Fall 1992. Recipients
must be willing to assist the President's Challenge Awards
Street: 666 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.
program in making nonproprietary information about
their environmental programs available to others who
City: Washington
State: D.C. Zip: 20003
wish to replicate their success.
Telephone: (202)547-9009 Fax: (202)547-9022
Application Format
Name: Nathaniel Pryor Reed
Please submit one original and four phòtocopies of your
application. You may include up to 10 pages of supporting
Title: President, 1000 Friends of Florida
materials. (NOTE: Photocopying both sides of a sheet of
paper will be considered two-pages.) Any oversized items
reet: Post Office Box 375
must be reduced to fit a standard 8.5" X 11" page format.
City: Hobe Sound
State:
FL
33475
Supporting materials may include items such as brochures,
Zip:
photographs, press clippings, and graphs depicting the
Telephone: (407)546-2666 Fax: (407)546-5019
program's results. The materials may not be used as a
substitute for written responses to Questions 5 and 6.
Name: Nancy Brown
The order of pages in the submitted application should be
as follows:
Title:
President, Friends of the Everglades
1. 4-page application (Questions 1-20)
2. 500-word overview summary (Question 5)
Street: 9220 S.W. 166 Street
3. 2-page responses to criteria questions (Question 6)
4. 10 pages of supporting materials
City:
Miami
State: FL Zip: 33157
5. 3 letters of recommendation (Question 17)
Telephone: (305)235-8591 Fax: (305)888-1230
NOTE: The entire package should be stapled in the upper,
left-hand corner. Any items sent over the 10-page limit of
supporting materials will be disregarded and not reviewed
18. Please sign below to Indicate that all applicants agree a) to
by the technical evaluators and selection committee. Do
abide by the rules and requirements of the awards competition,
not put the application or backup materials into a binder,
and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the
notebook or plastic cover.
Signature: best of their knowledge. Clubs
OMB Control No. 0331-0002, (Exp. 2/95): As required by the
Date: 5/22/92
Paperwork Reduction Act, CEQ estimates that completion of this
application will take 10 hours. Send comments regarding the col-
lection of this information, including suggestions for reducing the
Title: Governor
Organization: State of Florida
paperwork burden, to CEQ and also to: Paperwork Reduction Pro-
ject, Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and
elephone: (904)488-2272
Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., 20503
printed on recycled paper containing more than 50% post-consumer waste
5. THE FLORIDA SAVE OUR EVERGLADES PROGRAM - SUMMARY:
The Florida Everglades and its interrelated lakes, rivers,
marshes, freshwater swamps, mangrove forests and coastal
estuaries stretches from Orlando to Florida Bay, and from Ft.
Myers to Ft. Lauderdale, covering an area of approximately 9,000
square miles on the South Florida peninsula. A sub-tropical
climate, flat terrain, and some 60 inches of annual rainfall
created a water-dependent ecological system in South Florida with
a rich and productive species diversity, unique to the
continental United States. The interrelated hydrological system,
characterized by overland sheet flow of freshwater, is the only
source of drinking water for Southeast Florida. More than one-
hundred years of drainage and development have severely damaged
the Everglades ecological system. Dredging, filling, and
draining for agriculture, urban development, and flood control
destroyed large portions of the historic Kissimmee River
floodplain, the Everglades, and Big Cypress Swamp, with negative
effects on water quality and supplies, fish and wildlife habitat
and the quality of human life.
The Save Our Everglades program was initiated in August 1983.
The goal of the program is to restore and preserve the Everglades
so that by the year 2000 it will look and function more as it did
in the year 1900. It is a strategic program with six primary
objectives, which are: 1. Re-establish the natural values of the
Kissimmee River; 2. Protect Lake Okeechobee; 3. Protect the
Water Conservation Areas; 4. Protect the Big Cypress Swamp; 5.
Restore Everglades National Park; and, 6. Protect the Florida
Panther and other endangered wildlife.
The Save Our Everglades Program has achieved remarkable success.
A $420 million, expansive restoration of the Kissimmee River has
begun, with the support of President Bush and the Corps of
Engineers. Legislation has been enacted by Congress adding
146,000 acres to the Big Cypress National Preserve and 107,
acres to Everglades National Park. Two new National Wildlife
Refuges have been created. To improve the quality of water in
Lake Okeechobee, pollution control measures are being installed
on all dairies north of Lake Okeechobee, and some 14,039 COWS
have been removed from the Lake's watershed. In converting State
Road 84 to I-75 across the Everglades, hydrological improvements
and wildlife underpasses have been constructed. Some 290,000
acres of land have been acquired for preservation and protection
of the Everglades ecosystem. National, State and local
environmental organizations, and the general public support the
program. The environmental organizations have been instrumental
in working with government agencies, the United States Congress
and the Florida Legislature to enact programs and legislation to
further the goals of the program.
6A. 1. The members of the partnership, their roles and
contributions are as follows:
State of Florida:
The Office of the Governor of Florida
coordinates the program. Resources provided by the State include
Legislative appropriations and ad valorem taxes levied by the
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) for land
acquisition, pollution control, dairy farm buyouts, and
restoration research, planning and implementation. Florida
invests over $300 million per year in the acquisition of
environmental lands and appropriates $10 million for surface
water cleanup.
The SFWMD, a sub-state regional agency, is
responsible for implementing many of the objectives of the Save
Our Everglades Program.
Federal Agencies:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - provides
funds appropriated by Congress for restoration planning, design
and implementation; and, pursuant to the Flood Control Act of
1948, regulates water levels in portions of the Everglades.
Under Section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act, $17.3
million has been appropriated to the Corps for the restoration of
the Kissimmee River.
National Park Service - provides funds
and staff for land acquisition and restoration projects, manages
Everglades National Park and the Big Cypress Preserve, and works
with State, federal and local governments to protect and restore
the Everglades National Park, Big Cypress National Preserve and
the Preserve Addition.
Fish and Wildlife Service - manages the
Loxahatchee, Florida Panther and Ten-Thousand Islands National
Wildlife Refuges and protects endangered and threatened species.
The Everglades Coalition: Twenty-two national and state
conservation organizations have joined the coalition to support
the program. It has advocated federal legislation and funding to
accomplish the program objectives. The Coalition members have
worked with Congress and the Administration for passage of the
Big Cypress Addition Act, the Florida/Arizona Land Exchange Act
and the Everglades National Park Expansion and Protection Act.
2. The Save Our Everglades Program was created to restore and
preserve the Everglades so that by the year 2000, it will look
and function more as it did in the year 1900. Objectives: 1. Re-
establish the natural values of the Kissimmee River; 2. Protect
Lake Okeechobee; 3. Protect the Water Conservation Areas;
4. Protect the Big Cypress Swamp; 5. Restore Everglades National
Park; and, 6. Protect the Florida Panther and other endangered
wildlife. The program has been planned to protect and restore
the entire Everglades ecological system and has succeeded in
generating strong State, federal and public support. Activities,
accomplishments and needs of the program are reported to the
Florida Cabinet in the quarterly Everglades Status Report (most
recent report attached as supporting information).
3. Innovative partnership: The Save Our Everglades program is
unusual in the magnitude and scope of its goal and objectives,
and in the approach to implementing those objectives. Consensus
has been developed among the partners on the needs of the
Everglades ecosystem and actions required to restore it. The
program is structured to acquire large tracts of land necessary
for the protection and restoration of the Everglades. Once these
tracts are acquired, restoration and management plans are
developed. Funding for the program is provided by South Florida
Water Management District ad valorem tax revenues, State funds
and federal funds. The Save Our Everglades Program will continue
to be funded by a combination of sources. Corrective actions are
taken to restore water flow whenever opportunities arise. For
example, hydrological improvements and wildlife crossings have
been constructed in the conversion of State Road 84 to I-75. The
National Park Service, with State funding, has restored sheetflow
in the Turner River Basin and other areas of the Big Cypress
National Preserve. In a pilot program to demonstrate river
restoration techniques, the SFWMD restored a section of the
original Kissimmee River channel with assistance from the Corps
of Engineers.
The Save Our Everglades Program has created a dynamic partnership
to combat and reverse nearly 100 years of draining, dredging,
filling and diking in the Everglades ecological system. The
effects of these activities include the loss of six species of
fish and 30,000 to 40,000 acres of wetlands from the Kissimmee
River, adverse effects on the quality of water in Lake
Okeechobee, and the over-drainage of Everglades marshes and
wetlands.
4. Measurable benefits:
Since August, 1983, approximately 290,000 acres of land in the
Everglades region have been acquired by the State of Florida,
federal agencies and the SFWMD.
Three federal laws have been enacted by the Congress: The Big
Cypress National Preserve Addition Act of 1988, the Florida/
Arizona Land Exchange Act of 1988, and the Everglades National
Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989.
President Bush, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and
the Corps of Engineers have approved a restoration plan for the
Kissimmee River. The Corps of Engineers has agreed to contribute
fifty percent of the total costs, including land acquisition and
construction.
36 bridges, bridge extensions and wildlife crossings have been
constructed on I-75. Waterflow has been restored to more than
3,500 acres of land south of the highway (a conservative
estimate) The Florida Department of Transportation has
documented the use of wildlife crossings by the endangered
Florida panther and other species, such as the Florida black
bear, American alligator and bobcat. Six more wildlife crossings
are planned for State Road 29, a north-south road forming part of
the western border of the Big Cypress National Preserve.
The Florida Preservation 2000 Act, passed in 1990 has
significantly increased the State acquisition of lands in the
Everglades region.
The Florida Surface Water Improvement and Management Act has
provided funding for the protection and restoration of surface
waters, such as Lake Okeechobee and the Water Conservation Areas.
Two Governor and Cabinet resolutions and 5 Executive Orders
have implemented, supported and encouraged the Save Our
Everglades program (see page 19, Everglades Status Report)
Of 49 dairies within the Lake Okeechobee watershed, 19 have
been relocated, 14,039 COWS have been removed from the basin, and
the 30 dairies remaining have constructed pollution control and
treatment systems.
5. Program model: Lessons learned from the Save Our Everglades
program are being used in Florida to protect other ecosystems.
Key elements of the program are: 1. A comprehensive, strategic
ecosystems approach; 2. Strong leadership and policy direction by
the Governor through creation of task forces; 3. Participation
of appropriate agencies, and private economic and citizen
interests; and 4. Frequent reports to the Governor and Cabinet,
members of Congress, federal agencies and citizens. The
Econlockhatchee, Suwannee and Wekiva river initiatives and the
Lake Jackson program are examples of the use of this program
approach.
A
Status Report
By the
Office
of
Governor
Lawton Chiles
April 30, 1992
STATE
SAVE O U R
EVERGLADES
Figure 1
Kissimmee River- -
Lake Okeecbobee- -
Lake
Kissimmee
Everglades System
Kissimmee River
1
Lake Okeechobee
Kissimmee River
Water
Taylor Creek
Conservation Areas
Holey Land and
Rotenberger Tracts
Nubbin slough
Big Cypress National Preserve
Fakahatchee Strand
8017
2
Everglades National Park
East Everglades
Lake
Okeechobee
Big Cypress National
Preserve Addition
West
Caloosabatchee River
Palm
Beach
Fort Myers
SR 29
ЧСА
UCA
s?A
Alligator Alley
WCA
2H
Naples
"W'CA
Fort
TRAI
4
3
Lauderdale
Miami
WCA
Miami
Beach
RIS
as
5
Taylor
Slough
Florida Bay
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Figure 1: Kissimmee-Lake Okeechobee-Everglades System.
i
I.
RE-ESTABLISH THE VALUES OF THE KISSIMMEE RIVER
2
II.
PROTECT LAKE OKEECHOBEE.
4
III.
PROTECT THE WATER CONSERVATION AREAS.
6
IV.
PROTECT THE BIG CYPRESS SWAMP
9
V.
RESTORE EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK.
12
VI.
PROTECT THE FLORIDA PANTHER AND OTHER ENDANGERED
SPECIES,
15
VII. THE EVERGLADES COALITION
17
APPENDIX A - LAND ACQUISITION SUMMARY
18
ii
SAVE OUR EVERGLADES STATUS REPORT
APRIL 30, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
This is a report on the status of the Save Our Everglades Program for the period
January 25 to April 30, 1992. It summarizes the activities and accomplishments during the
period and anticipated activities for the next 90 days.
I. RE-ESTABLISH THE VALUES, OF THE KISSIMMEE RIVER
BACKGROUND: The Kissimmee chain of lakes, which begins a few miles south of
Orlando, is the northern-most part of the Kissimmee River-Lake. Okeechobee-Everglades
ecological system. From the southern-most and largest of the lakes, Lake Kissimmee (58
square miles), flows the Kissimmee River The Kissimmee River is the primary tributary
to Lake Okeechobee and, historically, provided thirty-five to forty percent of the lake's
water.
Beginning in 1961 and ending in 1971, the 103 mile-long river was channelized into a 56
mile-long canal. Channelization of the river dramatically altered the hydrology and ecology
of the Kissimmee basin, including an eleven-fold: increase in the rate at which water
recedes from the river valley, a 90 percent reduction in the number of waterfowl and the
loss of six species of freshwater fish.
Efforts to restore the Kissimmee River began shortly after completion of the project. A
1989 study by the University of California, Berkeley determined that filling in the middle
section of the canal would restore a considerable. amount of the natural river. Backfilling
of 29 miles of the canal would restore 56 miles of historic river channel, recreate about
29,000 acres of wetlands and 50 square miles of floodplain ecological system, and provide
habitat for 300 species of plants and animals, including 3 endangered species (bald eagle,
Everglades kite, and wood stork).
The cost of restoring the Kissimmee River has been estimated by the United States Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) at $426.8 million. Revitalization of the headwaters is
estimated at an additional $91.2 million. The total estimated cost to complete the project
is $518 million. The State has requested that the federal government assist in restoring the
river.
A. Activities and Accomplishments During the Period:
1. On February 13, the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)
Governing Board agreed to criteria for the restoration project that would eliminate
the need to buy or flood any homes south of U.S. Highway 98 and to backfill the
canal south of water control- structure 65-D near River Acres.
2. On March 5, 1992, Governor Lawton Chiles met with Nancy Dorn, Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Public Works, regarding cost sharing for the Kissimmee
River Restoration. Assistant Secretary Dorn expressed support by the Corps of
Engineers, President Bush and the Office of Management and Budget to contribute
fifty percent of the total costs, including land acquisition and construction.
Governor Chiles said that "Mrs. Dorn's statement of strong support for the
Kissimmee Restoration was profound - a tremendous breakthrough in the 20-year-
old effort to give the upper reaches of the Everglades ecosystem back to nature."
3. On March 10, the Corps Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors
recommended approval of the lower Kissimmee River basin environmental
2.
restoration plan. The Corps' restoration plan is a modified version of the Level II
Backfilling plan proposed by the SFWMD. The Corps plan includes the following:
Backfilling 29 miles of the existing manmade canal
Excavating 11.6 miles of
new river channel to replicate the original river
Constructing a bypass weir and
channel at the Lake Kissimmee outlet to the Kissimmee River
Shallowing and
constructing weirs in the Lake Kissimmee outlet channel reach
Constructing
containment levees to protect existing developments
Building new bridge
crossings at U.S. 98 and the CSX Railroad
Building new weirs in Pool E
Removing three navigation locks, water control structures and levees, and
Installing navigation channel markers.
4. On April 4, Assistant Secretary Dorn forwarded the Chief of Engineers Report
on the Kissimmee River Restoration to the United States Congress with a
recommendation for authorization of the project.
5. On April 30, the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
approved an authorization bill for the Water Resources Development Act of 1992.
The Senate committee included language authorizing the Kissimmee River
Restoration and Headwaters Revitalization projects.
6. The Corps of Engineers is preparing a detailed design report on the Kissimmee
Headwaters Revitalization project pursuant to Section 1135, Water Resources
Development Act. Upon approval, the report will include sufficient detail to enable
timely preparation of design drawings and specifications. The Corps is also
proceeding with design work and preparation of a General Design Memorandum for
the Lower Kissimmee Basin project.
7. No lands were purchased by the SFWMD in the Kissimmee River floodplain
during the period. Some 28,997 acres have been acquired - approximately 28,003
remain to be purchased.
B. Activities and Needs for the Next 90 Days:
1. Congress should reach a decision on the authorization of the Kissimmee
restoration by August or September, 1992.
2. The SFWMD is working with the Florida Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) to provide information on each Kissimmee land purchase in compliance with
the requirements of the Governor and Cabinet.
3. Approval of the Headwaters Revitalization report by Corps headquarters is
expected in late 1994.
3
II. PROTECT LAKE OKEECHOBEE
BACKGROUND: Lake Okeechobee is the largest freshwater lake in the United States
south of the Great Lakes. It is the backup source of drinking water for the lower east
coast urban areas of south Florida and directly supplies water to several cities around the
lake. In times of drought, water from the lake is used to recharge the Biscayne Aquifer,
the sole source of drinking water for the 4.5 million people in southern Palm Beach,
Broward, Dade, and Monroe counties. The lake also provides irrigation water for sugar
cane, winter vegetables, sod and rice grown in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA)
south of the lake.
Lake Okeechobee's water quality has shown signs of deterioration over the past decade,
primarily due to phosphorus and other nutrients entering the lake from dairy farms and
urban areas located north of the lake. Emergency backpumping of agricultural runoff from
the EAA is, at times, another source of pollution to the lake. Regulation of the lake's
water level has also been cited as a problem for the lake ecosystem.
A. Activities and Accomplishments During the Period:
1. The level of water in Lake Okeechobee is currently 15.1 feet with a total
storage capacity of 2,160,000 acre feet of water. South Florida has continued to
receive near normal rainfall. In response to improving water conditions, the
SFWMD Governing Board lifted water use restrictions in March and released water
from the lake into Water Conservation Area 3. This movement of water from the
lake to the Everglades was to help prevent damage to downstream estuaries that
could result from lake regulatory releases anticipated for later this year.
2. Total phosphorus loading to Lake Okeechobee from October 1991 through
February 1992 was 67 metric tons. Phosphorus concentrations for the S-191, S-154
and C-38 (Kissimmee River) basins are still above the 0.18 milligrams per liter
(mg/L) target level. During the past year, concentrations have declined at S-191
and S-154 water control structures but have increased slightly in C-38. Algal
chlorophyll samples, collected in February, indicated bloom conditions existed at
only one site located on the lake's western shoreline.
3. Of the 49 dairy farms located in the Okeechobee basin before implementation of
the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) Dairy Rule, 18 are in
the Dairy Buyout program. One additional dairy has been purchased under the
SFWMD Save Our Rivers program. As of March 1992, 17 of the 18 dairies have
ceased operation and have moved their herds. Owners of 15 dairies have been paid
as a result of the buyout program. The last herd should be moved by June 1992.
A total of 14,039 cows have been relocated at a State cost of $8,451,478. Of that
amount, the SFWMD paid $4,139,468. No future funding requests for this program
are anticipated.
4. The remaining 30 dairies are in the DER Dairy Rule Best Management Practices
(BMP) program. BMP construction is complete at 28 dairies. Twenty-three of the
4
dairies have applied for DER Operating Permits. Seven of those have been issued
operating permits. BMP construction is currently underway at two farms.
5. The SFWMD has been monitoring phosphorus concentrations at the off-site
discharge points of the dairy farms in the BMP program. Discharges observed at
16 of the 30 dairies showed total phosphorus concentrations ranging from 0.02 mg/L
to 2.82 mg/L for February 1992. The BMPs have helped reduce phosphorus
concentrations discharged from some dairies. In areas where cows have been
removed from the basins, off-site discharge concentrations are lower, with many
farms showing reductions greater than the 1.2 mg/L total phosphorus target.
Although the dairy buyout and BMP programs have resulted in reduced phosphorus
levels at the farms, there has not been a corresponding decrease at the inflow points
to the lake. More time may be required for the ecosystem to respond to reduced
phosphorus concentrations. Earlier BMP programs conducted within the Taylor
Creek/Nubbin Slough Basins. demonstrated that 4-5 years were required between the
implementation of BMPs and the measurement of significant phosphorus reductions.
6. The SFWMD Works-of-the-District permit program was initiated in November
1989. Since January 1990, 451 permits have been issued for 11 Lake Okeechobee
area basins. Of this total, 414 are individual permits, and 37 are general permits.
7. In February 1992, the SFWMD approved a Lake Okeechobee Works of the
District permit for the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) Chapter 298 Drainage
Districts. The permit incorporates a water quality monitoring program, phosphorus
credits for implementation of BMPs, removal of feed lots, and credits for municipal
treatment plants converting from surface discharge of wastewater to deep well
injection in the cities; of Belle Glade, Pahokee, and South Bay.
B. Activities and Needs for the Next 90 Days:
1. The SFWMD is preparing an update of the Lake Okeechobee SWIM plan to be
presented to the Governing Board in June 1992. The final draft is scheduled, for
submittal to DER by September 1992.
2. Two computer model contracts currently underway (the Watershed Phosphorus
Transport and Lake Okeechobee Agricultural Decisions Support System models)
should produce preliminary results by September 1992.
3. The SFWMD will meet with the Corps in June to discuss the environmental and
economic. study and Lake Okeechobee water regulation schedule (15.5 to 17.5 feet)
recommended by the SFWMD Governing Board in December. The Corps has not
yet approved this schedule.
5
III. PROTECT THE WATER CONSERVATION AREAS
BACKGROUND: The Water Conservation Areas (WCAs) are an integral component of
the Everglades and the water supply for southeast Florida. The 860,160 acre WCAs
comprise the majority of the Everglades. Along with the east coast canal system, the
WCAs help recharge wellfields and prevent saltwater intrusion into the Biscayne Aquifer.
The levees along the east side of the WCAs prevent flood damage to urban southeast
Florida. The WCAs provide approximately fifty percent of the water for the eastern
portion of Everglades National Park.
The WCAs are rich in fish and wildlife resources. The Florida panther, Everglades kite,
wood stork, American alligator, and white-tailed deer are only a few of the notable species
that inhabit the WCAs.
A. Activities and Accomplishments During the Period:
1. Current water levels in the WCAs are as follows:
WCA-1: 14.9 feet; WCA-2: 11.1 feet, and WCA-3: 8.8 feet above mean sea level.
These levels are near the average dry-season levels, a condition much better than
recent drought years. Because of higher than normal levels in Lake Okeechobee
and the potential for flooding in the EAA, the SFWMD began regulatory releases
from WCAs 1 and 2 in March. In mid-March, Everglades kite nests were found in
WCAs 1 and 2. To protect the nests, the Corps requested the SFWMD to maintain
higher water levels in the two areas: Water supply releases were made to Broward
County from WCA-2 during the month. Water levels in WCA-3 have been
declining as the dry season has progressed.
2. On February 11, Governor Chiles and Lieutenant Governor MacKay met with
Greer Tidwell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Southeastern Regional
Administrator, who presented a draft of EPA's South Florida Initiative. The
Initiative, which has since been finalized, contains numerous measures intended to
improve the environment of South Florida, including mercury research and
hydrological studies.
An agreement was reached at the February meeting to create a select committee to
continue to discuss South Florida issues. The committee will initially consist of Lt.
Governor MacKay, Greer Tidwell and Brigadier General Stanley G. Genega,
Southeastern Division Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. James W. Coleman
Jr., Southeastern Regional Director, National Park Service, and James Pulliam,
Southeastern Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, will also be invited
to participate.
3. On February 24, Judge William Hoeveler approved the Everglades lawsuit
settlement agreement. The Western Palm Beach County Farm Bureau, Inc. filed an
appeal of Judge Hoeveler's order in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Eleventh
Circuit.
6
4. On March 12, the SFWMD Governing Board adopted the Everglades SWIM,
plan. Challenges to the SWIM Plan were subsequently filed by the Florida Sugar
Cane League, the Sugar Cane Growers Co-operative and the Florida Fruit and
Vegetable Association. The challenges were petitions requesting hearings pursuant
to section -120.57(1), Florida Statutes.
5. On April, 9, the Florida Sugar Cane League offered an alternative to the
Everglades SWIM plan. This plan proposes the removal of 125 tons of the 200
tons of phosphorus from Everglades Agricultural Area waters discharged to the
Water Conservation Areas each year. The proposed plan is estimated to cost one-
fourth of the estimated cost of the Everglades SWIM plan.
6. The SFWMD Governing Board adopted a resolution to review and consider
alternatives that achieve the same restoration goals as in the lawsuit settlement
agreement and the SWIM plan. In addition, the Board requested that the alternative
plan be evaluated by the Scientific Advisory Group for the Everglades (SAGE).
7. The SFWMD has completed a conceptual design for four Stormwater Treatment
Areas (STAs) within the Everglades Agricultural Area and is selecting a contractor
to prepare a General Design Memorandum for the STAs. The District is also
conducting an Economic Impact Statement for the Everglades SWIM plan.
8. No land was acquired in the WCAs during the period. Some 799,287 acres
have been acquired to date and 65,513 acres remain to be acquired.
9. No lands were acquired in the Rotenberger Tract during the period. To date,
about 19,821 acres have been acquired in the tract. An estimated 9,349 acres
remain to be purchased. The Land Acquisition Advisory Council approved the 1992
Conservation and Recreation Lands Program (CARL) priority list in December. The
Rotenberger tract was ranked number 64 on the list, which will enable the
Department of Natural Resources to continue to purchase these lands.
10. In January, the Governor and Cabinet approved the extension of State-owned
land leases in the EAA through June 30, 1993, for those leases expiring prior to
that date. At the January meeting, the Governor and Cabinet also authorized the
sale of the 2,720 acre Closter Farms parcel through a competitive bidding process.
On April 21, a Governor and Cabinet workshop was held on the State-owned land
leases in the EAA.
11. The SFWMD Governing Board has created two advisory groups to evaluate
and make recommendations on the Everglades SWIM plan, the settlement agreement
and implementation of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas Act. These groups are: the
Scientific Advisory Group for the Everglades and the Everglades Restoration
Funding Council. The two groups met during February, March and April.
7
B. Activities and Needs for the Next 90 Days:
1. The initial meeting of the committee on the South Florida Initiative with Florida,
EPA and the Corps, will be held on May 26 or 29 in Tallahassee. Governor
Chiles, Lt. Governor MacKay, Greer Tidwell and General Genega plan to attend.
2. The challenge to the Everglades lawsuit settlement agreement by the West Palm
Beach Farm Bureau has not yet been scheduled for hearing in the Eleventh Circuit
Court of Appeals.
3. In May, the SFWMD Governing Board will decide whether to forward the
Everglades SWIM plan challenges by agricultural interests to the Division of
Administrative Hearings for the initiation of proceedings under Chapter 120, Florida
Statutes.
4. The Everglades SWIM plan Economic Impact Statement is expected to be
completed by July.
5. The Scientific Advisory Group for the Everglades (SAGE) expects to have
completed its evaluation of the Florida Sugar Cane League alternative plan by mid-
summer and is expected to make a presentation to the SFWMD Governing Board on
the merits of the plan in July or August.
6. In May, the SFWMD Governing Board will consider the adoption of Phase II of
the EAA Regulatory Program administrative rule. Upon adoption of the final rule,
the SFWMD will re-submit permit applications to the Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation for the operation of the water control structures in the
Everglades.
7. NEED: Restoration of the Rotenberger Tract is an integral component of the
Save Our Everglades program. Restoration will improve the ecology of the tract
and at the same time improve the quality of water flowing into WCA-3
(Everglades). The DNR needs to proceed with acquiring the 9,349 acres of private
land in the Rotenberger Tract so that restoration can be undertaken in accordance
with the May 12, 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the DER, the
Governor and Cabinet (Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund), the
SFWMD and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.
8
IV. PROTECT THE BIG CYPRESS SWAMP
Background: The Big Cypress Swamp, with elevations slightly higher than the Everglades
to the east, spans approximately 1,205 square miles (771,000 acres) from southwest of
Lake Okeechobee to the Ten Thousand Islands in the Gulf of Mexico. Because of its
relative flatness, the Big Cypress Swamp is covered with water for several months each
year. It is considered to have the best quality surface water in south Florida.
The Big Cypress Swamp is the primary home of the highly endangered Florida Panther and
contains numerous other species of endangered plants and wildlife. The 570,000 acre Big
Cypress National Preserve was established by Congress in 1974 to protect natural and
recreational values of the Big Cypress watershed and to allow for continued traditional uses
such as hunting, fishing, and oil and gas production. In 1988, Congress passed the Big
Cypress National Preserve Addition Act which will add 146,000 acres to the national
preserve.
The conversion of Alligator Alley (State Road 84) to Interstate Highway 75 (I-75) provided
a unique opportunity to enhance water flow through the Everglades, protect the Florida
Panther and other wildlife and expand the Big Cypress National Preserve.
A. Activities and Accomplishments During the Period:
1. No lands were purchased by the National Park Service in the original Big
Cypress National Preserve during the period. A total of 536,552 acres have been
acquired. Approximately 183 acres remain to be acquired.
2. With the assistance of the Florida Department of Transportation (DOT), the
Florida Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the National Park Service have
acquired a total of 37,349 acres of the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition. An
estimated 108,651 acres remain to be acquired (see Note 2, Appendix A).
3. The DNR has acquired 51,094 acres in the Fakahatchee Strand. An estimated
22,906 acres remain to be acquired.
4. The DNR has acquired 4,706 acres in southern Golden Gate Estates. Some
36,294 acres remain to be acquired.
5. Since October 1990, the SFWMD has acquired 13,653 acres in the Corkscrew
Regional Ecosystems Watershed Trust (CREW) project. This includes SFWMD
purchases and donations of land purchased by Lee County. The CREW Trust is
working with Collier County to seek revenues for purchase of CREW lands in
Collier County. The CREW project is currently number 52 on the CARL priority
list.
Background: The Florida/Arizona Land Exchange Act of 1988 (H.R. 4519)
authorized the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) to convey 68.4 acres of Indian
School property in Phoenix, Arizona, to the Collier Companies in exchange for
9
107,799 acres of Florida land owned by the Colliers, and $34.9 million in cash
payable over 30 years (with DOI approval). The Collier lands are in the Big
Cypress National Preserve Addition project area (83,070 acres), the Florida Panther
National Wildlife Refuge, (5,109 acres) and the Ten Thousand Islands National
Wildlife Refuge (19,620 acres). The Indian School tract totals 111 acres.
According to the Act, 20 acres are to be conveyed to the City of Phoenix, 11.5
acres to the Veterans Administration, 4.5 acres to the State of Arizona and 6.5 acres
are reserved for right-of-way.
6. The U.S. Department of the Interior and the Colliers expect to complete an
agreement by June 12 on the collateral for the payment of $34.9 million to the
Indian Education Trust Fund, pursuant to the Florida/Arizona Land Exchange Act.
If agreement is reached, it is possible that the Colliers could transfer 83,070 acres in
the Big Cypress Addition to the U.S. Department of the Interior on the date of this
meeting. If agreement is not reached, both parties can agree to extend the deadline.
7. On April 2, representatives of the Florida departments of Agriculture (Division
of Forestry), Community Affairs, Environmental Regulation, and Natural Resources,
the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the SFWMD, Collier County Growth
Planning Department, and the Governor's Office met to discuss land acquisition and
a restoration and management plan for southern Golden Gate Estates.
8. In February, Governor Chiles asked the SFWMD to develop a conceptual
hydrologic restoration plan for southern Golden Gate Estates. In March, the
SFWMD responded that a 12-18 month program would be requested for funding
with fiscal year 1993 SFWMD funds. The District has provided $40,000 to the
DNR to assist with land acquisition activities in southern Golden Gate Estates.
9. The Division of Forestry (DOF) indicated that to better manage publicly-owned
lands in the southern Golden Gate Estates, a Forest Ranger will be located in the
Northwest quadrant and that some roads between certain canals will be studied for
possible closure. The Division has been conducting prescribed burns in ten places
in the Estates to prevent out-of-control wildfires. DOF will continue to manage the
area and to work with the other agencies to develop and implement the hydrologic
restoration and management plans.
10. In April, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and Collier County
reached agreement on the southern Golden Gate Estates element of the Collier
County comprehensive plan. The agreement balances and complements the State's
acquisition plan for the southern Estates. The county has agreed to establish a
development review process and will notify DNR when building permits are applied
for within the Estates.
11. The SFWMD indicated that potholes and low areas of the Miller Boulevard
Extension, which connects U.S. 41 to the southern Estates, have been filled. The
extension is not within the boundaries of the southern Estates but is in the Big
Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. Collier County had previously indicated a
10
desire to improve the extension with limerock to accommodate emergency services
vehicles; however, the County does not own the right-of-way. Collier County has
initiated legal proceedings to establish a "prescriptive easement" for the road right-
of-way.
12. The DOT and DER have agreed to a conceptual design regarding the
construction of a recreational access facility on I-75 at Mile Marker 31 in Collier
County.
13. In February, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (GFC), the
National Park Service (NPS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) met to
discuss wildlife management, hunting regulations, endangered species research,
biological assessments for Big Cypress National Preserve Addition lands, and public
and recreational access to the Big Cypress National Preserve. In April, the NPS
notified the GFC that off-road-vehicle (ORV) access to the Big Cypress preserve at
Mile Marker 31 remains inconsistent with NPS management objectives for that area,
and with conclusions of the NPS Biological Assessment regarding the effects of
hunting on the Florida Panther and the FWS Biological Opinion of August 15,
1990.
B. Activities and Needs for the Next 90 Days:
1. DNR is preparing for the transfer of State-owned lands to the National Park
Service (upon approval of the Governor and Cabinet) in the Big Cypress National
Preserve Addition area, in compliance with the Big Cypress National Preserve
Addition Act and section 380.055(9)(b), Florida Statutes.
2. Providing recreational access from I-75 to the Big Cypress National Preserve
and "Addition" is an integral part of the I-75/Big Cypress Addition component of
the Save Our Everglades Program. The DOT stands ready to provide the needed
access. However, differences in opinion regarding access between the State and the
NPS and FWS have prevented the DOT from providing the access. If this issue is
not soon resolved, the DOT will have no choice but to fence off the highway,
allowing no access. State and federal agencies will meet during the next 90 days to
try and resolve these recreational access issues.
11
V. RESTORE EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK
BACKGROUND: Everglades National Park (ENP) encompasses 2.4 million acres of
wetlands and submerged lands at the southern end of the Florida Peninsula. The Park was
established in 1947 principally with State land conveyances. It is the second largest
National Park in the continental United States. ENP is an aquatic environment dependent
on seasonal rainfall and overland flow from the North. Historically, approximately half of
the Park's water flowed in from the Everglades and Big Cypress Swamp and the other half
fell as rainfall.
Alterations in water flow that resulted from the extensive drainage of the Everglades
beginning in the late 1800s, have damaged the ecology of the Park. Experts contend that
fish and wildlife populations have diminished during the 20th Century, as a result of
hydrologic changes.
To provide a more historic water flow into the Park, the natural flow to the Northeast
Shark River Slough in the East Everglades needs to be restored. The need to acquire land
and restore the natural water flow in the East Everglades was the basis for the Everglades
National Park Expansion Act, enacted by Congress on December 13, 1989. The Act
authorized the addition to Everglades National Park of 107,600 acres in the Northeast
Shark River Slough and East Everglades. Hydrologic improvements to structures in the
C-111 basin and improved water management schedules are also needed to more closely
approximate the natural hydroperiod in the southeastern portions of Everglades National
Park.
1. Of the 107,600 acres to be acquired for the expansion of Everglades National
Park, 42,959 acres of State and SFWMD-owned lands were transferred to the
National Park Service in October, 1991. Since January 1992, the National Park
Service and DNR have acquired 1,374 acres in the Northeast Shark River
Slough/East Everglades. Approximately 63,267 acres in private ownership in the
East Everglades and Northeast Shark River Slough remain to be acquired.
2. The SFWMD has acquired 26,720 of 29,643 acres in the Southern 'Glades
C-111 Canal project. Some 2,896 acres of the Save Our Rivers project remain to
be purchased.
3. In February, the Corps opened a field office in Miami to acquire right-of-way
for the works needed to restore flow to the Northeast Shark River Slough. Final
approval of the Northeast Shark River Slough General Design Memorandum is
expected in early May. The document will be available for a final 30 day public
review. According to the Corps, the $90 million project will require approximately
six years to complete.
4. In January, at the Seventh Annual Everglades Coalition Conference, Nancy
Dorn, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Public Works, announced that timely
completion of the C-111 Basin General Design Memorandum was a priority for the
Corps and that a crucial part of the project is the restoration of freshwater flow to
12
Everglades National Park and Florida Bay. During late winter and early spring, the
Corps of Engineers, with the assistance of State and federal agencies, developed a
plan of study for preparation of the C-111 Basin General Design Memorandum, and
conducted land surveys in the area.
5. Representatives of Everglades National Park, the Corps, DNR, SFWMD and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have been working toward
consensus and documentation of the importance of freshwater flows to the estuarine
and marine ecosystems of Florida Bay and the Florida Keys coral reef tract.
6. Seagrass die-back continued in the Johnson Key basin and recurred in the Sunset
Key and Rabbit Key basins. In addition, there was a sponge die-off in the
southeastern corner of Florida Bay near Lignum Vitae Key. In February,
representatives of DNR and ENP visited areas of Florida Bay and observed a die-
back of mangroves on the mainland and on several keys. Preliminary suggestions
are that the mangrove die-back may be related to specific tidal or rainfall events.
7. DOT is planning to widen U.S. 1 from Florida City to Key Largo. There are
environmental concerns to be addressed and environmental permits will be required.
However, as with the conversion of Alligator Alley to I-75, there may be
opportunities to improve water circulation and wildlife habitat (particularly that of
the American Crocodile) in designing and constructing this highway project.
In April, the Federal Highway Administration approved the final Environmental
Impact Statement for the U.S. 1 project and a conceptual wetland mitigation plan
was approved by EPA, the Corps, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Background: Mercury Contamination: In December 1989, the Governor appointed a Task
Force on Mercury in Fish and Wildlife to determine the cause and extent of mercury
contamination and to develop recommendations to protect public health and the state's
environmental resources. On March 15, 1990, the Mercury Task Force provided to the
Governor a workplan on mercury. The workplan recommended that State agencies
continue testing and monitoring of fresh and saltwater fish, increase environmental and
biological monitoring to determine effects of mercury on the ecosystem, conduct research
on sources of mercury contamination and propose solutions.
The Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS), the Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission and DER determined that the highest levels of mercury in
Florida were found in the Everglades. HRS is issuing health advisories regarding the
consumption of fish with mercury levels above 0.5 parts per million.
In June and July, 1991, the last two female panthers known to inhabit Everglades National
Park died. Mercury poisoning is believed to have contributed to these deaths, since one
panther had 35 parts per million (ppm) mercury in her liver and a blood level of
approximately 15 ppm. The other had slightly lower levels.
13
8. In 1990, the Legislature appropriated $500,000 for mercury studies. The
Governor's budget request for 1992-93 includes $400,000 for mercury research.
DER, HRS and the GFC have been using existing resources to conduct fish tissue
sampling throughout the State, evaluate the results, issue public health advisories
and develop plans for future research and monitoring.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is currently providing $150,000 for
mercury studies in the Everglades and will add another $400,000 to this year's
budget.
B. Activities and Needs for the Next 90 Days:
1. The Corps expects approval of the NESRS General Design Memorandum by
mid May, and by the end of May will apply for permits for the new water control
structures needed for the project.
2. The Corps plans to circulate for review a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement/General Design Memorandum for the C-111 Basin by late 1994.
3. Comprehensive studies of the freshwater needs and effects of the lack of
freshwater on Florida Bay and the coral reefs of the Florida Keys are needed.
14
VI. PROTECT THE FLORIDA PANTHER AND OTHER ENDANGERED SPECIES
BACKGROUND: It is estimated that fewer than 50 adult Florida Panthers now survive in
South Florida, making it one of the most endangered animals on, earth. Habitat loss and
fragmentation, poor food supplies, inbreeding, highway mortality and mercury contamination
are the greatest threats to the panther. Protection of the Florida Panther has become a
national priority, State and federal agencies have contributed significant resources to
panther recovery.
A 1990 survey estimated that 418 Everglades Kites remain (the GFC estimated a
population of 668 birds in 1984). Declines in the kite population have been attributed to
widespread drainage and drought conditions. The Everglades Kite is influenced
significantly by the timing, volume and distribution of water flow, and the existence of
open marsh habitat and specialized vegetation which allows the kite to obtain its sole
source of food - the apple snail.
A. Activities and Accomplishments During the Period:
1. In January, the GFC recaptured, re-collared and conducted health assessments on
21. Florida panthers. In February, one male kitten was placed in the captive
breeding program. GFC and NPS are hoping to capture female kittens, however the
female adult panthers have not yet gone to dens for birthing in the Big Cypress.
2. In March, the GFC completed its final report on Mercury Contamination of
Florida Panthers. The report and its recommendations were unanimously endorsed
by the Florida Panther Interagency Committee. Work continued on developing the
Habitat Conservation Plan for the Florida Panther.
3: The GFC and DOT are continuing to develop a plan for wildlife crossings for
State Road 29. Six candidate sites that could warrant crossings are being studied by
the two State agencies.
4. The GFC is working with the NPS and FWS to plan a baseline resource study
of the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition lands.
5. In February, the GFC conducted annual nesting surveys of Everglades kites in
the Kissimmee River-Lake Okeechobee-Everglades ecosystem. Preliminary results
indicate the following:
The Kissimmee River basin has fewer birds and nests
than last year. Nest failures on Lakes Kissimmee and Toho resulted from severe
March thunderstorms and hail, and water level decline caused failure where nests
were in cattails
Lake Okeechobee nesting is similar to last year in total number
of nests started but the distribution is different, with 90 percent of nests being
located in woody vegetation and 10 percent in cattails. Nesting success is expected
to be higher this year because of the more stable nests
Kites have nested in
WCA-1 and WCA-2A for the first time in 12-15 years. Kites appear to be
returning to the WCAs because of improved water conditions following the long-
term drought.
15
B. Activities and Needs for the next 90 Days:
1. The Habitat Conservation Plan for the Florida Panther should be completed by
July.
2. GFC, NPS and FWS will meet on May 12 to develop a schedule and scope of
study for the Big Cypress Addition, lands.
16
VII. THE EVERGLADES COALITION:
In the Spring of 1984, several national conservation organizations joined Florida in the
program to protect and restore the Everglades. Since then, the Everglades Coalition
member organizations have worked to advocate federal legislation, funding, and program
support for the essential steps necessary to accomplish this massive undertaking.
The Coalition members have worked with Congress and the Administration for the
enactment of the Big Cypress Preserve Addition Act, Florida/Arizona Land Exchange Act,
funding for Kissimmee River restoration, and the Everglades National Park Expansion Act.
The Coalition met on March 13 to work on a national campaign to gain support for a
comprehensive re-evaluation of the purposes, adequacy and efficiency of the Central and
Southern Florida Flood Control Project.
The Coalition will meet on June 6 in Miami to begin planning the Eighth Annual
Everglades Coalition Conference.
17
APPENDIX A: EVERGLADES LAND ACQUISITION SUMMARY
AS OF APRIL 30, 1992
EVERGLADES PROJECTS:
TOTAL
ACRES ACQUIRED
TOTAL ACRES ACQUIRED TO DATE:
ACRES
AREA
THIS QUARTER:
REMAINING
(ACRES):
TO BE
ACQUIRED:
State
WMD
FED
State/WMD
FED
Total
KISSIMMEE RIVER
57,000
0
0
0
28,997
28,997
28,003
HOLEY LAND TRACT
35,300
0
0
0
35,300
35,300
0
ROTENBERGER TRACT
29,170
0
0
0
19,821
19,821
9,349
WATER CONSERV. AREAS
862,800
0
0
0
799,287
799,287
65,513
*1. BIG CYPRESS NAT'L PRES.
574,434
0
0
0
536,552
536,552
183
*2. BIG CYPRESS ADDITION
146,000
776
0
1,294
34,641
2,708
37,349
108,651
FAKAHATCHEE STRAND
74,000
361
0
0
51,094
51,094
22,906
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES
41,000
1,516
0
0
4,706
4,706
36,294
FLORIDA PANTHER NWLR
29,410
0
0
0
24,300
24,300
5,110
TEN THOUSAND IS. NWLR
20,000
0
0
0
0
0
20,000
EVERGLADES NAT'L PARK
107,600
106
0
1,268
206
44,227
44,433
63,167
EXPANSION
*3. SOUTHERN GLADES
29,643
0
0
0
26,720
26,720
2,896
(C-111 BASIN)
TOTAL:
2,006,357
2,759
0
2,562
1,000,772
607,787
1,608,559
362,072
*1. The original Big Cypress legislation authorized a total of not more than 570,000 acres for the Preserve. Several sections of land south
of Alligator Alley are larger than the standard 640 acres. The Preserve is now calculated at 574,434 acres, but that amount is not
legislatively authorized. The difference in figures (574,434 and 536,552) is represented by the 183+ acres of private land that remain to
be acquired and about 37,699 acres within the Big Cypress National Preserve boundaries that belong to the state and counties.
*2. Total acreage in State and Federal ownership was over-estimated in January 24 Everglades Status Report.
*3. See pg. 38, South Florida Water Management District "Save Our Rivers" 1992 Five Year Plan.
18
GOVERNOR AND CABINET RESOLUTIONS
February 16, 1989 - Cabinet Resolution supporting
acquisition and restoration of the Northeast Shark River
Slough and pledging State support for the expansion of
Everglades National Park.
August 29, 1989 - Cabinet Resolution in support of federal
authorization and appropriations for restoration of the
Kissimmee River.
EXECUTIVE ORDERS
November 4, 1983 - Executive Order 83-178 created the
Kissimmee River-Lake Okeechobee-Everglades Coordinating
Council.
January 21, 1988 - Executive Order 88-25 limited development
activities in the Everglades ecosystem.
March 23, 1988 - Executive Order 88-69 created the East
Everglades Land Acquisition Task Force.
July 14, 1988 - Executive Order 88-152 created the Lake
Okeechobee Technical Advisory Council.
September 12, 1990 - Executive Order 90-251 supported the
Everglades Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM)
plan and set forth a financial agreement for sharing the
costs of cleaning the water flowing into the Everglades from
the Everglades Agricultural Area.
19
The Everglades Coalition
666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE 2nd fl. Washington, DC 20003
May 19, 1992
The President's Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards, The White House
Attention: Award References
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, DC 20503
To Whom It May Concern:
This is to recommend the State of Florida's Save Our Everglades Program for
the President's 1992 Environment and Conservation Challenge Award in the
Partnership category.
The Save Our Everglades Program, initiated in August, 1983, has achieved
national distinction and tangible results in the protection and preservation of the
Kissimmee River-Lake Okeechobee-Everglades ecological system. The success of the
program is based on continuous interaction of the Florida Governor's Office with
the U.S. Congress, Federal, State and local agencies, the South Florida Water
Management District, and the Everglades Coalition (a coalition of twenty-eight
national and state conservation organizations). Among the exemplary
achievements of the Save Our Everglades Program are the following:
Congressional enactment of the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition
Act and the Florida/Arizona Land Exchange Act which added 146,000 acres
to the Big Cypress National Preserve.
Congressional enactment of the Everglades National Park Expansion
and Protection Act which added 107,600 acres to Everglades National Park.
Support by President George Bush, the Office of Management and Budget
and the Corps of Engineers for restoring the Kissimmee River, which will
restore a 56 mile canal to its natural condition, recreating some 29,000
acres of wetlands and wildlife habitat.
On behalf of the Everglades Coalition, I heartily recommend the Save Our
Everglades Program for the CEQ award.
Sincerely,
StevenJ. Parells
Steven J. Parcells
Chairman
The Everglades Coalition
NATHANIEL PRYOR REED
POST OFFICE Box 375
HOBE SOUND, FLORIDA 33475
TELEPHONE
TELEFAX
(407) 546-2666
(407) 546-5019
May 19, 1992
The President's Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards
ATTN: Award References
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
Dear Sir:
As a long-time conservationist and resident of South Florida, I know of no other
more successful program to receive the President's 1992 Environment and
Conservation Challenge Award than the State of Florida's Save Our Everglades
Program.
The Kissimmee River-Lake Okeechobee-Everglades ecological system is
priceless. It is dependent on a natural volume, timing and distribution of
freshwater. More than one hundred years of drainage and development activities
have diminished not only the extent of this natural system but also the vital flow
of freshwater.
The Save Our Everglades Program enjoys broad-based support. It has been
carried forward by three Florida governors who have worked closely with the
federal, state and local agencies, congress, the state legislature, the South Florida
Water Management District and many conservation organizations.
The Save Our Everglades Program has achieved excellent results, particularly in
acquiring privately-owed land. Enactment by Congress of the Big Cypress
National Preserve Addition Act, the Florida/Arizona Land Exchange Act and
the Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act are examples of the
outstanding achievements of the program.
Without hesitation, I recommend the Save Our Everglades Program for the
President's Conservation Challenge Award.
Sincerely, I
/Nathaniel P. Reed, President
1000 Friends of Florida
/j
FRIENDS
OF THE
EVERGLADES
Founded by Marjory Stoneman Douglas
May 18, 1992
President's Environmental & Conservation Challenge Award
The White House - Attention: Award References
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
To Whom it may Concern:
Nearly ten years after creation of the Save Our Everglades program,
the State of Florida has moved forward on a number of projects directed
at restoring and improving significant portions of the historic
Kissimmee-Okeechobee-Everglades system.
The Kissimmee River project is a bold plan to redirect the water of a
dredged canal back to the former natural serpentine river and marsh
system. Progress in the Kissimmee River restoration is the most dramatic
and rehabilitative of the SOE programs in that the marsh, waterfowl and
fish have rapidly re-established themselves in the pilot areas.
Friends appreciates the State's successful negotiation of the Florida/
Arizona Land Exchange for acquisition of private lands in the Big
Cypress Preserve Addition, Florida Panther WLR and Ten Thousand Island
NWR, another creative means to unify a fragmented natural system.
Acquisition and hydrologic restoration in the Southern Golden Gate
Estates is critical to natural water regimes. Years of overdrainage
have altered the natural hydroperiod and caused excessive loss of
precious fresh water.
Friends of the Everglades strongly supports your favorable considera-
tion of the Save Our Everglades program for the President's Challenge
Award. In the face of rapid urbanization in the most sensitive areas
of the state, Florida has successfully implemented a most ambitious
plan to preserve natural ecosystems, endangered and other wildlife,
recreation values and fresh water supply for agricultural and urban
needs.
Thank you for your kind consideration,
Nancy Carroll Brown, President
lake
101 Westward Drive, Suite #2
Miami Springs, Florida 33166
305-888-1230
Application Summary
ID Number:
P.065
Project:
Think Earth Environmental Education Program
Contact:
Ms. Ann Crafton
Think Earth Distribution Office
5505 East Carson Street, #250
Telephone:
Lakewood, CA 90713-
(310) 420-6814
Summary:
The Think Earth Program is a consortium of 15 California
environmental entities that have collaborated to develop and
distribute "Think Earth", an elementary school environmental
education curriculum. The curriculum teaches children to
conserve natural resources, reduce waste, and minimize
pollution. "Think Earth" has reached approximately one
million students nationwide.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
An excellent approch to environmental education. Partners
represent a broad private/public sector interest. Focus on
children in exemplary -- a distinctive feature. Education
strategy is innovative and comprehensive. Partners show
commitment through investment among other activities.
P.065
Question 5
Overview Summary
The Think Earth Environmental Education Program began in 1989 when
representatives of environmental public and private organizations as well as
educational organizations gathered to address the need for a comprehensive
environmental education program. The group agreed that, although individually the
task would be immense, a consortium of development sponsors could pool their
resources to produce the curriculum.
One of the original members, Walt Kirwan of ARCO, recalls the initial formation of
the Think Earth consortium. "We identified common interests and goals for our
organizations, each attainable through a comprehensive environmental education
program. It then became a matter of generating necessary funding for such a
massive undertaking. Once we began soliciting partners, everything came together
quickly because the program concept was so sound and essential, it sold itself."
The consortium is unique. Its partners represent a broad environmental spectrum:
water agencies, air quality boards, electric and gas utilities, an oil company,
sanitation districts, and a state energy commission. Naturally these members don't
always agree. This diversity, however, has helped produce a broad, unbiased
program.
Educational Development Specialists (EDS), a member of the consortium,
developed the Think Earth curriculum. The program consists of seven complete
instructional units for kindergarten through sixth grade. The goal of the program is to
help children learn to "Think Earth"-to conserve natural resources, reduce waste,
and minimize pollution. Children learn basic environmental concepts, skills, and
behaviors. The program promotes an environmental ethic by which students balance
human and environmental needs. The emphasis is on behaviors; empowering
children with practical life skills that will make a difference.
The curriculum is innovative in that it is comprehensive, yet brief. It interrelates all
elements of the environment in an integrated instructional program rather than as an
eclectic set of activities or informational sheets. Most importantly, Think Earth is
measurable; unit tests allow teachers to assess student learning of objectives and
behaviors.
The consortium has provided free Think Earth K-3 instructional units to 2,000 of the
3,500 public and private elementary schools in Southern California. To date, more
than 10,000 teachers have taught the units to nearly 500,000 students. The
grades 4-6 units have been field tested and will be distributed beginning in late
1992.
The program is available to similar sponsoring companies and agencies throughout
the nation. So far, local environmental companies and agencies in all 50 states have
ordered Think Earth and an estimated 500,000 students have been reached outside
Southern California.
Results of field tests show that the units helped teachers elicit high levels of pupil
achievement in the classes. In addition, teacher attitudes were positive. All of the
teachers felt the program helped students develop an understanding of
environmental problems and a commitment to solving them.
The Think Earth program is a successful example of a public/private collaborative
alliance. It serves not only as a case study of a quality environmental program for
Southern California, but as a model of how similar programs can be developed
throughout the country.
Responses to Criteria Questions
Question 6.A. Partnership
1. Who are the partnership's members? What are their roles? What resources do
they bring to the partnership?
There are three types of consortium members: sponsor members, educator
members, and technical reviewers. Sponsor members represent a broad
environmental spectrum that includes water agencies; air quality boards; electric,
gas, and phone utilities; an oil company; sanitation districts; a state energy
commission; as well as a curriculum development company. These members
provide the focus, leadership, organizational framework, program development,
and funding for the program. Educator members serve in an advisory capacity
and are directly involved in the educational program development. The technical
reviewers review the educatonal programs and provide input on program content
and activities.
2. What are the partnership's specific environmental or conservation objectives?
Has a sustainable plan of concerted action for meeting these needs been
established?
The partnership's program objective is to help children develop an environmental
ethic by becoming aware of:
environmental problems and their causes,
the consequences of these problems,
things they can do to solve these problems,
things government, industry and consumers can do to solve these problems,
and,
costs and benefits of environmental behaviors to both people and the
environment.
To make the leap from abstract theory to practical application, the consortium has
developed Think Earth, an environmental education curriculum for elementary
schools. The consortium hopes to provide Think Earth free to all 3,500
elementary schools in Southern California.
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative? What obstacles, environmental
or otherwise, does it overcome?
The Think Earth Program is distinctive because a broad spectrum of 15
environmental companies and agencies pooled their resources to develop and
distribute an environmental program for schools. With such a diverse group, a
major obstacle was agreeing on program content. It would have been easy to
develop 15 separate programs that reflected the specific interests of each
partner. However, out of this diversity a broad, unbiased curriculum was
developed. Also, pooling their resources, rather than working individually,
produced a higher quality program. This quality and the comprehensive nature of
the program makes it more acceptable and useful to schools.
4. What measurable environmental or conservation benefits has the partnership
produced?
The Think Earth K-3 program has reached 2,000 of the 3,500 elementary schools
in Southern California. More than 10,000 teachers have taught the units to nearly
500,000 students. The program has nationwide distribution and an estimated
500,000 students have been reached outside Southern California.
In field tests students averaged 58% on unit pretests (near-guessing level) and
nearly 90% on postests. Ninety-five percent said they liked the program and
would do more now to help the environment than prior to the program. Nearly all
of the teachers indicated they would teach the program again.
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by others and transferred to
other settings?
The environmental problems we face today are not isolated concerns that can be
solved by individual agencies. We need public support and education. The Think
Earth consortium is a practical, cost-effective organizational model for others.
Environmental agencies and companies around the country can join together to
pool resources to develop and distribute environmental education programs, or,
even more cost-effective, to distribute Think Earth. While consortium partners
had a "learn as you go" challenge in the area of distribution, they soon developed
feasible distribution options and other groups can benefit from their experience.
Application 'Form-1992
questions pertaining to the specific Award category for
which you are applying. (For example: Partnership category,
ase read the application form carefully and provide all information
answer questions A1-A5; EQM, B1-B7; Innovation, C1-C5;
requested. Please type or print clearly. Supplementary pages should
Education, D1-D5).
follow the format of this form as closely as possible. Incomplete applica-
Nions will not be considered.
Answers should be clear, concise and should emphasize
quantifiable results or benefits of the program. Each
1. Select the Award category for which you are competing:
answer to a sub-question should not exceed 100 words.
(Note: A program may be entered in only one category. See descriptions of
Taken as a whole, all answers to criteria questions should
categories in Question 6.)
not exceed two pages.
(01) X Partnership
(02) Environmental Quality Management
P.065
A. PARTNERSHIP: awarded to diverse organizations or
(03) Innovation
groups that have fostered cooperative approaches to envi-
(04) Education and Communication
ronmental needs at the local, regional, or national level.
2. Name of the project or program described in this application:
1. Who are the partnership's members? What are their
roles? What resources do they bring to the partnership?
The Think Earth Environmental Education Program
2. What are the partnership's specific environmental or
3. Name of Award Applicant(s): (Use separate sheet, if needed)
conservation objectives? Has a sustainable plan of con-
Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
certed action for meeting these needs been established?
Name: Please see Attachment A
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative?
What obstacles, environmental or otherwise, does it
le:
overcome?
Southern California "Think Earth"
Organization: Environmental Education Consortium
4. What measurable environmental or conservation
benefits has the partnership produced?
Street:
5505 East Carson Street, Suite 250
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by
City
Lakewood
State: CA
Zip: 90713
others and transferred to other settings?
Telephone: (310) 420-6814
Fax: (310) 420-1485
B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT:
awarded to organizations which have demonstrated that
environmental values can be integrated into sound man-
4. Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
agement decisions and objectives. (Note: This category
Mr. Mrs. X Ms. Miss Dr.
reflects broad-based organizational approaches. Special
programs or projects may be more appropriate for entry
Name:
Ann Crafton
in one of the other three award categories.)
Title:
Director of Program Distribution
1. What are the organization's environmental policies
and objectives?
Organization:
Think Earth Distribution Office
2. How has the organization's top management
Street:
5505 East Carson Street, Suite 250
demonstrated commitment to these policies and objec-
tives? Do the policies demonstrate commitment
City:
Lakewood
State:
CA
Zip: 90713
beyond legal compliance?
Telephone: (310) 420-6814
Fax: (310) 420-1485
3. What are the organization's environmental stan-
dards for its product(s) and operations? (Explain how
NOTE: The Selection Committee will rely heavily on Questions 5-6 in
they go beyond legal constraints and how they relate to man-
termining how well the application meets the award criteria.
agement control mechanisms.)
5. Please attach a one-page (not to exceed 500 words) summary, suitable
4. How are these policies and objectives incorporated in
for publication, which provides a complete overview of the application.
Th
the: a) Day-to-day management of the organization; h) Orga-
page response should be clear, concise, and should emphasize
nization's decision-making about research and development,
quantinable results or benefits of the program.
long-range planning, capital, and operating budgets?
5. How are these policies and objectives reflected in the orga-
NOTE: The following questions are for informational purposes.
nization's relationships with employees, customers, suppliers,
7. How long has the technology, program, project or service been
d the general public?
operational?
1989 - ongoing
6. What are the organization's control mechanisms that give
decision makers objective data to measure continuous perfor-
8. Which of the following most accurately describes the appli-
mance improvement toward its short- and long-term environ-
cant(s)? (Check more than one, if applicable.)
mental objectives?
(01) X National Business or Industry
7. What quantifiable, sustained environmental quality results
(02) X Regional or Local Business or Industry
in products and processes have resulted from the organiza-
(03) National Nonprofit Organization or Foundation
tion's environmental approach?
(04) Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05) X Local or State Government/Government Agency
(06) X Educational Organization
C. INNOVATION-awarded to individuals, organizations and
(07) Voluntary Civic Organization
groups who have demonstrated exceptional creativity or pio-
(08) Trade or Professional Society
neered new approaches in the development and/or execution of
(09) Youth Organization
technologies, programs, projects, or services that are environ-
(10) Labor Organization
mentally sound and economically sensible?
(11) Individual
(12) Other (Please describe):
1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or
service?
9. If business or industry, which of the following best describes
the type of business or industry?
2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinc-
tive or innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or other-
(01)
Agriculture/Forestry
wise, does it overcome?
(02) Aerospace
(03) X Communications
How is the technology, program, project, or service superior
(04) Construction
to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a
(05) Electronics/Computers
problem for which no solutions previously existed?
(06) X Energy
(07) Engineering
4. Can the technology, program, project or service be replicated
(08) X Environmental Services
in an economically feasible manner?
(09)
Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10) Manufacturing-Chemical
5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental ben-
(11) Manufacturing-Other
efits or results of the technology, program, project, or service?
(12) Mining
(13) Recreation
(14) Trade-Wholesale
D. EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION-awarded to indi-
viduals, organizations, or groups which have developed educa-
(15) Transportation
(16) X Utilities-Electric, Gas or
tional or informational programs that inspire respect for the
(17) X Other (Please describe): Petroleum
environment and raise the public's environmental literacy.
1. What is the program? What are its environmental or conser-
10. Which of the following most accurately describes the environ-
vation objectives?
mental program under consideration for an award? (Check more
than one, if applicable.)
2. Who is the program's audience? How large is the audience?
(01) agriculture
How is the program's effect on the audience determined?
(02) air quality
(03) conservation
3. What is original or distinctive about the program?
(04) education-general public
(05) X education-academic
4. What are the measurable results or benefits produced by the
(06) energy
am? How does the program promote the development
(07) environmental quality management
Order environmental ethic and make a positive contribution to
(08) forestry
environmental awareness?
(09) hazardous waste remediation
(10) international
5. How can the program be used or modeled by others?
(11) natural resources
(12) pollution control
14. Please indicate which of the following are the primary audi-
13) recreation
ences, beneficiaries, or users of the program or service, and esti-
) recycling
mate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
5) solid waste
(16) source reduction/pollution prevention
Type
How Many People
(17) water quality
(18) wetlands
(01) Business or Industry
(19) wildlife and fish resources
(02) Trade or Professional Society
(20) Other (Please describe):
(03) Government
(04) X Educational Organizations
2,000
11. If applicable, list the sources of the program's support and the
(05) X Youth
500,000*
percentage of support provided, including grants and in-kind
(06) Community or Public Interest Groups
contributions of goods and services. (Use separate sheet if needed).
(07) Local Community or Local Public
(08) General Public
Source See Attachment B
%
(09) Employees
(10) Customers or Clients
Source
%
(11) Other (Please describe):
Source
%
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project,
or conservation awards in the past five years?
including approximate value of in-kind contributions of goods
South Coast AOMD Award
and services:
NAAEE Environmental Film Award
$ 617,000+ (to date)
f the project is ongoing, what is the annual cost?
100,000
*These are current numbers. Potential
audience is 64,000 schools/25 mil. students.
16. In one paragraph (not to exceed 50 words), please summarize the program, its objectives and what it has accomplished. Use space
provided below. This paragraph should be suitable for use in a catalog, database or brochure.
The Think Earth Program is a consortium of 15 California environmental entities
that have collaborated to develop and distribute "Think Earth," an elementary
school environmental education curriculum. The curriculum teaches children
to conserve natural resources, reduce waste, and minimize pollution. "Think
Earth" has reached approximately 1,000,000 students nationwide.
17. Please include 3 one-page letters of recommendation attached
How to Apply
to the application when it is submitted for consideration. Letters
should be addressed: "Attention: Award References." References
Completed applications must be postmarked
should have first-hand knowledge of the environmental program,
by May 22, 1992 and mailed to the:
service, or technology and should offer a candid evaluation of its
The President's Environment and
success or effectiveness. References may also include users or
Conservation Challenge Awards
beneficiaries of your program.
Council on Environmental Quality
NOTE: Letters of recommendation must accompany the applica-
The White House
tion when it is submitted to CEQ. Letters sent directly to CEQ
722 Jackson Place, NW
will not be considered. Please list the references in the spaces
Washington, DC 20503
below.
All information submitted with the application should be
Name: Dr. Darlene Stoner
considered public information and becomes property of
Director, Environmental Education
the President's Challenge Awards program.
Title:
Resource Center, CSUSB
Award recipients will be notified in Fall 1992. Recipients
must be willing to assist the President's Challenge Awards
Street: 5500 University Parkway
program in making nonproprietary information about
their environmental programs available to others who
City: San Bernardino
State: CA Zip: 92407
wish to replicate their success.
Telephone: (714) 880-5640 Fax: (714) 880-5990
Application Format
Please submit one original and four photocopies of your
Name: Ms. Lillian Kawasaki
General Manager, Dept. of Environ. Aff.
application. You may include up to 10 pages of supporting
materials. (NOTE: Photocopying both sides of a sheet of
Title:
City of Los Angeles
paper will be considered two-pages.) Any oversized items
must be reduced to fit a standard 8.5" x 11" page format.
Street: 200 N. Spring Street, Room 1500 MS 177
CA
90012
Supporting materials may include items such as brochures,
City:
Los Angeles
State:
Zip:
photographs, press clippings, and graphs depicting the
program's results. The materials may not be used as a
Telephone:
Fax:
substitute for written responses to Questions 5 and 6.
The order of pages in the submitted application should be
Name: Ms. Linda Peck
as follows:
Teacher - Brywood Elementary
1. 4-page application (Questions 1-20)
Title:
2. 500-word overview summary (Question 5)
Street: No. 1 Westwood
3. 2-page responses to criteria questions (Question 6)
4. 10 pages of supporting materials
5. 3 letters of recommendation (Question 17)
City:
Irvine
State: CA Zip: 92720
NOTE: The entire package should be stapled in the upper,
Telephone: (714) 857-9230 Fax:
left-hand corner. Any items sent over the 10-page limit of
supporting materials will be disregarded and not reviewed
by the technical evaluators and selection committee. Do
18. Please sign below to indicate that all applicants agree a) to
not put the application or backup materials into a binder,
abide by the rules and requirements of the awards competition,
notebook or plastic cover.
and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the
best of their knowledge.
OMB Control No. 0331-0002, (Exp. 2/95): As required by the
Signature: Director ann of m Crafton Think Date: Earth 5/19/92
Paperwork Reduction Act, CEQ estimates that completion of this
application will take 10 hours. Send comments regarding the col-
lection of this information, including suggestions for reducing the
Title: Program Distribu Organization: Distribu. Office
paperwork burden, to CEQ and also to: Paperwork Reduction Pro-
ject, Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., 20503
Telephone: (310) 420-6814
printed
on
more
than
50%
waste
FEB 28 1992
ATTACHMENT A
THINK EARTH CONSORTIUM
SPONSOR MEMBERS
ARCO
LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF
515 South Flower Street, AP 4467
WATER AND POWER
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Post Office Box 111, Terminal Annex
Contacts:
Los Angeles, CA 90051
Walt Kirwan
Contacts:
Manager, Public Affairs Programs
Walter Zeisl
(213) 486-2560
Supervisor of Educational Services
FAX (213) 486-1986
Room 1514
(213) 481-6357
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Rita Brown
CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
Education Consultant
360 East Second Street, Suite 702
11204 Summertime Lane
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Culver City, CA 90230
Contacts:
(213) 481-4085
Lynne Goldsmith
(310) 558-1814
Education Outreach Specialist
FAX (213) 580-0739
Bureau of Engineering
(213) 485-8272
METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF
FAX (213) 237-0962
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Heidi Wenzel
Post Office Box 54153
Consultant, Clean Water Program
Los Angeles, CA 90054
(310) 378-4485
Contact:
FAX (310) 378-7265
Sue Meltzer
Supervisor of Education Programs
EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
(213) 250-6739
SPECIALISTS
FAX (213) 250-6500
5505 East Carson Street, Suite 250
Lakewood, CA 90713
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION
Contacts:
DISTRICTS
Fred Niedermeyer, President
Post Office Box 8127
Kay Ice, Director of Program Development
Fountain Valley, CA 92728-8127
Ann Crafton, Director of Marketing
Contact:
Sharian Burroughs, Director of Business Affairs
Corinne Clawson
(310) 420-6814
Public Information Officer
FAX (310) 420-1485
(714) 962-2411 ext. 2055
FAX (714) 962-0356
GTE CALIFORNIA
SANITATION DISTRICTS OF LOS
One GTE Place, CA500 PAC
ANGELES COUNTY
Thousand Oaks, CA 91362-3811
Post Office Box 4998
Contact:
Whittier, CA 90607
David C. Fisher
Contact:
Area Manager, Community Economic Development
Joe Haworth
(805) 372-6640
Public Information Officer
FAX (805) 372-7377
(310) 699-7411 ext. 1555
FAX (310) 695-613
SOUTH COAST AQMD
21865 Copley Drive
Post Office Box 4937
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-0937
Contact:
Ron Ketcham
Senior Public Information Officer
(714) 396-3213
FAX (714) 396-3335
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1190 Durfee Avenue, Suite 200
South El Monte, CA 91733
Contact:
Valerie Williams
Supervisor of Educational Services
(818) 302-0247
FAX (818) 302-0254
THE GAS COMPANY
555 West 5th Street, ML 25FO
Los Angeles, CA 90013-1011
Contact:
Helen Romero Shaw
Community Involvement Administrator
(213) 244-2533
FAX (213) 244-8254
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL DISTRICT
702 County Square Drive
Ventura, CA 93003
Contact:
Barbara L. Page
Public Information Administrator
(805) 645-1415
FAX (805) 645-1444
VENTURA REGIONAL SANITATION
DISTRICT
1001 Partridge Drive, Suite 150
Ventura, CA 93003-5562
Contact:
Allison Maires
Education Specialist
(805) 658-4686
FAX (805) 658-4633
THINK EARTH CONSORTIUM
EDUCATOR MEMBERS
Bob Clarillos
Ed Rodevich
Monlux Science Center
Coordinator
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL
Math and Science
DISTRICT
ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE OF
6155 Bellaire Avenue
EDUCATION
North Hollywood, CA 91606
200 Kalmas Drive
(818) 762-1156
Costa Mesa, CA 92628
(714) 966-4391
Bill Gustafson
Coordinator-Environmental Education
UCLA EXTENSION SERVICES
Dorothy Rubenstein
Department of Education
School of Education
10995 LeConte Avenue
CALIFORNIA STATE POLYTECHNIC
Los Angeles, CA 90024
UNIVERSITY, POMONA
(310) 825-4191
3801 West Temple Avenue
FAX (310) 206-5066
Pomona, CA 91768-4050
(714) 869-2324
FAX (714) 869-4747
Lois Hitz
Consultant
Environmental Education
Darleen Stoner
6 Poppy Trail
Director
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Center for Environmental Education
Office- (213) 744-2355
School of Education
Home- (213) 377-9182
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SAN
BERNARDINO
5500 University Parkway
Jeff Jones
San Bernardino, CA 92407
SIERRA CLUB
(714) 880-5640
10852 Blix Street, #6
FAX 880-5990
Toluca Lake, CA 91602-1335
Office- (818) 242-7722
Home- (818) 761-0732
Jennifer Mohr Johnson
Curriculum Development Coordinator
CALIFORNIA MUSEUM OF SCIENCE &
INDUSTRY
700 State Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90037
(213) 744-7444
FAX (213) 744-2034
Raleigh Philip
Project Coordinator
Center for Health Education
LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE OF
EDUCATION
9300 Imperial Highway
Downey, CA 90242-2890
(213) 922-6321
FAX (213) 922-6699
THINK EARTH CONSORTIUM
TECHNICAL REVIEWERS
Dr. Harold Hungerford
Harvey Alter
Science Education Center
Manager
Resources Policy Department
Department of Curriculum and Instruction
U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Wham Building, Room 327
SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY
1615 H. Street, NW
Carbondale, IL 62901
Washington DC 20062
(618) 453-4211 FAX 453-1646
(203) 463-5531
Patrick Atkins
Lillian Kawasaki
General Manager
Environmental Control & Engineering
General Manager
Environmental Affairs Department
ALCOA
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
1501 Alcoa Building
200 N. Spring Street, Room 1500, Stop 177
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(412) 553-3805
(213) 237-0352
Clark Brink
Office of External Affairs
Ed Mastro
AIR RESOURCES BOARD
Curator
Post Office Box 2815
CABRILLO MARINE MUSEUM
Sacramento, CA 95812
3720 Stephen White Drive
(916) 327-8885
San Pedro, CA 90731
Walter Coyne
(213) 548-7567
Director, Executive Communications
Public Affairs
Dr. Glenn McGlathery
ARCO
School of Education
515 South Flower Street
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Campus Box 106
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO
(213) 486-0662
Post Office Box 173364
Denver, CO 80217-3364
Phil Gay
(303) 556-8453
Director
California Project 2061
SAN DIEGO CITY SCHOOLS
Howard Sullivan
4275 Cass Street
San Diego, CA 92109-4005
Psychology and Education
College of Education
(619) 273-2061
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
Brenda Goeden
Payne Building, Room 301
Education Director
Tempe, AZ 85287
HEAL THE BAY
(602) 965-3384
1640 Fifth Street, Suite 112
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Patrick Wegner
(310) 394-4552
Associate Director
CALIFORNIA COUNCIL ON SCIENCE
Jim Hastings
AND TECHNOLOGY
Consultant
Curriculum and Instructional Programs
100 Academy Drive
LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE OF
Irvine, CA 92715
EDUCATION
(714) 854-4150
FAX (714) 854-4179
9300 East Imperial Highway
Downey, CA 90242-2890
(213) 922-6334
AR
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAM
S
UPPOSE
all of the children in
your community began to:
save papers, bottles, and cans for recycling
turn the water off while brushing their teeth
dispose of all wastes properly and not litter
walk, bike, or carpool whenever possible
z
use energy, water, paper, and other resources
wisely and not waste them.
1991 PROGRAM INFORMATION BOOKLET (K-3)
The Units
Each of the four units for
F
kindergarten through grade 3
ew things are as important to our future as a
contains grade specific materials
for teachers, students, and
healthy, sustainable environment. Young children,
parents. Each unit includes:
receptive and eager to learn, can and should be well
Teacher Guide, with procedures
prepared to inherit and care for our planet in the 21st
for 5 lessons, additional hands-on
century. You can help them with "Think Earth."
activities, background information,
a children's literature list, and
additional sources for information
and materials.
What is Think Earth?
2 Full-Color Posters
2 Sets of Color Story-Cards
Think Earth is an Environmental Education Program. It contains an
animated video and four complete instructional units for kindergarten
Reproducible Masters for:
-Pretest
through third grade.
-Posttest
But Think Earth is more than just materials. It's a national, grass-roots
-2 Practice Exercises
education movement. All across the country, companies, agencies, and
-Mini-Poster
organizations are providing Think Earth free to their local elementary schools.
-Family Activity Sheet
Will schools want Think Earth?
A Think Earth school pack
contains one copy of each
Yes! Think Earth is a multidisciplinary, behavior and awareness program
grade-level unit and one video.
that addresses all elements of the environment-air, land, water, and
energy. Teachers at each grade level can complete the program in as few
as five days, teaching conservation,
waste reduction, and pollution control.
THINK
Think Earth covers current
MDIU MA Joseter Send)
environmental topics and issucs
much more comprehensively than
WITH it
textbooks, and teachers appreciate
that the program correlates well
The Video
with their district and state
The Think Earth
JYP year In
curriculum frameworks.
video is a full-
Both teachers and students
color, fully-animated presentation
like the program. It's easy,
that introduces children to the
entertaining, and effective.
environment and to the need for
your feer
During field testing in more
all of us to conserve natural
Derhad and Loday Perfert!
than 30 schools, students
resources, reduce waste, and
averaged near guessing levels
minimize pollution.
on unit pretests and nearly
The video contains two
90 percent on posttests.
versions of Think
Earth, each one
Who can help children Think Earth?
7 minutes long.
Paily
Activity
The first version
Agencies, organizations, companies, clubs,
I
Sheet
is narrated. The second version
and institutions nationwide are providing
//
100
is not narrated so that children
Think Earth to their local schools.
can supply their own narration
Whether it's a consortium of companies
///
and so that the video can also be
supplying 2,000 schools or a service club
10000000
00000000
used with non-English speaking
supplying one school, people are showing
children.
their concern for the environment, for our
children, and for our future.
YOUR NAME HERE
Students at the different grade-
levels focus on various aspects
of the video presentation, but all
You can order school packs for only $85 per school.
ultimately learn how important it
See back page for details.
is to Think Earth
The Environment
THINK EARTH
(aucation
Teacher Guide
FIRST
clinic
ENVIRONMENT the
&
Ball
Family Activity
CAS
} ? / / // /
a
//
THINK EARTH
Envoronments Frogram
EARTH
Envoronments
Pretest
Teacher Guide
#
Teacher Guide
S
***
8.4
REPUGE
REVENT
TERMS
THIRD
PEU
GRADE
EARTH
OUR COMMUNITY
Teacher Guide
-
AP
LABRII
21
LANDRILL
bar
$
H
ere's how your organization can provide
Think Earth to local schools.
THE
THINK
Think Earth provides many benefits to organizations who give the program
EARTH
to local elementary schools.
The most obvious benefit is, of course, community relations. School
administrators, teachers, and students will all appreciate your providing the
materials. And since the Family Activity Sheet in each unit can be imprinted
with your organization's name, parents know of your concern as well.
S
tory
Think Earth is a perfect way to make personal contacts with school
administrators and teachers and to implement "adopt-a-school" or other
The Think Earth campaign began
partnership programs.
in 1989 when a consortium of 14
members-including water agen-
cies, air quality boards, waste
management districts, and
energy companies-worked with
educators and curriculum
developers to create an environ-
mental education program. The
K-3 units were developed in 1990,
and the 4-6 units will be available
early in 1992.
The Think Earth Environmental
Education Program was developed
with several important objectives.
The program:
interrelates environmental
issues involving air, land, water,
and energy in one program
stresses environmental habits
and behaviors
What does it cost?
costs very little so that local
Think Earth costs only $85 per school. Each school pack contains the
sponsors can afford to offer the
Think Earth video and four complete instructional units-one each for
program to every elementary
kindergarten through third grade.
school
In keeping with the program's theme of efficient use of resources,
teachers share and reproduce materials when there is more than one
is fully field tested, with
successful student learning
teacher per grade level. Since each school typically has at least two
classrooms per grade level and since the materials should last at least
and positive teacher reactions.
three years, a single Think Earth K-3 school pack will educate more than
Educational Development
700 students. Your costs average out to less than 12 cents per child.
Specialists, a member of the
consortium, developed Think
How do we start?
Earth and distributes the program
to local sponsors nationwide:
Some organizations order a Think Earth K-3 school pack for every school.
Other industry-sponsored
Others start with a smaller pilot test in several schools before moving into
programs for schools developed
a wider distribution. Still other organizations use our free school mailers
by Educational Development
to determine demand and then order accordingly.
Specialists on such topics as
nutrition, energy, water
For ordering and other information, write or call:
conservation, and solid waste
EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT SPECIALISTS
management have reached more
5505 East Carson Street, Suite 250
Lakewood, CA 90713-3093
than 40 million students.
(213) 420-6814
FAX (213) 420-1485
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
THINK EARTH
TIMES
THINK EARTH
Education, Program
Summer 1991
Vol. 1, Issue 1
K-3 Distribution Off To Good Start
So far, THINK EARTH has reached 500,000 students
in 2,000 schools across 38 states.
B
ernie the Bus, Trashbot the Robot
ment Specialists, authors of educa-
Trashcan, and three mischievous
tional programs that have reached
Rascals are making friends with kids
more than 40 million students.
everywhere. In fact, these likeable
THINK EARTH units for kindergar-
characters have made more than
ten through third grade are provided
500,000 buddies across 38 states.
free to schools by companies and
They have children singing and
agencies concerned about the
evaluation cards supplied with the
talking and role-playing through their
environment. Each kit contains an
THINK EARTH kits, teachers and
essons about the environment in the
animated video and four complete
principals have overwhelmingly
HINK EARTH Environmental Educa-
units for kindergarten through third
endorsed the program's concept and
grade. (Materials for grades 4-6 will
method of teaching children about
fion Program.
THINK EARTH is a new multidisci-
follow next year.) The program offers
the environment. Pre- and post-testing
plinary program that teaches children
a fun and effective way to teach
show that the program is effective in
about all elements of the environ-
about conservation, waste reduction,
reaching its teaching goals: the
ment-air, land, water, and energy.
and pollution control.
average results jumped from an initial
The materials were written and
The response to the program by
test score of 58 percent to 93 percent
developed by Educational Develop-
the schools has been enthusiastic. On
after the units were taught.
Here are some of the comments received from
THINK EARTH teachers:
"Excellent, well-developed unit. Easy to use and
appropriate to grade level."
"Terrific for Earth Day celebration."
"This is the best environmental program I've used
with my 1st graders!"
"Thank you so much for your THINK EARTH kit.
We had a lot of fun and learned so much. Very
positive."
"It was wonderful! We have 21 new environmen-
talists!"
"Thank you for helping US take care of the earth."
"Environmental education empowers children to make the
world better," says Lynn Benedict, first-grade teacher in
Printed on Recycled Paper
Torrance, California.
THINK EARTH Developed by
Unique Public-Private Partnership
Consortium members tell all: how the program
works for them and their agencies.
W
hen the THINK EARTH Consortium
was formed in 1989, it brought
together. a unique public-private
partnership. Sitting around the table
were representatives from water
agencies, air quality boards, waste
management districts, and energy
companies.
These Consortium members met
frequently and worked hard with the
group's educators and curriculum
experts to create an environmental
education program that would
work-for students, for teachers, and
for its potential sponsors. After
extensive field-testing, the K-3 units
were ready for distribution in 1991,
Sue Meltzer, Supervisor of Educational Programs at Metropolitan Water
with the units for grades 4-6 to follow
District of Southern California, discusses the THINK EARTH program and
soon in 1992.
her company's participation in the Consortium.
Consortium members represent a
variety of different organizations.
Solidarity and Cooperation
EARTH to be an extremely worthwhile
Accordingly, they brought with them
for the Schools
project, benefiting from so many
many different goals they hoped to
accomplish with the THINK EARTH
H elen Romero Shaw, community
professionals in the Consortium.
"My agency could never have
program. How do they like what has
involvement manager with the
been done so far?
Southern California Gas Company,
produced such a program without
"I've been delighted about how
says she's impressed with the mem-
this group. We're getting exposure to
an educational area that we could
well the consortium works together,
bers who make up the Consortium:
the corporations and agencies that
never have achieved by ourselves."
about the potential we've brought to
fruition," says Allison Maires, Educa-
have come together in solidarity and
The Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California was excited
tion Specialist at the Ventura Re-
cooperation for the schools.
about being part of a major consor-
gional Sanitation District. "I'm out in
"People have set aside their own
tium of companies and agencies,
classrooms regularly and have talked
interests to create this important
curriculum for students. At the Gas
according to Sue Meltzer, Supervisor
to several teachers. They unanimously
of Educational Programs.
have a positive response to THINK
Company, we think that it's a very
She comments, "We have long
EARTH-they love it!"
worthwhile program that should have
been started sooner."
supported the idea that changes
She adds that after the kids have
come about as a result of behavioral
been through the program, her job of
In the southern part of the Consor-
training, and that's what this program
talking to them about solid waste is
tium area, Corinne Clawson repre-
accomplishes."
so much easier because they can go
sents the Orange County Sanitation
Consortium members are commit-
Districts. She has found THINK
into the topic with more depth. "They
ted to getting THINK EARTH into the
really understand the reduce, reuse,
schools in Southern California.
recycle idea we're trying to foster at
"My agency could
Meanwhile, the program's developer,
our District."
never have produced
Educational Development Specialists,
such a program with-
is making THINK EARTH available to
companies and agencies across the
out this group.
nation.
This Issue's Highlight: Second Grade Unit
Focuses on Solid Waste and Recycling
Three little rascals are stars of waste
eduction lessons.
REDUCE REUSE RECYCLE
Every day, Tony and Tina, who were not only brother and
sister but also twins, took the trash out to the alley behind
their house. They didn't like the job much because the alley
was usually pretty messy. The trash cans were overflowing
most of the time and trash was always lying around.
For the past two days, however, they noticed that the alley
didn't look so bad. The trash cans were still full, but every-
thing was neatly organized and arranged. Glass bottles were
in one box; aluminum cans were in another
S o begins the story of Tony and Tina, who will meet the
three little rascals and learn all about waste reduction.
The story is part of the THINK EARTH Grade 2 Unit,
The skills taught in this unit include identifying recy-
where students are introduced to the 3 R's of waste
clable products and recognizing waste-reduction behav-
reduction-reduce how much they throw away, reuse
iors. The students also learn what they can do to help the
as much as they can, and recycle cans, bottles, and
environment: save newspapers, aluminum cans, glass,
newspapers.
and plastic bottles for recycling; keep reusable things or
Each THINK EARTH unit emphasizes one of the THINK
give them away rather than put them into the trash; and
EARTH themes-conserve natural resources, reduce
use nondisposable plates, cups, towels, and other items
waste, and minimize pollution-while touching on all the
when possible.
themes and interrelating all elements of the environment-
Like all other units, this teaching set contains a teacher
ir, land, and water. In the Grade 2 unit, students learn
guide with lesson plans and hands-on activities, colorful
that following the 3 R's-reduce, reuse, recycle-not only
posters, illustrated story cards, and reproducible tests and
creates less trash for the landfills, but also conserves
exercises, as well as a home information sheet. The
natural resources and reduces pollution.
animated THINK EARTH video is also included.
How to Help Children THINK EARTH
A wide variety of sponsors everywhere find
their own ways to distribute educational kits.
But just how do sponsors get the kits to the children? If
you're interested in helping your local schools teach
THINK EARTH has caught on as a national grass-roots
about the environment, you might consider some of the.
movement. Orders for the educational kits have come
following ways to distribute the THINK EARTH materials:
from Texas to Wisconsin, from Washington to New
Take the THINK EARTH school packs to schools in your
Jersey, 38 states in all. They've also arrived from other
area.
countries, such as Canada, New Zealand, and India.
Use the free school mailers provided with THINK
Many different kinds of sponsors are helping children to
EARTH materials to determine demand and then order
THINK EARTH-individuals, small business owners,
and distribute accordingly.
governmental agencies, organizations, companies, clubs,
Hold a school district workshop to inform officials
and institutions.
about the program and find out about demand.
For $85 per school pack, or less than 12 cents per
Offer THINK EARTH in your educational services
child, THINK EARTH can reach more than 700 students
catalog.
and their families over a three-year period, giving them a
Conduct teacher workshops and show the THINK
powerful message about the environment.
EARTH video to K-3 teachers at local schools before
distributing units.
3
THINK EARTH Gets Big Send-Off in Los Angeles
Consortium members join children at
"live" demonstration of lessons, skits, and song.
The Earth was smiling and so were the participants at
the THINK EARTH kick-off staged at Canfield Elementary
School in Los Angeles on April 18, 1991. The lively
demonstration by a class of first and second graders
included a lesson about resource conservation (taught
expertly by two students), several skits, and a rousing
rendition of the THINK EARTH song.
Members of the audience, seated on pint-sized chairs,
represented the 14 corporations, utilities, and public
agencies who have committed about $500,000 to
Children at Canfield Elementary School sing the THINK
developing and distributing the THINK EARTH materials.
EARTH song.
They were impressed with the understanding of environ-
mental issues the children had developed from their
The letters announcing the availability of free THINK
relatively few THINK EARTH lessons.
EARTH K-3 school packs were mailed to 3,420 principals
and district superintendents across Southern California in
January 1991. Since then, more than 1,700 schools have
returned their cards to order the materials.
Usually, the schools receive their kits within 2 or 3
weeks. Principals are encouraged to introduce the
materials to all' K-3 teachers so they can work out a plan
for sharing the units for each grade level.
About This Newsletter
The THINK EARTH newsletter is published twice a year. It
features news about the latest THINK EARTH products and
provides ideas for successful partnerships in business and
education. In future issues, look for stories, about people
involved with THINK EARTH and for a special activity page for
Teachers Lori Forkin (left) and Dolores LaMore are
teachers. For more information about THINK EARTH or about
awarded THINK EARTH T-shirts following their class-
how to order school packs or THINK EARTH products, such as
tote bags, T-shirts, and badges, please call (213) 420-6814.
room demonstration at Canfield School Kick-off.
THINK EARTH
Environmental Education Program
Educational Development Specialists
5505 East Carson Street, Suite 250
Lakewood, CA 90713
What's Inside:
Distribution starts
Consortium members tell all
How to be a sponsor.
4
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative? What obstacles, environmental
or otherwise, does it overcome?
The Think Earth Program is distinctive because a broad spectrum of 15
environmental companies and agencies pooled their resources to develop and
distribute an environmental program for schools. With such a diverse group, a
major obstacle was agreeing on program content. It would have been easy to
develop 15 separate programs that reflected the specific interests of each
partner. However, out of this diversity a broad, unbiased curriculum was
developed. Also, pooling their resources, rather than working individually,
produced a higher quality program. This quality and the comprehensive nature of
the program makes it more acceptable and useful to schools.
4. What measurable environmental or conservation benefits has the partnership
produced?
The Think Earth K-3 program has reached 2,000 of the 3,500 elementary schools
in Southern California. More than 10,000 teachers have taught the units to nearly
500,000 students. The program has nationwide distribution and an estimated
500,000 students have been reached outside Southern California.
In field tests students averaged 58% on unit pretests (near-guessing level) and
nearly 90% on postests. Ninety-five percent said they liked the program and
would do more now to help the environment than prior to the program. Nearly all
of the teachers indicated they would teach the program again.
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by others and transferred to
other settings?
The environmental problems we face today are not isolated concerns that can be
solved by individual agencies. We need public support and education. The Think
Earth consortium is a practical, cost-effective organizational model for others.
Environmental agencies and companies around the country can join together to
pool resources to develop and distribute environmental education programs, or,
even more cost-effective, to distribute Think Earth. While consortium partners
had a "learn as you go" challenge in the area of distribution, they soon developed
feasible distribution options and other groups can benefit from their experience.
THINK EARTH Environmental Education Program
Outcome Summary for Each K-3 Unit
THINK EARTH 1%
Outcomes (Abridged)
Environmental Education Program
Unit Focus
Concepts
Skills
Behaviors
Kindergarten
Natural environment
Identify products made
Use only the paper towels,
(Conservation)
includes sun, air, land,
from trees
napkins, and other paper
K-3 Field Test Abstract
water, plants, animals.
Identify paper-saving and
products really needed
Trees provide many uses
litter-avoiding behaviors
Make sure all trash ends
Four environmental units for kindergarten through third grade being developed under the
and benefits, including
up in the trash can
Think Earth Project were field tested during May of 1990. The units were used with more
paper products.
Use only as much water as
Wasting paper and
than 1,000 students from 42 classrooms at 12 schools throughout Southern California.*
needed
littering can harm the
These schools represented a cross-section of the locations and socioeconomic levels found
environment.
in this region. Each unit contained the teacher and student materials needed to conduct 4
daily lessons on the unit's unit outcomes.
First Grade
The natural environment
Identify natural resource
Turn off unused lights,
(Conservation)
provides valuable re-
base of given products
televisions, and other.
The data collected during the field test focused primarily on 1) student achievement of unit
sources for us to live:
Identify resource-conser-
appliances when not being
outcomes, 2) student attitudes toward the units, 3) student behaviors related to the
We waste natural re-
vation behaviors
used
environment, and 4) teacher attitudes toward the units. Prior to teaching the units, teachers
sources in many ways in
Turn off water faucets
attended short orientation meetings conducted by field test site coordinators. Coordinators
our homes.
when finished and while
then held debriefing meetings with teachers at the end of the field test.
Our families can do many
brushing teeth
things to conserve natural
Close doors and windows
resources and produce
when heat or air condi-
Student achievement during the field test is summarized below:
less waste.
tioning are on
Grade Level
Classrooms
Pretest
Posttest
(X% Correct)
(X% Correct)
Second Grade
We use natural resources
Identify recyclable prod-
Save newspapers, alumi-
(Waste reduction)
to make many products.
ucts
num cans, glass, and
1.
12
72
89
When we bury our trash
Identify waste-reduction
plastic bottles for recy-
in landfills, the natural
behaviors
cling
2
13
69
90
resources are lost and
Keep reusable things or
3
6
54
82
can't be used-again.
give them away rather
Total 1-3
31
65
87
Recycling cans, bottles,
than put them in trash
newspapers, plastic, and
Use reusable rather than
Tests were net included at the kindergarten level
yard waste conserves
disposable plates, cups,
natural resources, saves
towels, and other items
energy, saves land, and
when possible
The pretests and posttests were constructed such that random guessing would result in
reduces pollution.
mean scores of 50 percent. Thus, the scores shown above represent little student knowledge
prior to instruction and mastery-level attainment of program outcomes after instruction.
Third Grade
Producing, distributing,
Identify ways air, water,
Walk or ride bike when
(Pollution control)
consuming, and disposing
and soil can become
possible instead of riding
of products all create
polluted
in car
waste that goes into our
Identify ways to help
Carpool or ride public
water, onto our land, and
minimize pollution
transportation when
into our air.
possible
Waste can and does
See that all trash, includ-
pollute the environment.
ing hazardous wastes, are
Air pollution from burn-
disposed of properly
ing fossil fuels is difficult
Conserve energy, water,
to control.
paper, and other resources
All of us can do things to
help control pollution.
The California
FORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY
State University
SAN BERNARDINO
May 15, 1992
The President's Environment and Conservation
Challenge Awards Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW.
Washington, D.C. 20503
Attention: Award References
I am an Educator Member of the Southern California Think Earth
SCHOOL
Environmental Education Consortium. As such I was, and am, directly
OF
involved as an education advisor in the development of the Think Earth
curriculum.
EDUCATION
The working partnership among the various energy-related and educational
members of the consortium greatly contributed to the effectiveness and
80-8600
success of the Think Earth program. We were a team consisting of the
scholar (educator members), the curriculum maker (Educational Development
Specialists), the teacher (some consortium representatives and educator
members), the evaluator (entire consortium), and the student (field-test
participants).
The job of the educational advisors was to review program content and form
and to ensure its "teachability." People sometimes underestimate the
importance of the instructional products teachers are given to teach
environmental education. High quality, effective programs are critical
because what happens between teachers and students in the classroom really
determines what students actually learn and whether they acquire
environmentally supportive attitudes and behaviors.
Because the Think Earth curriculum is based on the sound instructional
technology of objective-based instruction, field-testing, analysis of
achievement data, and revision, it promotes student learning in a
measurable way. The result is that teachers indicate they will use this
program again and again because of the positive environmental attitudes
and behaviors that the students acquire.
5500 University Parkway, San Bernardino, CA 92407-2897
MAY-15-'92 FRI 15:13 ID:CSUSB HD110
ICL
Page 2
The President's Environment and Conservation Challenge
Awards Council on Environmental Quality
It is gratifying to be involved with an organization such as the
consortium that is providing sound environmental education to our schools
in an effective, efficient, and professional manner.
Sincerely,
Dailer Stones
Dr. Darleen Stoner
Professor, Environmental Education and
Director, Environmental Education Resource Center
CITY OF Los ANGELES
CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
DEPARTMENT OF
COMMISSION
ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
MARILYN M. MORTON
PRESIDENT
LILLIAN Y. KAWASAKI
GARY R. AYALA
GENERAL MANAGER
VICE-PRESIDENT
200 N. SPRING ST.
ROOM 1500. MS 177
LOS ANGELES, CA 90012
ROBERT L. BURKETT
(213) 237-0462
BARBARA MIYAMOTO
TOM BRADLEY
JILL L. RATNER
MAYOR
May 15, 1992
President's Environment and Conservation
Challenge Awards Program
Attention: Awards References
The White House Council on Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place, N.W.
Washington, DC 20503
Subject:
Think Earth Environmental Education Program
Dear Selection Committee Members:
I am pleased to support the Think Earth Environmental Education Program, an excellent
curriculum due to its comprehensive, interactive format. However, what may be most significant about
hink Earth is its evolution and creation.
The development of Think Earth was a unique collaborative effort of Southern Californian water
agencies, energy companies, air quality boards, and waste management districts, and educators from
Southern California school districts, colleges, and universities. This consortium of agencies, companies,
and educators is a public-private partnership in every sense of the term. By identifying the need for
this curriculum, and establishing a common goal, the consortium worked together to sponsor Think
Earth - a special environmental education program.
Consortium member representatives were active participants in the development of the
instructional materials, activities, and accompanying videos; each consortium member also contributed
financially to the program. By pooling ideas, resources, and finances the consortium produced a high-
quality set of instructional materials. This consortium serves as a model of cooperation and
collaboration. The results an excellent environmental education program made available at no cost
to Southern California schools - may be the best measurement of the Think Earth consortium's success!
I highly recommend Think Earth as deserving of the President's Environment and Conservation
Challenge Awards. I commend the consortium for developing a program that approaches the
environment in a comprehensive way while teaching behaviors to conserve resources and minimize
pollution. If I may be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at (213) 237-0352.
Sincerely,
Lillian Y. Kawasaki
General Manager
-
AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION
EMPLOYER
Recyclable and made from recycled waste.
Linda Peck
Brywood Elementary School
Irvine Unified School District
No. 1 Westwood
Irvine, CA 92720
April 28, 1992
The President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, DC 20503
Attention: Award References
Last year, I field tested the Think Earth second-grade unit. The teacher's guide provided all
the necessary directions and an ample amount of lesson. guidance.
My class used the resource cards for a trash sack activity, sorting and classifying recyclable
and non-recyclable items as well as those that were replaceable and non-replaceable. The
accompanying video was popular; students asked to see it many times during the unit. We
tried activities suggested in the guide, such as drawing pictures to go with creative writing,
eventually making a classroom book that was read over and over.
Story cards were also a treat for students. After reading the cards as a class, students wrote
their own stories about the characters Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. As well, students
delighted in looking at the large, colorful poster that we hung in the classroom, discussing
details with one another.
When my second graders began the Think Earth program, students scored 50-60 percent on
the accompanying environmental pretest. After two weeks of activities, however, every child
scored between 80-100 percent on a posttest. As a concluding activity, children made
sculptures from trash and displayed them for parents at our school's open house. As I
wandered the halls during the event, I overheard numerous Think Earth exchanges. I can't
wait to begin the third-grade unit now that I'm teaching a new level.
Sincerely,
Lunda Peck
Linda Peck
Teacher
Application Summary
ID: Number: P.077
Project:
New England Electric/Conservation Law Collaborative Effort
Contact:
Ms. Mary H. Smith
New England Electric System
25 Research Drive
Telephone:
Westboro, MA 01582-
(508) 366-6551
Summary:
The unlikely union of an electric utility (NEES) and an
environmental group (CLF) has resulted in two major
achievements: the development of one of the nation's most
successful energy conservation programs and regulatory
approval for a utility earnings incentive. The "power plant
that conservation built" significantly reduced the utility's
carbon dioxide emissions and the need for new capacity. Only
in partnership could these results have been achieved.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
Very impressive partnership between former adversaries --
electric utility and environmental groups. Partnership
revolutionized rate-making in 3-state region, serving as a
model for entire U.S. Tremendous environmental benefits, as
well as educational value. Only weakness in the application
was lack of explanation of future goals, plans. Results
well-quantified.
NEES, through its collaborative effort with CLF, took on the
challenge of instituting a massive energy efficiency program
to reduce energy consumption. Proven that energy efficiency
programs can greatly reduce the amount of CO2 emmitted into
the atmosphere and at those measures can be cost effective.
Programs are essential to reducing emissions of global warming
pollution, and the effort serves as model to be replicated.
However, it should be noted the NEES program is only the most
publicized of a number of energy efficiency programs
instituted by northeast utilities and environmental groups.
Because NEES took initiative and because it was completed
first, it can be looked upon as a model for utilities around
the nation to replicate. But a number of other northeast
utilities stand with NEES head and shoulders above other
utilities around the nation.
P.O77
#5.) Four years ago, New England Electric System companies (NEES) and the
Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) embarked on an unlikely joint venture the
union of electric utility and environmental group. At a time when utilities across
the country were finding it difficult to build new power plants, groups such as the
CLF were effectively arguing that energy conservation, not new power plants,
should provide the needed capacity. Formed as an alternative to working out their
differences within the regulatory arena, the partnership resulted in the
implementation of the largest, most comprehensive, cost-effective conservation
program in the nation in proportion to the utility's size.
Hoping to bridge their differences, officials from NEES and the CLF met for
lunch in 1988 and sketched out a proposed collaborative on a paper napkin. The
unceremonious meeting began one of the nation's most innovative and successful
partnerships. Challenged with the joint goal to lessen environmental impacts
through conservation, NEES and the CLF developed an agreement which
committed the utility to a substantial increase in conservation spending (up to $40
million that first year).
NEES, in cooperation with the CLF, developed a comprehensive series of
cost-effective new energy conservation programs for its commercial, industrial and
residential customers. The partnership heralded a new era in utility-sponsored
energy-efficiency efforts.
Subsequently, improvements within the partnership evolved. A primary
concern of NEES was the ability of the utility to maintain such a high level of
funding for its conservation programs without jeopardizing the company's overall
financial stability. NEES' options involved slowing the development of its
conservation and load management (C&LM) program to an average utility level, or
gambling that a truly first-class level would yield a sound regulatory response
allowing the utility to profit from its efforts. Again, NEES and the CLF rolled up
their sleeves. The result was another breakthrough.
In the fall of 1989, NEES and the CLF jointly filed in each of the three states
NEES serves, a proposal for a new C&LM program which would be the largest in
the nation proportionate to NEES' size. NEES proposed to spend $65 million on its
C&LM efforts in 1990 and asked the regulatory agencies in the three states to
allow NEES to share in the savings that its conservation expenditures would save
its customers. All three states approved variations of the NEES/CLF incentive
proposal. For the first time in the region's history, an electric utility was allowed
to earn a return on its conservation expenses at the state level. The action
assured the continuation of utility-sponsored conservation programs and increased
investment on NEES' part. In 1991, despite flat electricity demand and a national
recession, NEES spent $92 million and proposed to spend $108 million in 1992.
The NEES/CLF partnership continues on a day-to-day basis to support these
efforts.
Clearly, the NEES/CLF partnership has been a win-win situation for all
concerned - NEES, its customers, the CLF, and the environment. More than 550
gigawatthours (GWH), or enough power to supply 80,000 households for one year,
was saved. The "power plant that conservation built" has already displaced the
need to burn fossil fuels saving approximately 320 million pounds of carbon
dioxide emissions. By 2000, NEES expects its efforts to supplant the need for 800
megawatts (MW) of generation and to contribute to an overall 45 percent
reduction in net weighted air emissions. Without their partnership, NEES and the
CLF could not have achieved the same results.
#6.)
A-1.) Partnership members include:
New England Electric System companies (NEES), a public utility holding company
headquartered in Westborough, Mass, whose subsidiaries serve more than 1.2
million customers in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Hampshire, and
The Conservation Law Foundation of New England (CLF), a Boston-based, non-
profit environmental group.
The role of both organizations is to work jointly toward the promotion of
conservation and load management (C&LM) efforts. Individually, NEES is
responsible for the development and implementation of its programs and the CLF
serves as a review board for existing and future programs. Both groups have
expertise in the design and implementation of conservation programs.
A-2.) The partnership's objective is to deliver to NEES' customers in all market
sectors a complete package of comprehensive, cost-effective C&LM programs. A
sustainable plan of action for meeting these needs has been established and
involves an on-going review process. A working relationship exists to review and
revise all C&LM activity on an on-going basis. NEES also funds a team of expert
advisors, with experience in energy efficiency investment programs around the
nation, identified by and working for the CLF. New programs as well as existing
ones are continually under review by the partners.
A-3.) Forged by two natural adversaries, the NEES/CLF partnership is a unique
joint venture. Prior to the partnership, the region's utilities looked warily upon the
CLF since the group held a naturally opposing view on the issue of energy policy.
NEES was a pioneer in its attempt to bridge these differences wagering a
partnership could be mutually beneficial. Compromise, rather than regulatory
battle, yielded a win-win situation for all concerned -- NEES, its customers, the
CLF, and the environment. By working together rather than individually, a
successful multi-million dollar conservation program became a reality.
A-4.) The partnership's four-year effort has to-date saved more than 550
gigawatthours (GWH) of energy which is enough power to supply 80,000
households for one year. The effort also displaced the need for 227 megawatts
(MW) of peak capacity, increasing the system's reliability. In addition, the energy
savings reduced the need to burn fossil fuels eliminating approximately 320 million
pounds of carbon dioxide emissions. The savings also represent more than $450
million in value to NEES customers.
A-5.) All aspects of the partnership could be used today as a model for other
electric utilities. By drawing upon four years of NEES' experience, other utilities
can begin their efforts ahead of the game, able to model not only similar
partnerships, but also a successful array of conservation programs. In addition to
serving as a model for other utilities, the CLF partnership also served as a model
for NEES itself during the development of the utility's new environmental initiative,
NEESPLAN 3. Based on the structure of the CLF partnership, NEES created an
environmental collaborative including members of the environmental, consumer,
business and academic communities to focus on other environmental goals of the
utility to be achieved during the next decade. Clearly, the CLF partnership serves
as a useful model for other utilities, and left a lasting impression on NEES itself.
P.O
6. A-D: Please answer only the following Award cri
Application Form-1992
questions pertaining to the specific Award category
which you are applying. (For example: Partnership car
Please read the application form carefully and provide all information
answer questions A1-A5; EQM, B1-B7; Innovation, C1-
requested. Please type or print clearly. Supplementary pages should
Education, D1-D5).
follow the format of this form as closely as possible. Incomplete applica
tions will not be considered.
Answers should be clear, concise and should empha
quantifiable results or benefits of the program. Each
1. Select the Award category for which you are competing:
answer to a sub-question should not exceed 100 wo:
(Note: A program may be entered in only one category. See descriptions of
Taken as a whole, all answers to criteria questions S
categories in Question 6.)
not exceed two pages.
(01)
Partnership
A. PARTNERSHIP: awarded to diverse organizatio
(02)
Environmental Quality Management
groups that have fostered cooperative approaches to
(03)
Innovation
ronmental needs at the local, regional, or national I.
(04) Education and Communication
1. Who are the partnership's members? What are
2. Name of the project or program described in this application:
roles? What resources do they bring to the partne
New England Electric Conservation Law Foundation
Collaborative Effort
2. What are the partnership's specific environme
3. Name of Award Applicant(s): (Use separate sheet, if needed)
conservation objectives? Has a sustainable plan
certed action for meeting these needs been establ
Mr. Mrs. X Ms. Miss Dr.
Name: Cheryl A. LaFleur
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovati
What obstacles, environmental or otherwise, do
Vice President
overcome?
Title:
4. What measurable environmental or conservat.
Organization: New England Electric System
benefits has the partnership produced?
Street:
25 Research Drive
5. What aspects of the partnership can be model
City: Westboro
State:
MA
Zip:
01582
others and transferred to other settings?
Telephone: (508) 366-9011
Fax: (508) 366-6551
B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMEI
awarded to organizations which have demonstrat
environmental values can be integrated into soun
4. Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
agement decisions and objectives. (Note: This cate
reflects broad-based organizational approaches. Sᵢ
Mr. Mrs. XMs. Miss Dr.
programs or projects may be more appropriate for ,
Name: Mary H. Smith
in one of the other three award categories.)
Title:
Coordinator
1. What are the organization's environmental pc
and objectives?
Organization:
New England Electric System
2. How has the organization's top management
25 Research Drive
demonstrated commitment to these policies and
Street:
tives? Do the policies demonstrate commitment
City: Westboro
State: MA
Zip:
01582
beyond legal compliance?
3. What are the organization's environmental sta
Telephone: (508) 366-9011
Fax:
(508) 366-6551
dards for its product(s) and operations? (Explain
they go beyond legal constraints and how they relate
NOTE: The Selection Committee will rely heavily on Questions 5-6 in
agement control mechanisms.)
determining how well the application meets the award criteria.
5. Please attach a one-page (not to exceed 500 words) summary, suitable
4. How are these policies and objectives incorpo)
for publication, which provides a complete overview of the application.
the: a) Day-to-day management of the organization;
The one-page response should be clear, concise, and should emphasize
nization's decision-making about research and develo
quantifiable results or benefits of the program.
long-range planning, capital, and operating budgets?
5. How are these policies and objectives reflected in the orga-
NOTE: The following questions are for informational purposes.
nization's relationships with employees, customers, suppliers,
7. How long has the technology, program, project or service been
and the general public?
operational?
4 Years
6. What are the organization's control mechanisms that give
decision makers objective data to measure continuous perfor-
8. Which of the following most accurately describes the appli-
mance improvement toward its short- and long-term environ-
cant(s)? (Check more than one, if applicable.)
mental objectives?
(01) National Business or Industry
7. What quantifiable, sustained environmental quality results
(02) X Regional or Local Business or Industry
in products and processes have resulted from the organiza-
(03) National Nonprofit Organization or Foundation
tion's environmental approach?
(04) Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05) Local or State Government/Government Agency
(06) Educational Organization
C. INNOVATION-awarded to individuals, organizations and
(07) Voluntary Civic Organization
groups who have demonstrated exceptional creativity or pio-
(08) Trade or Professional Society
neered new approaches in the development and/or execution of
(09)
Youth Organization
technologies, programs, projects, or services that are environ-
(10)
Labor Organization
mentally sound and economically sensible?
(11) Individual
(12) Other (Please describe):
1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or
service?
9. If business or industry, which of the following best describes
the type of business or industry?
2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinc-
tive or innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or other-
(01)
Agriculture/Forestry
wise, does it overcome?
(02)
Aerospace
(03)
Communications
3. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior
(04) Construction
to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a
(05)
Electronics/Computers
problem for which no solutions previously existed?
(06) Energy
(07) Engineering
4. Can the technology, program, project or service be replicated
(08) Environmental Services
in an economically feasible manner?
(09)
Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10) Manufacturing-Chemical
5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental ben-
(11)
Manufacturing-Other
efits or results of the technology, program, project, or service?
(12)
Mining
(13)
Recreation
(14) Trade-Wholesale
D. EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION-awarded to indi-
(15)
Transportation
viduals, organizations, or groups which have developed educa-
(16) X Utilities-Electric, Gas or Electric
tional or informational programs that inspire respect for the
(17)
Other (Please describe):
environment and raise the public's environmental literacy.
10. Which of the following most accurately describes the environ-
1. What is the program? What are its environmental or conser-
mental program under consideration for an award? (Check more
vation objectives?
than one, if applicable.)
2. Who is the program's audience? How large is the audience?
(01)
agriculture
How is the program's effect on the audience determined?
(02) air quality
(03) X conservation
3. What is original or distinctive about the program?
(04) education-general public
(05) education-academic
4. What are the measurable results or benefits produced by the
(06)
energy
program? How does the program promote the development
(07) environmental quality management
of an environmental ethic and make a positive contribution to
(08) forestry
environmental awareness?
(09) hazardous waste remediation
(10) international
5. How can the program be used or modeled by others?
(11) natural resources
(12) pollution control
14. Please indicate which of the following are the primary audi-
(13) recreation
ences, beneficiaries, or users of the program or service, and esti-
(14) recycling
mate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
(15) solid waste
(16) source reduction/pollution prevention
Type
How Many People
(17) water quality
(18) wetlands
(01) Business or Industry
(19) wildlife and fish resources
(02) Trade or Professional Society
(20) Other (Please describe):
(03) Government
(04) Educational Organizations
11. If applicable, list the sources of the program's support and the
(05) Youth
percentage of support provided, including grants and in-kind
(06) Community or Public Interest Groups
contributions of goods and services. (Use separate sheet if needed).
(07) Local Community or Local Public
(08) General Public
Source
NA
%
(09) Employees
(10) Customers or Clients
1.2 Milli
Source
%
(11) Other (Please describe):
Source
%
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project,
or conservation awards in the past five years?
including approximate value of in-kind contributions of goods
No
and services:
$
Approximately $400,000
13. If the project is ongoing, what is the annual cost?
$
Approximately $350,000/yr
16. In one paragraph (not to exceed 50 words), please summarize the program, its objectives and what it has accomplished. Use space
provided below. This paragraph should be suitable for use in a catalog, database or brochure.
#16) The unlikely union of an electric utility (NEES) and an environmental group
(CLF) has resulted in two major achievements: the development of one of the
nation's most successful energy conservation programs and regulatory approval for
a utility earnings incentive. The "power plant that conservation built" significantly
reduced the utility's carbon dioxide emissions and the need for new capacity. Only
in partnership could these results have been achieved.
17. Please include 3 one-page letters of recommendation attached
How to Apply
to the application when it is submitted for consideration. Letters
should be addressed: "Attention: Award References." References
Completed applications must be postmarked
should have first-hand knowledge of the environmental program,
by May 22, 1992 and mailed to the:
service, or technology and should offer a candid evaluation of its
The President's Environment and
success or effectiveness. References may also include users or
Conservation Challenge Awards
beneficiaries of your program.
Council on Environmental Quality
NOTE: Letters of recommendation must accompany the applica-
The White House
tion when it is submitted to CEQ. Letters sent directly to CEQ
722 Jackson Place, NW
will not be considered. Please list the references in the spaces
Washington, DC 20503
below.
All information submitted with the application should be
Name: Mary Kilmarx
considered public information and becomes property of
the President's Challenge Awards program.
Title: Director of Energy, Policy & Plng.
Award recipients will be notified in Fall 1992. Recipients
Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission must be willing to assist the President's Challenge Awards
Street: 100 Orange Street
program in making nonproprietary information about
City: Providence
State: RI
Zip:
02903
their environmental programs available to others who
wish to replicate their success.
Telephone: (401) 277-3500 Fax: (401) 277-6805
Application Format
Name:
Henry Lee
Please submit one original and four photocopies of your
application. You may include up to 10 pages of supporting
Title:
Executive Director
materials. (NOTE: Photocopying both sides of a sheet of
Harvard University
paper will be considered two-pages.) Any oversized items
79 J.F.K. St. Belfer Bldg. Rm 302
must be reduced to fit a standard 8.5" X 11" page format.
Street:
City: Cambridge
State:
MA
Zip:
02138
Supporting materials may include items such as brochures,
photographs, press clippings, and graphs depicting the
Telephone: (617) 495-1350 Fax: (617) 495-1635
program's results. The materials may not be used as a
substitute for written responses to Questions 5 and 6.
Name: Janet G. Besser
The order of pages in the submitted application should be
as follows:
Manager, Energy Planning
1. 4-page application (Questions 1-20)
Title:
New Hampshire Public Commission
2. 500-word overview summary (Question 5)
Street: 8 Old Suncook Road
3. 2-page responses to criteria questions (Question 6)
4. 10 pages of supporting materials
City: Concord
State: NH
Zip: 03301
5. 3 letters of recommendation (Question 17)
Telephone: (603) 271-6047 Fax: (603) 271-3878
NOTE: The entire package should be stapled in the upper,
left-hand corner. Any items sent over the 10-page limit of
supporting materials will be disregarded and not reviewed
by the technical evaluators and selection committee. Do
18. Please sign below to indicate that all applicants agree a) to
not put the application or backup materials into a binder,
abide by the rules and requirements of the awards competition,
notebook or plastic cover.
and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the
best of their knowledge.
OMB Control No. 0331-0002, (Exp. 2/95): As required by the
Signature: Side
Date: 5/22/92
Paperwork Reduction Act, CEQ estimates that completion of this
application will take 10 hours. Send comments regarding the col-
Demand
Title: VP- Management Organization: Power service Co.
New England
lection of this information, including suggestions for reducing the
paperwork burden, to CEQ and also to: Paperwork Reduction Pro-
ject, Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and
Telephone: 508-366-9011
Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., 20503
printed on recycled paper containing more than 50% post-consumer waste
Figure 1.5.1.
NEES Companies Cumulative DSM Expenditures (1)
And Installed Savings 1987 - 1991
300
250
242
227
Cumulative Millions $ or Summer Peak MW
200
175
150
150
125
I-5-3
100
78
72
50
37
28
13
0
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991 (2)
Year
Spending ($ Millions)
MW Installs
(1) Expenditures include all DSM R&D and planning costs as well as DSM implementation and evaluation spending for the NEES Companies.
(2) 1991 cumulative installed savings include premliminary estimates of savings installed in 1991, which have not yet been adjusted for 1991 evaluation results.
In addition, 1991 savings reflect a 7.6 MW decrease in savings available through Cooperative Interruptible Service.
DSM Spending
At New England Electric
1979
0
1979 NEESPLAN
1980
1
- Initial commitment
1981
4
to conservation
1982
3
1983
3
Mid-1980's begin collaboration
Year
1984
5
with Conservation Law Foundation
1985
4
1986
7
1987 "Partners in Energy Planning"
1987
13
1988
25
1989 Incentives approved
1989
41
1990
71
Largest DSM effort in nation
1991
92
as proportion of revenue
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
$ Spent (millions)
Making Conservation
Pay:
The NEES Experience
In New England, utilities and regulators are
forging a new regulatory compact - one which
builds on the old model, but recognizes the need
for different forms of compensation for different
kinds of service.
John W. Rowe
John Rowe is president, chief execu-
tive officer, and a director of New En-
gland Electric System. Prior to
I
n recent months, the companies
clude with an observation about
joining NEES in February 1989, Mr.
of the New England Electric
applying this experience to other
Rowe served as president and CEO of
System¹ have gained modest noto-
areas of utility regulation.
Central Maine Power, during which
riety for the size and scope of the
time he redirected the company's re-
conservation and load manage-
I. Initial Experience
source policies and restored
ment program ("C&LM") we
its balance sheet.
NEES began encouraging
offer to our customers. We have
Before joining CMP in 1984, he
C&LM in 1979 with NEESPLAN,
served as senior vice president of law
gained almost as much attention
our strategic plan, due to the in-
for Conrail, and prior to that was a
for the incentive systems which
creasing cost of new power plants
partner at the Chicago law firm of
make these programs a sound
and increasing environmental op-
Isham, Lincoln & Beale, where he
business opportunity.
position to those facilities.² These
served as lead counsel in restructur-
Here, I shall describe the devel-
early efforts were low-cost and ex-
ing of a major railroad. Mr. Rowe is a
opment of C&LM at NEES and
graduate of the University of Wiscon-
perimental, consistent with what
sin and the University of Wisconsin
identify some of the problems
has become known as the "no los-
Law School, where he was a member
that the regulators of Massachu-
ers" or price minimization test.
of Phi Beta Kappa and Order of
setts, Rhode Island, and New
(The cost of conservation must
the Coif.
Hampshire have solved. I shall
not exceed the difference between
also identify several problems we
the utility's avoided cost and its
have not eliminated, and con-
retail price for electricity.)
18
The Electricity Journal
In the mid-1980s, the New En-
Our alternatives were slowing
gland states instituted the current
the development of C&LM to an
"full avoided cost" or "total bill
average utility level or choosing
minimization" approach (the cost
to believe that a first-class effort
of conservation must be less than
would yield a sound regulatory
the avoided cost of electricity).³
response. Several regulators had
Accordingly, my predecessor,
indicated willingness to consider
Samuel Huntington, began to in-
more favorable financial systems
crease the scale of our C&LM ef-
in order to speed implementation.
fort, working with a leading New
Working with Doug Foy and
England environmental group,
Armond Cohen of CLF, we chose
the Conservation Law Founda-
the riskier but more promising
tion (CLF).
course.
When the C&LM
When Iy arrived at NEES in
1989, the C&LM bud-
II. 1989: The Second Level
get had risen to $40 million, pro-
In 1989, NEES committed itself
budget had risen to
voking serious concern about
to becoming the nation's best con-
$40 million, we had
NEES' ability to continue the ef-
servation utility and asked the
serious concerns about
fort. On the one hand, the public
regulators to respond. NEES and
policies were clear and NEES has
CLF proposed a $65 million
NEES' ability to
a tradition of exceptional respon-
C&LM program (nearly 4% of
continue the effort.
siveness to those policies. On the
1989 revenues), and jointly re-
other hand, conservation expendi-
quested that the NEES companies
tures at this cutting-edge level
be awarded a share in the savings
posed serious business risks with-
expected to be generated. In De-
out offsetting rewards.
cember 1989, the Rhode Island
1:00
As the author has jokingly observed, "the rat has to smell the cheese."
(Drawing courtesy of New England Electric System.)
19
December 1990
Public Utilities Commission gave
this effort its first, essential en-
III. Utility Conservation
dorsement. The Rhode Island
Disincentives
Commission found:
Given the obvious environmen-
The C&LM approach submit-
tal advantages of conservation
ted in this docket is innova-
and the regulatory enthusiasm for
tive, comprehensive, and bold
such efforts, it is useful to under-
in its expectations of reducing
energy consumption and con-
stand why utilities have been re-
sequently avoiding or defer-
luctant to finance major commit-
ring the need for new genera-
ments. Lest we utility executives
tion facilities. The Commis-
be thought stubborn and peevish
sion reiterates its support for
(which we sometimes are and
Each of the states we
C&LM programs, and awaits
sometimes ought to be ), I turn to
results of this experiment.4
serve has set the
the Downeast druid, David
A
S described below, Massa-
Moskovitz. Moskovitz points out
foundation piers for
chusetts and New Hamp-
that for utilities, demand-reduc-
shire also approved incentive sys-
maximum utility
ing investments generally mean:
tems in 1990.5 Now, each of the
conservation efforts:
1. Slow and uncertain recovery
states we serve has set the founda-
of costs;
(1) an adequate incen-
tion piers for maximum utility
2. Lost base revenues; and
conservation efforts: (1) an ade-
tive and (2) current
3. Lack of direct profit opportu-
quate incentive and (2) current re-
nity.⁶
recovery of conserva-
covery of conservation expendi-
To these problems I must add
tures.
tion expenditures.
several more:
NEES hopes that its 1990
4. Conservation expenditures
C&LM incentives will contribute
beyond the "no losers" test in-
about $7 million to its bottom line
crease electricity rates.
over 1990 and 1991. With this pos-
5. Few businesses or bureaucra-
itive signal from our regulators,
cies wish to shrink their opportu-
NEES and CLF have proposed
nities. (Yes, Virginia, it really is
that 1991 C&LM expenditures
un-American.)
rise to $85 million or about 5% of
6. It is difficult to explain C&LM
1990 revenues, which we believe
to customers and employees if it
makes ours the largest program in
is not profitable.
the nation considering the size of
W
hile the importance of
the NEES system.
these concerns is obvious,
Most noteworthy of all, we are
a few general observations will re-
expanding our commitment
inforce them. Conservation is not
when we project demand to fall
a natural business niche for utili-
by nearly 2%. The 1990 program
ties. Conservation involves equip-
is expected to realize about $150
ment we do not make, which is in-
million savings in terms of the
stalled on property we do not
avoided costs of power. The 1991
own, and requires kinds of work
program is planned to save an-
where we have no natural advan-
other $150 million, with greater
tage. Conservation increases the
emphasis on residential conserva-
cost of the commodity we like to
tion.
20
The Electricity Journal
make (raising concerns of compe-
rate structure of our FERC-regu-
tition and by-pass), aggravates in-
lated wholesale power subsidiary,
equities among customers, and re-
New England Power Company.
duces base revenues, particularly
While the profit opportunity and
in historic test-year jurisdictions.
current recovery do not end the
While some utilities are investing
fear of undercutting our business,
in energy service subsidiaries, I
they certainly help live us with it.
have yet to meet a utility CEO
Credibility with customers is also
who believes this area to be a
greatly increased.
large and enduring business op-
T
he C&LM incentive proposal
portunity.
NEES developed with Con-
servation Law Foundation had
IV. Overcoming the
four basic components:
Most noteworthy of
Disincentives
-Value guaranteed to the
N
EES set out to deal with as
customers;
all, we are expanding
many of these specific con-
-Shared savings for the com-
our commitment when
cerns as possible and then to de-
pany;
we project demand to
velop a business philosophy
-Payment only for perfor-
which would put conservation at
mance; and
fall by nearly 2%.
the center of our work.
-Agreement on the technical
First, we requested prompt and
parameters for one year.
certain cost recovery through an
First, guaranteed value means
estimated charge and fuel clause-
the customers would not have to
type balancing account, squarely
bear costs for C&LM which ex-
meeting the first obstacle. Cur-
ceed the value of achieved electric-
rent recovery also alleviates the
ity savings.
utility's concern about price im-
Second, the amount which the
pacts because the programs and
company would earn would be a
the rate designs can be altered
share of the value created. Our
quickly if by-pass becomes a prob-
earnings would grow only if the
lem. Customers receive a more
customer's benefit grew. (Figure
correct signal about long-term
1 graphically illustrates this point.)
price trends. By contrast, rate bas-
Third, plans are fine, but the
ing, the principal alternative to
company would earn something
current cost recovery, aggravates
only to the extent that real installa-
the cost per kilowatthour concern
tions were achieved.
and reduces our flexibility.
F
ourth, the technical parame-
Next, we requested shared-sav-
ters in the value calculation
ings-based incentives to create the
would be open for all to see and
profit opportunity which had
review. The parameters would be
been missing. The incentives pro-
agreed upon for a year and would
posed were large enough to erase
then be updated with real experi-
the lost revenue problem, particu-
ence.
larly when coupled with a reve-
The original proposal was struc-
nue adjustment mechanism
tured to keep attention focused on
which has been included in the
two objectives: (1) increasing the
December 1990
21
FIGURE 1: C&LM Incentive
Distribution Costs
Customer Benefit
Line Losses
Utility Incentive
NEES
Generating Costs
Contractors
The amount which the
Total Value of
-
Program Cost
=
Net Value
company would earn
Avoided Costs
would be a share of the
The NEES incentive structure is based on the difference between the value of
conservation and its cost. The incentive allocates over 80% of net value to customers.
value created. Our
earnings would grow
size of the accomplishments in
The Massachusetts Department
only if the customer's
kilowatts and kilowatthours
of Public Utilities chose to base
saved, and; (2) increasing cost- ef-
the incentive directly on the num-
benefit grew.
fectiveness.
ber of lifetime kilowatts and
T
he first objective gave rise to
kilowatthours that would be
the Maximizing Incentive,
saved by each C&LM installation,
which was proposed as a 5%
without calculation of avoided
share of the total avoided cost
cost. The Department established
value. The second led to the Effi-
two bonus rates to be awarded for
ciency Incentive, which was pro-
each kilowatt or kilowatthour
posed as a 10% share of the net
saved over a set threshold. More-
value after deducting program
over, the savings must be estab-
and other costs.
lished through after-the-fact eval-
uation.⁸
V. Regulatory Response
The New Hampshire Public
As New England Electric's re-
Utilities Commission adopted the
tail subsidiaries are located in
shared savings approach, includ-
three states, we knew that each
ing a Maximizing and Efficiency
commission would refine our pro-
Incentive. The commission re-
posed incentives to match their
quested a thorough assessment of
public policy goals.
the Maximizing Incentive after a
The Rhode Island Public Utili-
year in operation.⁹
ties Commission adopted both
Table 1 summarizes these incen-
the Maximizing Incentive and the
tive systems in more detail.
Efficiency Incentive, but required
As Table 1 illustrates, the maxi-
that half of the work be done
mum possible incentive for 1990
without profit before the incentive
C&LM programs is between $7
takes effect.⁷
and $8 million, which is approxi-
22
The Electricity Journal
mately 10% of the estimated sav-
and bill minimization will remain.
ings to the customer and less than
Some customers will inevitably re-
one-half of one percent of the sys-
ceive less C&LM services than
tem revenues. Incentives, there-
others. Also, once any customer
fore, can be very powerful while
has received a program or done
very cheap to the consumer.
conservation work itself, it ceases
to be a service or "total bill" custo-
VI. Remaining Problems
mer and becomes again a com-
Of course, several fundamental
modity- or price-driven customer.
issues remain. Customer conser-
The copybook headings Joskow
vation has not kept pace with op-
and Ruff have invoked may be
portunities, in part because elec-
sleeping gods, but they are not
tric rates have been low and
dead. 10
The dichotomy
stable (at least in New England).
Rising real costs are likely in the
S
econd, we still know very little
between rate and bill
about the supply and demand
1990s. While this will induce
curves for C&LM, which will be
minimization will
customers to take conservation
affected by a number of different
remain. The copybook
more seriously, it may also induce
factors. Today there are many op-
more objections to including
portunities for sound C&LM in-
headings Joskow and
C&LM costs in rates.
vestments. Tomorrow may offer
Ruff have invoked may
The dichotomy between rate
even more such opportunities
be sleeping gods, but
they are not dead.
TABLE 1: New England Electric System
1990 C&LM Incentive Summary ($ millions)
Granite
New
Mass.
Narragansett
State
England
NEES
Electric
Electric
Electric
Power
System
1990 Incentive-approved
$5.3
$1.7
$0.4
None
$7.4
sought
in 1990
Total Value of
$106
$31
$4.1
$12
$154
Conserved Electricity
Direct Cost of Program
$ 37
$11
$1.4
$ 6
$ 56
Other Costs-Customer
$ 8
$ 2
$0.3
$ 0
$ 10
& Planning/evaluation
Net Savings for
$ 56
$17
$2.4
$ 6
$ 80
Customers-"dividend"
Incentive Type
Fixed unit
Shared
Shared
bonus:
Savings:
Savings:
$8.35/kWh
91%
83%
$.00305/kWh
Customers
Customers
9% Company
17% Com-
pany
Threshold before
50%
6MW of 12.9
None
Incentive Begins
kW & kWh
MW Target
Targets
December 1990
23
due to advancing technologies, or
significant, they must not be al-
fewer because the most readily
lowed to obscure the magnitude
available improvements have
of the accomplishments wrought
been made. Increasingly,
by Rhode Island, Massachusetts
customers ought to select more ef-
and New Hampshire (and, of
ficient conservation technologies.
course, separately in Wisconsin,
However, the problem of "free rid-
New York, and California).¹¹
ers," who use utility subsidies to
With current recovery and a fair
make C&LM improvements they
opportunity for profit, our states
would have made anyway, may
have made C&LM a real business
increase.
for the NEES companies. As a re-
M
oreover, consumers have a
sult, NEES is expanding the
Symmetry between
higher discount rate for
nation's largest C&LM program
C&LM than utilities have for sup-
during a recession.
risk and reward ought
ply-side investments, making it
More than this, conservation is
to be a minimum
difficult to compare these invest-
moving from an intimidating
measure of a utility's
ments. Who is wrong, and why?
duty to the heart of a strategy for
In order better to understand
dealing with the inevitable envi-
rights.
these issues, we need to monitor
ronmental effects of electric
and evaluate closely the current
power production, as CLF and
generation of C&LM programs.
the regulators have long envi-
NEES and CLF consider this
sioned. This is reflected in the cur-
work the critical next step in their
rent draft of our corporate vision
collaboration.
statement:
Third, the reasonableness of in-
The NEES companies will pro-
centives still is assessed tacitly in
vide the highest value in elec-
relation to return on rate base,
tric service for the costs in-
curred and the natural
with the magic word "symmetry"
resources consumed or af-
appearing from time to time.
fected. We will accomplish
Symmetry between risk and re-
this through the efforts of all
ward ought to be a minimum
employees by continuously
measure of a utility's rights. Sym-
improving to meet the chang-
metrical incentives are not an op-
ing expectations of our
customers.
portunity unless this "symmetry"
can be skewed by performance
Utility conservation programs
within the utility's capabilities.
are an experiment in public policy
Utilities, like other businesses,
making. Thanks to proper finan-
ought to have an opportunity to
cial regulation, they are a dy-
earn independently of their exist-
namic and effective experiment
which will do our customers a
ing rate base when they are asked
or required to undertake activities
great deal of good and increase
not within their traditional busi-
our knowledge immensely.
ness.
T'
he lesson of all this can be
stated simply. When commit-
VII. Parting Thoughts
ment to a public policy is sup-
While these problems are quite
ported by sound financial princi-
ples, business can and will
24
The Electricity Journal
respond.
collectively serve 1.2 million
customers in Massachusetts, Rhode Is-
A utility with an opportunity to
land, and New Hampshire, are collec-
earn is far more effective - partic-
tively referred to in this article as
ularly in novel areas - than one
"NEES."
wincing under new interpreta-
2. New England Electric System,
tions of the duty to serve. Think
NEESPLAN, Oct. 9, 1979; "New En-
back to the vexing and appall-
gland Electric System: Embracing the
Conservation Ethic," Business Week,
ingly expensive gestation of com-
Dec. 10, 1979.
petitive generation. Protecting
3. See Mass. Dept. of Pub. Util., Rul-
sunk investments and providing
ing and Order in Docket No. 86-36-F,
financial incentives for new pro-
Integrated Resource Management Reg-
jects would likely have fostered
ulatory Approach, Nov. 30, 1988; P.L.
the market for nonutility genera-
Joskow, Understanding the 'Unbundled'
When commitment to
Utility Conservation Bidding Proposal,
tion with much less litigation and
PUB. UTIL. FORT., Jan. 4, 1990, at 18;
a public policy is
cost than PURPA and its after-
L.E. Ruff, Least-Cost Planning and De-
math.
mand-Side Managment: Six Common Fal-
supported by sound
lacies and One Simple Truth," PUB. UTIL.
T
oday, many good opportuni-
FORT., Apr. 28, 1988 at 19.
financial principles,
ties exist for the judicious use
4. R. I. Pub. Util. Comm., Report and
business can and will
of incentive regulation. Properly
Order, Docket No. 1939, May 16, 1990,
structured incentives for regu-
at 16.
respond.
lated utilities could help further
5. Mass. Dept. of Pub. Util., Order
increase competitive generation,
and Docket No. DPU 89-194/195,
advance the use of renewable
March 30, 1990; N. H. Pub. Util.
resources, and reduce the envi-
Comm., Order No. 19,905, Docket No.
DE 89-187, Aug. 7, 1990.
ronmental effects of generating
6. See D. MOSKOVITZ, PROFITS & PROG-
electricity faster than the law re-
RESS THROUGH LEAST-COST PLANNING
quires. The experience of the
(NARUC, 1989).
NEES companies with C&LM
7. See R. I. Pub. Util. Comm., supra
suggest that incentives can cost-
note 4.
effectively implement new poli-
8. See Mass. Dept. of Pub. Util., supra
cies. To work, however, they
note 5.
must be simple, focused, and pro-
9. N. H. Pub. Util. Comm., supra note
portionate to the public benefit,
5.
to the utility effort and risk, and
10. See Joskow, supra note 3 and Ruff,
to the culture change required.
supra note 3.
11. See, e.g., Pub. Serv. Comm. of
Footnotes:
Wisc., Findings of Fact and Order, Ap-
plication of Wisconsin Electric Power
1. New England Electric System is a
Co., Docket No. 6630-UR-103, Jan.
public utility holding company head-
1990; N. Y. Pub. Serv. Comm.,
quartered in Westborough, Massachu-
Ratemaking Practices and Incentive
setts. It has a FERC-regulated
Mechanisms Promoting Least-Cost
generating subsidiary, New England
Planning and Demand-Side Manage-
Power Company, and three state-regu-
ment by Electric Utilities - Orange and
lated retail subsidiaries, Massachu-
Rockland Utilities, Inc., Opinion No.
setts Electric Company, The
90-24, Sept. 26, 1990; Cal. Pub. Util.
Narragansett Electric Company, and
Comm., Approving Demand-Side
Granite State Electric Company.
Management Programs of Four Utili-
These three retail subsidiaries, which
ties, Decision 90-08-068, Aug. 29, 1990.
25
December 1990
RHODE
OF
ISLAND
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS
HOPE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
FAX (401)277-6805
100 Orange Street
TDD (401)277-3500
Providence, R.I. 02903
(401-277-3500)
ATTENTION: AWARD REFERENCES
I am very pleased to write in support of the application of
New England Electric System (NEES) for The President's Environment
and Conservation Challenge Award, based on the unique and fruitful
collaborative effort between the Company and the Conservation Law
Foundation (CLF). Having participated in this ongoing dialogue,
I have first hand knowledge of how well the collaborative works.
It is important first to understand the basically adversarial
atmosphere milieu in which conservation activities were viewed by
environmental groups and utilities. These were not natural
partners! CLF had thrown down the gauntlet in their publication
"Power to Spare" by contending that there was technical potential
for far more conservation than was being achieved, even by NEES,
a utility which had taken the lead in New England. Utilities were
skeptical of the numbers and the costs, and had a reluctance to bet
a large percentage of their future resource needs on fuzzy, often
untried DSM programs. So the first remarkable aspect of the
collaboration was the willingness to get together.
The partnership has worked remarkably well. NEES funding of
CLF to bring in outside experts has provided credibility to program
design. CLF's interest in maximizing conservation (in order to
reduce the adverse environmental effects of electric power
generation) has been tempered by the realities of administration
and budget limitations. What has emerged are strong, practical,
cost effective progams for all sectors which have been implemented
in all three state jurisdictions in which NEES companies operate.
Of particular note was the development in the collaborative
of an incentive for aggressive pursuit of conservation by allowing
company shareholders a portion of the savings that accrue to
ratepayers. The mechanism is structured to reward both
maximization of savings and efficiency in holding down costs. This
innovative construct was accepted by our state Public Utilities
Commission. Many other states across the country have recognized
that conservation is best furthered in this way.
I commend New England Electric System to you as a worthy
recipient of this important award.
Mary W. Kilmary
Mary N- Kilmarx
Director of Energy Policy and Planning
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
HENRY LEE
John F. Kennedy School of Government
Executive Director.
79 John F. Kennedy Street
Environment and Natural
Cambridge. Massachusetts 02138
Resources Program
Phone (617) 495-1350
Fax (617) 495-1635
May 13, 1992
Attention:
Award References
I have been asked to write a letter in support of awarding one of the President's 1992
Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards to the collaborative Demand Side
Management effort between the Conservation Law Foundation and the New England
Electric Company.
My knowledge of this program stems from two sources. During the 1970s, I was the first
head of the Massachusetts Energy Office, and through that experience, became intimately
involved in energy efficiency programs. Secondly, for the last four years, I have been the
Chairman of New England Electric's Demand Side Management Advisory Committee.
In my twenty years of experience, the most outstanding partnership effort in the energy
efficiency field has been this collaborative effort. The reasons are twofold.
1.
While many utilities have now decided to invest significant amounts of money into
demand side management, this was not the case when the Conservation Law
Foundation first approached New England Electric. Most utilities in New England
perceived CLF as an adversary, especially on the issue of electricity policy. New
England Electric was willing to be a pioneer and to join with one of their staunchest
critics in establishing a multi-million dollar DSM program.
To CLF's credit, they were willing to shift from an advocacy mode to one of working
constructively to build a program that worked. It is one thing to have a press
conference extolling the virtues of energy conservation, but it is another to work on
the nuts and bolts of a comprehensive DSM initiative including the residential,
industrial, and commercial sectors in three separate states.
2.
The program has been enormously successful. New England Electric has been
willing to invest over $242 million in the last five years and project expenditures of
over $107 million in 1992 on DSM, alone, and as a result, has developed what is
generally perceived in the field as the flagship DSM program, not only in the U.S.,
but perhaps in the world. In the last three years, the program has saved 450,172,482
kWh of electricity.
If one judges a partnership on a willingness to take risks, to innovate, to be a pioneer, to
overcome political obstacles, and in the end, to design a phenomenally successful effort,
then I believe there can be no doubt that this program deserves recognition.
While I understand that the award is given to organizations, I would like to take this
opportunity to mention three individuals, whose vision and leadership made this possible.
Doug Foy, the Executive Director of the Conservation Law Foundation, and John Rowe,
the CEO of New England Electric, are the architects of this program. However, the late
Sam Huntington, former CEO of New England Electric, deserves enormous credit for
having the vision to embark on this venture.
If I can answer further questions, please let me know.
Sincerely Hander yours,
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
STATE
OFFICER
OF
CHAIRMAN
Douglas L. Patch
OF THE
Man.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
SHIRE
HAMPSHIRE
HAMP
AND SECRETARY
COMMISSIONERS
Wynn E. Arnold
Bruce B. Ellsworth
TDD Access: Relay NH
Linda G. Bisson
1776
1-800-735-2964
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Tel. (603) 271-2431
FAX No. 271-3878
8 Old Suncook Road
Concord, N.H. 03301-5185
May 21, 1992
The President's Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
Attention: Award References
Dear Sir/Madam:
The purpose of this letter is to recommend the New England
Electric System (NEES) for The President's 1992 Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards. NEES' energy conservation
collaborative effort with the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF)
is an example of a partnership that has reaped significant
economic and environmental benefits for both NEES' companies'
customers and the citizens of New England.
The NEES/CLF collaborative effort has been particularly
important in accelerating the implementation of electric utility
conservation programs in New England. The availability of these
programs provides customers with the opportunity and ability to
reduce their energy consumption, and consequently their energy
bills, without reducing their energy services or compromising
their quality of life. In fact, the environmental benefits
associated with conservation, such as reduced power plant
emissions, can be viewed as an enhancement to the quality of life
in New England.
By working with a traditional adversary, instead of in
opposition, NEES has demonstrated that partnerships offer a
constructive way to meet the environmental challenges ahead.
Sincerely,
Janet Gail Besser
Manager, Energy Planning
Application Summary
ID Number: P.015
Project:
CNG Vehicle Conversion Projects
Contact:
Ms. Dianne Caron
New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Res. Dept.
2040 S. Pacheco St.
Telephone:
Santa Fe, NM 87505-
(505) 827-5900
Summary:
New Mexico's Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department
and the Gas Company of New Mexico have entered into an unique
partnership to further common objectives of introducing
compressed natural gas vehicles to the state's diverse
transportation sectors. The program is to increase public
acceptance of energy-saving, cost effective and
environmentally compatible alternative to petroleum fuels by
implementing projects in diverse sectors. The program has
introduced CNG technology to school districts, government
agencies, municipalities and non-profit organizations.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
Wonderful.
Mostly prospective. Wait for results.
Looks "economic," like it's promoting sales of natural gas and
associated revenue.
P.015
5. Application Summary
The New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) and the Gas
Company of New Mexico have combined their resources and efforts to implement compressed
natural gas (CNG) fuel conversion projects for public schools, local governments and nonprofit
organizations within New Mexico. To promote the use of CNG technology, EMNRD has
allocated federal oil-overcharge monies received by the state to leverage fuel conversion projects
which have a total value of $2.8 million. These projects will generate savings of 49.61 million
Btus and $265,877 in fuel costs during the first year of completion.
The cost of conversion equipment, technology training for mechanics and drivers and the
incremental cost of purchasing dedicated CNG vehicles have been obstacles to widespread use
of CNG by transportation providers who operate on limited budgets. By applying for program
funding through EMNRD, transportation providers are able to obtain monies to leverage fuel
conversion projects that will not only realize dollar savings but will contribute to improved air
quality and a cleaner environment. Public awareness of CNG as a viable fuel alternative has
increased dramatically as a result of this highly visible program. The Gas Company of New
Mexico cooperates in this effort by providing fueling stations, which include both fast-fill and
slow-fill compressors, and materials for educating the public on advantages of CNG use. They
also provide site design services for fueling stations and engineering expertise for equipment
specifications.
Agreements for CNG conversion projects have been developed with three New Mexico school
districts and the State Department of Education to provide conversion equipment and incremental
costs for purchasing dedicated CNG buses. Fueling stations and equipment for converting fleets
of vehicles owned by the cities of Albuquerque and Roswell, New Mexico and the Chavez
County Retired Senior Volunteer Program have also been provided under the partnership
program. Additionally, the Gas Company will provide technical assistance to design a fueling
facility for a school district and municipal fleet conversion project funded by EMNRD in Las
Vegas, New Mexico. To demonstrate its commitment to CNG technology, EMNRD has
purchased one natural gas vehicle and is converting five other Department vehicles to
compressed natural gas. The Gas Company has installed a slow-fill fueling station at EMNRD's
main office in Santa Fe.
To further extend the benefits of leveraging funds for CNG conversion, EMNRD and the Gas
Company have combined resources to assist the Santa Fe Community College to develop a
curriculum for auto mechanic training on CNG technology. The program, which is scheduled
to begin the fall semester of 1992, will be the first comprehensive training course in CNG
equipment installation, emissions testing, and safety standards in New Mexico. After successful
completion of the course, mechanics can apply to the state for certification as CNG equipment
installation specialists. As an associated part of this project, EMNRD is providing a CNG van
to the college for transporting students to classes, and the Gas Company is providing access to
a convenient fast-fuel station.
6. A. PARTNERSHIP
1. Members; Roles; Resources
The partnership is composed of a state government agency, the New Mexico Energy, Minerals
and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) and a local public utility association, the Gas
Company of New Mexico. EMNRD actively promotes energy conservation and fuel efficiency
by financing and administering alternative transportation programs within New Mexico. The
Gas Company, through its Commercial/Industrial Market Development Division, actively
promotes the use of compressed natural gas (CNG) as an alternative fuel, coordinates the natural
gas refueling plans, and constructs fueling stations.
Through the Office of the Secretary, the Oil Conservation Division and the Energy Conservation
and Management Division, EMNRD brings to the partnership funds designated for CNG
conversion equipment or incremental purchase costs of CNG vehicles and expertise in CNG
policy development, marketing and program management. The Gas Company contributes site
design and equipment specification services, capital funds for constructing refueling stations, and
knowledge regarding national CNG technology resources.
2. Environmental and Conservation Objectives; Plans and Actions for Meeting Needs
The objective of implementing CNG transportation projects throughout New Mexico is to
conserve energy by reducing fuel consumption in vehicles, increase public awareness and
encourage the use of this resource as an alternative fuel to improve air quality and reduce
petroleum residue emissions from vehicles.
Through the partnership, which actively sponsors projects described in Section 5, community
needs are being met to utilize this fuel resource which requires no expensive refining, is easier
to recover from underground reservoirs, is non-toxic and has no particulate emissions.
3. Innovative Aspects of Partnership; Environmental Improvements and Public
Perception
The combination of public utility and state agency resources in a concerted effort to implement
alternative fuel projects in urban and rural communities is unique to New Mexico. The
abundance of natural gas in New Mexico, which is the fourth largest national producer of this
resource, makes it a realistic fuel alternative. The partnership is a dynamic effort to educate the
public and introduce vehicles on the road to demonstrate this clean, alternative technology. The
City of Albuquerque has a high level of automobile pollution, and combined with the future
probability of increased national trade activity with Mexico which is expected to result in serious
air quality problems along the border, the partnership is an effort to prevent more serious
consequences.
The fueling infrastructure provided by the Gas Company, a critical factor in the continued
success of the projects, supports the vehicles after they are converted or purchased.
4. Measurable Environmental/Conservation Benefits Produced
Through the partnership, six (6) natural gas fueling stations are being constructed to support the
needs of one hundred forty four (144) project vehicles. Project vehicles include school buses,
light weight vans, forty-foot transit buses, twenty-five foot transit buses, and light duty trucks
and sedans. Records for fuel useage and savings have been designed and are being documented
in a computerized data bank so that the effectiveness of the projects can be evaluated and future
efforts focused in the most efficient manner. It is estimated that 49.61 million Btus and
vehicles. $265,877.26 in fuel costs will be saved in the first year alone after conversion of project
5. Model-Transfer Aspects of the Partnership
All aspects of the EMNRD-Gas Company partnership could be used to model similar programs
nationwide. Recognization of environmentally compatible alternative resources, realization of
common objectives, development of plans to meet predetermined goals and contribution of
resources and expertise to realize goals are essential ingredients of a successful program which
can be used to leverage community conservation projects.
Leveraging funds and resources extends the impact of programs, which often are constrained by
limited budgets, insufficient numbers of personnel and amount of expertise needed to carry out
program objectives. Determination to pursue partnership arrangements and create plans for
implementation of projects can result in effective promotion of efficient, environmentally
compatible energy use alternatives. A partnership effort to supply resources and personnel
necessary to adequately meet the needs of this emerging technology can make widespread
alternative fuel programs feasible.
P.015
Ipplication Form- 1002
A-D: Please answer oniu the tollowing An and
questions pertaining :0 the specific Award
which you are applying.
Please read the application form carerully and provide ail information
insteer
auestions
requested. Please type or print cleariv. Supplementary pages should
D1-D5-
toilow the format or this form as closelv as possible. incomplete applica-
nons will not be considered.
Answers should be clear. concise and should emphasize
quantifiable resuits or benefits or the program. Each
1. Select the Award category for which you are competing:
answer to a sub-question should not exceed :
Note: .-: program mau ": enterea in only one enegony. See descrimions
Taken as a whole. ail answers to criteria questions
megories in Question
not exceed two pages.
01) X Partnership
(1)2) Environmental Quality Management
A. PARTNERSHIP: awarded to diverse organizations or
(03)
Innovation
groups that have fostered cooperative approaches to envi-
(04) Education and Communication
ronmental needs at the local, regional. or national levei.
2. Name or the project or program described in this application:
1. Who are the partnership members? What are
New Mexico Energy, Minerals & Natural Resources
Dept What resources do they oring to the
/Gas Company of New Mexico Program Partnership
(CNG Vehicle Conversion Projects)
2. What are the partnership S specific
3. Name or Award Applicant(s): Use separate sheer. :* needed)
conservation objectives? Has a sustamable plan
Mr. Mrs. X Ms. Miss Dr.
certed action for meeting these needs been estabiished
Name:
Anita Lockwood
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative"
What obstacles. environmental or otherwise. does :
Title:
Cabinet Secretary
overcome?
New Mexico Energy, Minerals and
Organization:
Natural Resources Department
4. What measurable environmental or conservation
benefits has the partnership produced?
Street:
2040 S. Pacheco Street
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by
City:
Santa Fe
State: New Mexico Zip: 87505
others and transferred to other settings?
Telephone: (505) 827-5900
Fax: (505) 827-5912
B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT:
awarded to organizations which have demonstrated that
environmental values can be integrated into sound man-
4. Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
agement decisions and objectives. (Note: This category
Mr. Mrs. X Ms. Miss Dr.
reflects broad-based organizational approaches. Special
programs or projects may be more appropriate for entry
Name:
Dianne Caron
in one of the other three award categories.)
Title:
Director, Energy Conservation/Management Div.
1. What are the organization $ environmental policies
New Mexico Energy, Minerals and
and objectives?
Organization: Natural Resources Department
2. How has the organization's top management
Street:
2040 S. Pacheco Street
demonstrated commitment to these policies and obtec-
tives? Do the policies demonstrate commitment
City: Santa Fe
State: New Mexico Zip: 87505
bevond legai compliance?
Telephone: (505) 827-5917
Fax: (505) 827-5912
3. What are the organization's environmental stan-
dards for its product(s) and operations? Explain
OTE: The Selection Committee will relu heavily on Questions 5-6 in
they go beyond legal constraints and how they relate :.'
determining how well the application meets the award criteria.
agement control mechanisms.)
5. Please attach a one-page (not to exceed 500 words) summary, suitable
4. How are these policies and objectives incorporated
for publication. which provides a compiete overview of the application.
the: all Dau-to-day management (if the
The one-page response should be ciear. concise. and should emphasize
mention 5 decision-making about research
quantinable results or benefits of the program.
long-range planning. capital. and overating
ATTACHMENT: Page 1; Item 3:
Name of Award Applicants:
Mr. William J. Real
Chief Operating Officer, Gas Operations
Gas Company of New Mexico
Alvarado Square
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87158-0120
Telephone: (505) 848-4403 Fax: (505) 848-2339
5. Application Summary
The New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) and the Gas
Company of New Mexico have combined their resources and efforts to implement compressed
natural gas (CNG) fuel conversion projects for public schools, local governments and nonprofit
organizations within New Mexico. To promote the use of CNG technology, EMNRD has
allocated federal oil-overcharge monies received by the state to leverage fuel conversion projects
which have a total value of $2.8 million. These projects will generate savings of 49.61 million
Btus and $265,877 in fuel costs during the first year of completion.
The cost of conversion equipment, technology training for mechanics and drivers and the
incremental cost of purchasing dedicated CNG vehicles have been obstacles to widespread use
of CNG by transportation providers who operate on limited budgets. By applying for program
funding through EMNRD, transportation providers are able to obtain monies to leverage fuel
conversion projects that will not only realize dollar savings but will contribute to improved air
quality and a cleaner environment. Public awareness of CNG as a viable fuel alternative has
increased dramatically as a result of this highly visible program. The Gas Company of New
Mexico cooperates in this effort by providing fueling stations, which include both fast-fill and
slow-fill compressors, and materials for educating the public on advantages of CNG use. They
also provide site design services for fueling stations and engineering expertise for equipment
specifications.
Agreements for CNG conversion projects have been developed with three New Mexico school
districts and the State Department of Education to provide conversion equipment and incremental
costs for purchasing dedicated CNG buses. Fueling stations and equipment for converting fleets
of vehicles owned by the cities of Albuquerque and Roswell, New Mexico and the Chavez
County Retired Senior Volunteer Program have also been provided under the partnership
program. Additionally, the Gas Company will provide technical assistance to design a fueling
facility for a school district and municipal fleet conversion project funded by EMNRD in Las
Vegas, New Mexico. To demonstrate its commitment to CNG technology, EMNRD has
purchased one natural gas vehicle and is converting five other Department vehicles to
compressed natural gas. The Gas Company has installed a slow-fill fueling station at EMNRD's
main office in Santa Fe.
To further extend the benefits of leveraging funds for CNG conversion, EMNRD and the Gas
Company have combined resources to assist the Santa Fe Community College to develop a
curriculum for auto mechanic training on CNG technology. The program, which is scheduled
to begin the fall semester of 1992, will be the first comprehensive training course in CNG
equipment installation, emissions testing, and safety standards in New Mexico. After successful
completion of the course, mechanics can apply to the state for certification as CNG equipment
installation specialists. As an associated part of this project, EMNRD is providing a CNG van
to the college for transporting students to classes, and the Gas Company is providing access to
a convenient fast-fuel station.
6. A. PARTNERSHIP
1. Members; Roles; Resources
The partnership is composed of a state government agency, the New Mexico Energy, Minerals
and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) and a local public utility association, the Gas
Company of New Mexico. EMNRD actively promotes energy conservation and fuel efficiency
by financing and administering alternative transportation programs within New Mexico. The
Gas Company, through its Commercial/Industrial Market Development Division, actively
promotes the use of compressed natural gas (CNG) as an alternative fuel, coordinates the natural
gas refueling plans, and constructs fueling stations.
Through the Office of the Secretary, the Oil Conservation Division and the Energy Conservation
and Management Division, EMNRD brings to the partnership funds designated for CNG
conversion equipment or incremental purchase costs of CNG vehicles and expertise in CNG
policy development, marketing and program management. The Gas Company contributes site
design and equipment specification services, capital funds for constructing refueling stations, and
knowledge regarding national CNG technology resources.
2. Environmental and Conservation Objectives; Plans and Actions for Meeting Needs
The objective of implementing CNG transportation projects throughout New Mexico is to
conserve energy by reducing fuel consumption in vehicles, increase public awareness and
encourage the use of this resource as an alternative fuel to improve air quality and reduce
petroleum residue emissions from vehicles.
Through the partnership, which actively sponsors projects described in Section 5, community
needs are being met to utilize this fuel resource which requires no expensive refining, is easier
to recover from underground reservoirs, is non-toxic and has no particulate emissions.
3. Innovative Aspects of Partnership; Environmental Improvements and Public
Perception
The combination of public utility and state agency resources in a concerted effort to implement
alternative fuel projects in urban and rural communities is unique to New Mexico. The
abundance of natural gas in New Mexico, which is the fourth largest national producer of this
resource, makes it a realistic fuel alternative. The partnership is a dynamic effort to educate the
public and introduce vehicles on the road to demonstrate this clean, alternative technology. The
City of Albuquerque has a high level of automobile pollution, and combined with the future
probability of increased national trade activity with Mexico which is expected to result in serious
air quality problems along the border, the partnership is an effort to prevent more serious
consequences.
The fueling infrastructure provided by the Gas Company, a critical factor in the continued
success of the projects, supports the vehicles after they are converted or purchased.
4. Measurable Environmental/Conservation Benefits Produced
Through the partnership, six (6) natural gas fueling stations are being constructed to support the
needs of one hundred forty four (144) project vehicles. Project vehicles include school buses,
light weight vans, forty-foot transit buses, twenty-five foot transit buses, and light duty trucks
and sedans. Records for fuel useage and savings have been designed and are being documented
in a computerized data bank so that the effectiveness of the projects can be evaluated and future
efforts focused in the most efficient manner. It is estimated that 49.61 million Btus and
vehicles. $265,877.26 in fuel costs will be saved in the first year alone after conversion of project
5. Model-Transfer Aspects of the Partnership
All aspects of the EMNRD-Gas Company partnership could be used to model similar programs
nationwide. Recognization of environmentally compatible alternative resources, realization of
common objectives, development of plans to meet predetermined goals and contribution of
resources and expertise to realize goals are essential ingredients of a successful program which
can be used to leverage community conservation projects.
Leveraging funds and resources extends the impact of programs, which often are constrained by
limited budgets, insufficient numbers of personnel and amount of expertise needed to carry out
program objectives. Determination to pursue partnership arrangements and create plans for
implementation of projects can result in effective promotion of efficient, environmentally
compatible energy use alternatives. A partnership effort to supply resources and personnel
alternative fuel programs feasible.
necessary to adequately meet the needs of this emerging technology can make widespread
5. How are these policies and objectives reflected in the orga-
NOTE: The following questions are for informational purposes.
nization's relationships with employees. customers, suppliers,
and the general public?
- How long has the technology. program. project or service been
operationai?
n. What are the organization's control mechanisms that give
Program Enaction Date: July, 1990
decision makers objective data to measure continuous perfor-
mance improvement toward its short- and long-term environ-
8. Which of the following most accurately describes the appii-
mental objectives?
cant(s)? (Check more than one. if applicable.)
(01)
National Business or industry
7. What quantifiable. sustained environmental quality results
(02) X Regional or Local Business or Industry
in products and processes have resulted from the organiza-
(03)
National Nonprorit Organization or Foundation
tion's environmental approach?
(04)
Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05) X Local or State Government/ Government Agency
C. INNOVATION-awarded to individuals, organizations and
(06)
Educational Organization
(07)
groups who have demonstrated exceptional creativity or pio-
Voluntary Civic Organization
neered new approaches in the development and/or execution of
(08) Trade or Professional Society
technologies, programs, projects, or services that are environ-
(09) Youth Organization
mentally sound and economically sensible?
(10) Labor Organization
(11) Individual
1. What is the purpose or the technology, program. project or
(12) Other (Please describe):
service?
9. If business or industry, which of the following best describes
2. How is the technology. program, project. or service distinc-
the type or business or industry?
tive or innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or other-
(01)
Agriculture/Forestry
wise, does it overcome?
(02)
Aerospace
(03) Communications
3. How is the technology. program. project, or service superior
(04) Construction
to other approaches? Does It offer a viable alternative to a
(05) Electronics/Computers
problem for which no solutions previously existed?
(06) X Energy
(07)
Engineering
4. Can the technology, program, project or service be replicated
(08)
Environmental Services
in an economically feasible manner?
(09)
Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10) Manufacturing-Chemical
5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental ben-
(11)
Manufacturing-Other
efits or results of the technology, program, project, or service?
(12)
Mining
(13) Recreation
D. EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION-awarded to indi-
(14) Trade-Wholesale
viduals, organizations, or groups which have developed educa-
(15) X Transportation
tional or informational programs that inspire respect for the
(16) X Utilities-Electric, Gas or
environment and raise the public's environmental literacy.
(17) Other (Please describe):
1. What is the program? What are its environmental or conser-
10. Which of the following most accurately describes the environ-
vation objectives?
mental program under consideration for an award? (Check more
than one, if applicable.)
2. Who is the program's audience? How large is the audience?
(01)
agriculture
How is the program's effect on the audience determined?
(02) X air quality
(03) X conservation
3. What is original or distinctive about the program?
(04) X education-general public
(05) education-academic
4. What are the measurable results or benefits produced by the
(06) X energy
program? How does the program promote the development
(07) X environmental quality management
of an environmental ethic and make a positive contribution to
(08) forestry
environmental awareness?
(09) hazardous waste remediation
(10) international
5. How can the program be used or modeled by others?
(11) natural resources
(2) X poilution control
:4. Please indicate which of the following are the primary aud:-
13)
recreation
ences, benenciaries, or users or the program or service. and est:-
14) recyciing
mate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
15)
solid waste
in) X source reduction/ pollution prevention
Type
How Many People
5
water quality
1S)
wetlands
(01) Business or industry
(9)
wildlife and fish resources
02) Trade or Professional Society
20)
Other Please describe):
(03) Government
148
(04) Educational Organizations
1,800
:1. If applicable. list the sources of the program's support and the
(05) Youth
percentage or support provided. including grants and in-kind
(06) Community or Public interest Groups 186,272
contributions of goods and services. Use separate sheet if needed).
(07) Locai Community or Local Public
New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural
(08) General Public
Source Resources Dept. Oil-Overcharge 50%
(09) Employees
Funds
(10) Customers or Clients
Source Gas Company of New Mexico
12
40%
(11) Other (Please describe):
Source Applicant Share
:
10%
(Average)
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project.
or conservation awards in the past five years?
including approximate value or in-kind contributions or goods
and services:
N/A
5 600,000 - Approximate 1st Year Expenditures
EMNRD and Gas Co.
13. If the project is ongoing, what IS the annual cost?
$ 400,000 - Average Annual Allocation -
(EMNRD and Gas Company)
16. In one paragraph (not to exceed 50 words). please summarize the program, its objectives and what it has accomplished. Use space
provided below. This paragraph should be suitable for use in a catalog, database or brochure.
The Gas Company of New Mexico and the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department
(New Mexico State Government) have entered into a unique partnership to further
common objectives of introducing compressed natural gas vehicles to diverse transportatio
sectors within the state. The program objective is to increase public acceptance of
an energy-saving, cost effective and environmentally compatible alternative to petroleum
fuels by implementing projects in diverse transportation sectors. The program has
introduced CNG technology to school districts, government agencies, municipalities
and non-profit organizations throughout the state.
:7. Please include 3 one-page letters or recommendation attached
How to Apply
:0 the application when It :S submitted for consideration. Letters
-hould be addressed: Attention: Award References. References
Completed applications must be postmarked
should have nrst-nand knowiedge or the environmental program.
by Mav 22. 1992 and mailed to the:
service. or technology and should offer 3 candid evaluation or Its
The President's Environment and
success or effectiveness. References may also include users or
Conservation Chailenge Awards
benenciaries or your program.
Council on Environmental Quality
NOTE. Letters or recommendation must accompany the applica-
The White Ho:
non when It :5 submitted to CEQ. Letters sent directly to CEQ
722 Jackson Pl.
\W
will not be considered. Please list the references in the spaces
Washington. DC 20503
below.
All information submitted with the application should be
Name: Alan D. Morgan
considered public information and becomes property or
State Superintendent of Public Instructionne President Challenge Awards program.
Title: New Mexico Department of Education
Award recipients will be notified in Fall 1992. Recipients
Education Building - 300 Don Gaspar
must be willing to assist the President's Challenge Awards
Street:
program in making nonproprietary information about
Santa Fe
NM
87501-2785
their environmental programs available to others who
Crv:
State:
Zip:
wish to replicate their success.
Telephone: (505) 827-6516 Fax: (505) 827-6696
Application Format
Name: William F. Brainerd
Please submit one original and four photocopies of your
application. You mav include up to 10 pages of supporting
Title: Mayor, City of Roswell
materials. (NOTE: Photocopying both sides of a sheet or
paper will be considered two-pages.) Any oversized item
Street: P.O. Drawer 1838
must be reduced to fit a standard 8.5" Y 11" page format.
City: Roswell
State:
NM
88201
Zip:
Supporting materials may include items such as brochures.
photographs, press clippings, and graphs depicting the
Telephone: (505) 624-6700 Fax: (505) 624-6709
program's results. The materials may not be used as a
substitute for written responses to Questions 5 and 6.
Name: Myra Bass, Director
The order of pages in the submitted application should be
as follows:
Title: Chavez County Retired Senior Volunteer
Program-page application (Questions 1-20)
2. 500-word overview summary (Question 5)
Street: 100 N. Missouri
3. 2-page responses to criteria questions Question 61
4. 10 pages of supporting materials
City: Roswell
State: NM
88201
5. 3 letters of recommendation (Question 17)
Zip:
Telephone: (505) 623-3960 Fax: N/A
NOTE: The entire package should be stapled in the upper.
left-hand corner. Any items sent over the 10-page limit of
supporting materials will be disregarded and not reviewed
by the technical evaluators and selection committee. Do
18. Please sign below to indicate that all applicants agree a) to
abide bv the rules and requirements of the awards competition,
not put the application or backup materials into a binder.
and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the
notebook or piastic cover.
best
Signature: or their knowledge. Date: 5/19/92
OMB Control No. 0331-0002, (Exp. 2'95): As required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act. CEQ estimates that completion or this
application will take 10 hours. Send comments regarding the coi-
Title:
Cabriet Xcuty
nim Every Uner als
lection or this information. including suggestions for reducing the
Organization: and third Reservas
Japerwork burden. to CEQ and also to: Paperwork Reduction Pro-
ject. or Management and Budget. Office or Information and
Telephone: 505-827-5950
Regulatory Arfairs. 725 17th Street. NW. Washington. D.C.. 20503
Volunteer Bureau
623-3960
RSVP
Transportation Service
623-7778
Chaves County Retired Senior Volunteer Program
100 N. Missouri
Roswell, New Mexico 88201
Presidential Environmental and Conservation Award
Council on Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 2053
ATT: Award References
We are currently converting the vans for the Chaves County Handi-
van Service in Roswell, New Mexico to compressed natural gas. We
believe this will provide better exposure to the general public on
the advantages of CNG.
This conversion will help our van service save money. We also
believe that health and air quality will be improved in our area.
Most importantly. we will be joining in the nation in conserving
our natural resources.
Sincerely,
Myra Bass
Myra Bass, Director
RSVP
MB/tk
"Personal Enrichment, Satisfaction - Community Involvement, Improvement"
Sponsored by the Roswell Chamber of Commerce
THE
STATE
OF
so
Tris
NEW
GREAT
DEPARTMENT
1912
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION - EDUCATION BUILDING
SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO 87501-2786
ALAN D. MORGAN
SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
May 15, 1992
Presidents Environmental and Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
White House
722 Jackson Place Northwest
Washington, D.C. 20503
Dear Sir/Madam:
We would like to bring to the attention of the Council the outstanding commitment and cooperation of the New Mexico Energy,
Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD), and Gas Company of New Mexico Inc. (GCNM) made to the New
Mexico State Department of Education (NMSDE). This combination of private industry and state government cooperatio
assisted the NMSDE in several projects to improve the air quality in communities and aided the school districts in reducir
their fuel costs.
GCNM provided equipment and technical expertise in the development of compressed natural gas school bus conversions in
the Los Lunas, Belen and Las Vegas, New Mexico school districts. The EMNRD worked closely with GCNM on the design
and implementation of the projects as the facilitator and as a procurer of resources.
The natural gas school buses have the potential of reducing carbon monoxide emissions by fifty to eighty percent. Reduction
of other volatile organic emissions is a major contributor to the undertaking of these projects in New Mexico. The auxiliary
issue of fuel cost savings was a welcome benefit in these times of reduced state revenues.
Cooperation between governmental agencies and private industry is the best of both worlds when it comes to providing quality
and service to the school children of New Mexico.
We at the New Mexico State Department of Education hope that consideration will be given by the council to this application
for the Presidents Environmental and Conservation Challenge Awards on behalf of the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources
Department and Gas Company of New Mexico Inc.
Sincerely,
alon D. morgan
ALAN D. MORGAN
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
ADM:CW:dj
"New Mexico Education: Good Schools Getting Better"
CITY OF
ROSWELL
Post Office Drawer 1838
72
M
Roswell, New Mexico 88201
(505) 624-6700
May 15, 1992
President's Environmental and Conservation
Challenge Award
Council on Environmental Quality
White House
722 Jackson Place N. W.
Washington, D.C. 20503
Attention: Award References
Dear Sir/Madam:
On behalf of the City of Roswell, New Mexico, please consider this
letter of recommendation for the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and
Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) for your award. Roswell has
experienced an excellent relationship with this agency for the past
several years, and we have been extremely pleased with their
professionalism, expertise, enthusiasm, and first and foremost,
their positive commitment to environmental and conservation issues.
I would like to take this opportunity to illustrate the financial
commitments EMNRD has made to the City of Roswell.
Alternative Fuel Public Transportation Project
In the fall of this year, Roswell will implement a fixed route
public transportation system, utilizing a total of nine (9) revenue
vehicles, seven (7) of which will be powered by compressed natural
gas (CNG). EMNRD is providing $500,000 (100% of the cost) to
purchase two (2) 35' CNG buses which will operate on the Main
Street bus route. This use of CNG vehicles for the transit system
has been very favorably received by the Roswell community.
Roswell CNG Fleet Conversion
During the next month or so, the City of Roswell will begin Phase
I of the conversion of 30 City owned trucks to operate on CNG (dual
fuel). This conversion is being made possible through a $32,400
grant from the EMNRD, and a local commitment of $47,000. The
conversion of these 30 trucks will save approximately $12,000 in
Equal Opportunity Employer
annual fuel costs, and reduce gasoline consumption by 28,000
gallons per year. Additionally, utilizing CNG will significantly
reduce maintenance costs, and extend the vehicle life of these
trucks by about 75,000 miles. The City will apply to the EMNRD
again this year for funding to convert additional City vehicles to
CNG.
Retired Senior Volunteer Program Van Conversion
In July of this year, the Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP)
will convert their four (4) vans to compressed natural gas (dual
fuel). RSVP currently provides demand responsive public
transportation in Roswell. When the fixed route service begins, it
will be redesigned to transport disabled individuals who are
unable to reach a bus stop. For this conversion, the EMNRD has
provided a grant for $5,100, and the City will provide $5,300.
The conversion of these 4 vehicles will save approximately $1,700
in annual fuel costs, and reduce gasoline consumption by 6,700
gallons per year.
Throughout the past two years of receiving these grants from the
EMNRD, the Gas Company of New Mexico has been very involved, and
has made a substantial commitment to the City's alternative fuel
program. Initially, they committed to providing a slow-fill
fueling station for just the seven (7) CNG vehicles in the transit
system. This station had a value of $106,000. As additional
funding has been provided by the EMNRD for the 30 trucks and 4 RSVP
vans, the Gas Company has expanded their investment to a
combination fast-fill and slow-fill station valued at over
$200,000. In summary, the City of Roswell is very grateful to the
EMNRD for their commitment to preserve the environment and to
conserve energy. Without their efforts, we would not be in the
enviable position we are in today.
Sincerely,
Wm. F. Brainerd
Mayor
(Date of Signing) - March 6, 1992
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT:
Governor Signs New Mexico Alternative Fuel Conversion Act
SANTA FE - New Mexico's commitment to the use of alternative
fuels got a boost today when Governor King signed House Bill 404,
the Alternative Fuel Conversion Act.
The Act, which supports promotion of alternative
transportation fuels, is one of the priority actions recommended in
the New Mexico State Energy Policy, released by the Governor on
November 25, 1991.
The Alternative Fuel Conversion Act expands on a $2.1 million
alternative transportation program currently run by the New Mexico
Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department.
Provision of the Alternative Fuel Conversion Act include:
Mandated state government vehicle conversions for at least
thirty percent of new state vehicles to alternative fuels
beginning in mid-1993. In the second year of the program, the
percentage rises to sixty percent, and by the third year, all
new state vehicles must be capable of running on alternative
fuels.
Establishment of a loan fund not to exceed $5 million to
finance conversions, to be managed by the General Services
Department. No money was appropriated for the fund during the
first year, however.
Creation of a job position in the General Services Department
called the State Alternative Transportation Fuels Manager to
coordinate alternative fuel programs.
Amending of state utility regulatory statues to permit the
retail sale of natural gas for transportation applications by
unregulated private sector companies. The law also was
amended to permit the Public Service Commission to set
regulatory policies to promote natural gas vehicle use.
House Bill 404 was sponsored by Representative Gary K. King,
D-Torrance-Valencia-Bernalillo.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
ISSUED BY THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO FOR SCHOOL BUS
CONVERSION EQUIPMENT AND THE TRAINING OF MAINTENANCE AND
SERVICE STAFF TO ENABLE OR FACILITATE THE USE OF
COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS IN STATE-OWNED SCHOOL BUSES
ARTICLE I.
STATEMENT OF WORK
Proposals are requested for contracts with New Mexico public school
districts to provide school bus conversion equipment and training
for maintenance and service staff to enable or facilitate the use
of compressed natural gas in state-owned school buses. Research
and development projects are not eligible.
ARTICLE II. BACKGROUND
The United States Department of Energy has approved a request by
the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department
(EMNRD) that a portion of the funds allocated to New Mexico through
the Stripper Well Settlement Agreement (D. Ks. MDL No. 378) be
expended as described in Article I., above.
ARTICLE III. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS
This request is directed only to New Mexico public school
districts.
ARTICLE IV. CONTRACT DURATION
The contract period will extend from the date of contract approval
by the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) to
one year after that date.
ARTICLE V. CONTRACT AMOUNT
A total amount of $500,000 is available for implementation of valid
project proposals.
ARTICLE VI.
CONTRACT TERMS
Contracts will be awarded in accordance with the terms of the
attached Professional Services Agreement and in accordance with the
requirements of this Request.
ARTICLE VII.
ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
A.
Bidding entities ("offerors") must examine all contract
documents, noting particularly all requirements that in any way
affect contract work. Failure of an offeror to acquaint itself
fully with the amount and nature of the work required to fulfill
all terms of the contract documents will not be considered as a
basis for extra compensation after a contract has been awarded.
B. If an offeror finds discrepancies, omissions, or ambiguities in
the contract documents, it must at once notify EMNRD, which will
send written corrections or explanations to all offerors. EMNRD
will not be responsible for any oral instructions.
C. If an offeror's proposal adds to, subtracts from, or otherwise
changes the provisions of this request, the proposal will be void.
D. Proposals must certify that any and all entities responsible
for authorizing the activities of the offeror have agreed to the
submittal of its proposal as written.
E. Proposals must certify that funds awarded to the offeror by
EMNRD through any contract issued pursuant to this Request will not
be used to supplant funds that the offeror may have at its disposal
from other sources.
ARTICLE VIII. SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS
A. Proposals must contain a complete and comprehensive description
of and justification for the project, including, when appropriate,
a project research and development history; assessments of similar
projects that are being or have been implemented; evaluations of
project technologies, materials, equipment, and structures;
detailed explanations of procedures for project implementation,
maintenance, and monitoring; a breakout of project funding sources,
funding source allocations, total cost, and costs per task; and a
work schedule indicating the project completion date and the
completion dates for each task.
B. The offeror must implement, maintain, and monitor the project.
C. The offeror must own any equipment or structures required for
project implementation, maintenance, and monitoring, except the
equipment or structures that it will purchase during the course of
the project as explained in the Project Budget Summary section of
the offeror's proposal.
D. Proposals must certify that any research or development
activity necessary for project planning, implementation, or
monitoring has been completed.
E. Proposals must document that the dollar amount of energy
savings realized by the project through reductions in petroleum-
derived fuel consumption will equal or exceed total project cost
within no more than seven years of contract approval by DFA (the
"maximum allowable payback period").
F. The remaining useful life of all project equipment and
structures must exceed the project's maximum allowable payback
period.
G. Proposals must include a plan for monitoring, verifying, and
reporting project energy cost savings.
H. Proposals must describe the source or sources and, per Article
VIII. A., above, the disposition of a specific sum of money added
by the offeror to the sum provided by EMNRD for project
implementation.
I. Proposals must describe any ways in which the project can be
expected harmfully or beneficially to affect the environment.
ARTICLE IX. PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA
Proposals will be evaluated individually and ranked competitively
according to the following weighted criteria.
A.
Feasibility of project and of project schedule
30%
B.
Completeness and accuracy of supporting
25%
documentation
C.
Estimated long-term energy cost savings
25%
D.
Environmental benefits
10%
E.
Brevity of payback period
10%
ARTICLE X.
PROPOSAL FORMAT
Proposals must be organized in accordance with the attached School
Bus Compressed Natural Gas Project Proposal Form. Attachments must
not exceed a total of ten double-spaced, letter-sized pages.
ARTICLE XI.
CONTACT PERSON AND PROPOSAL DEADLINE
Questions regarding this Request for Proposals should be addressed
to:
Ms. Mary Joy Ford, Energy Consultant
Compressed Natural Gas Projects
Energy Conservation and Management Division
New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department
2040 South Pacheco Street
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505
Ph: (505) 827-5957
Proposals must be received in triplicate (one original and two
copies) at this address no later than 5:00 p.m., June 3, 1991.
EMNRD reserves the right to cancel this Request for Proposals at
any time during the procurement process if such cancellation is in
the best interest of the state of New Mexico. EMNRD will not be
responsible for any costs incurred by offeror related to its
proposal.
A NATURAL GAS
VEHICLE WON'T
CLOUD THE ISSUE.
Fuel for Thought
Natural gas vehicles are also a
More than 6 million vehicles could
bargain for America. Because the
be economically converted immedi-
New Mexico - a land of crystal clear
U.S. contains an abundant domestic
ately. Conversion is a sound invest-
vistas and fresh pinon-scented air.
supply of natural gas. natural gas
ment in your company's future with
But today, the quality of our air is in
vehicles reduce our reliance on
long-term returns in savings and
serious danger because of car
imported fuels. And that can drive
clean air.
exhaust emissions.
our economy up.
You help put the brakes on pollution
On the Road to Success
by converting your vehicles to natural
Safety Auto-Motives
About 30,000 vehicles across
gas. Natural gas reduces your vehi-
A natural gas engine works much
America now use natural gas. The
cles' carbon monoxide emissions by
the same way as a gasoline engine.
Gas Company of New Mexico, alone.
99%. your reactive hydrocarbon emis-
Except the natural gas is compres-
operates 116 natural-gas powered
sions by 85%. and your nitrogen oxide
sed and stored in a cylinder in the
vehicles in Albuquerque, Santa Fe
emissions by 65%. Plus, it rids the air
rear of the vehicle. It is depressur-
and Farmington. The Gas Company
of all particulate pollutants.
ized and mixed with air. then carried
is currently working with the City of
to the engine's combustion chamber
Albuquerque to convert 10 Sun Tran
Your Clean, Lean
and ignited.
Buses and 10 minibuses to natural
Driving Machine
Natural gas is a much safer fuel than
gas. The City already has conver-
ted six of its own fleet vehicles to
There's more. Natural gas not only
gasoline. It ignites at 1200 degrees -
helps clear the air, it keeps your
a much higher temperature than
natural gas.
vehicles' engines clean, too. With an
gasoline's ignition point of 850
In the next few years, natural gas
octane rating of 130. compared to
degrees. And the natural gas cylin-
may become the vehicle- of
gasoline's 95. natural gas turns your
ders are made of a much thicker,
choice as more refueling stations
vehicle into a high performance
tougher steel than gasoline tanks
open. Currently, only 275 private
driving machine.
that puncture easily.
and a dozen public refueling stations
exist across the nation. America is
Plus, natural gas lowers your main-
tenance costs. You'll only need tune
on the move to natural gas vehicles.
The Convertible That
ups and oil changes half as often.
And you can be a driving force.
Pays for Itself
For more information, call
And since there's no carbon buildup,
Frank Burcham at the
the pistons and cylinders last longer.
Converting your gasoline powered
Gas Company of New Mexico.
vehicle to natural gas is less expen-
889-8446.
Gear Up for Savings
sive than you think. The average
cost of converting a vehicle ranges
With a natural gas vehicle, you can
from $1,500 to $2,000. But. depen-
return to the days when fuel cost 60
ding on your fleet size, the conver-
cents a gallon. It's amazing. Natural
sion can pay for itself in as little as
gas costs 40% less than gasoline for
three years.
the same miles per gallon! That
GAS
pumps hundreds of dollars back
into your cash flow.
NEW MEXICO'S
BEST ENERGY VALUE.
BECOME A DRIVING F
It's time to put ourselves on the road to cleaner air. And natural gas vehicles can get us
there quicker. They're a ready solution to the problems of smog and ozone pollution in
THE
our communities.
Plus, natural gas vehicles can help us curb our reliance on foreign oil - an important issue
Fuel Gauge
Transducer
with the current gulf crisis and foreign trade deficit. About 93% of the natural gas used in
signals the pres-
sure in the vehicle
cylinders.
this country is produced domestically - much of it right here in New Mexico - and the
other 7% comes from Canada.
By converting to natural gas vehicles, we can put the brakes on pollution, gear up for long
term fuel savings, and speed up state revenues from natural gas production.
10
STEERING US TOWARD A BETTER LIFE
Regulator
accepts natural gas from storage cylinders and
Just how much could using natural gas vehicles improve the quality of life in
feeds this gas to the mixer in response to de
mand and vacuum signals from the intake sye
tem. k also leatures a built-en gas solenoid valve
with vacuum lockout. engine adling device. xas
New Mexico? Consider: ciean-burning natural gas reduces our vehicles' carbon
primer. water circulation purts and a
replaceable - filler element
monoxide emissions by 99%, our reactive hydrocarbon emissions by 85%, our
nitrogen oxide emissions by 65% and our particulate emissions by 100%.
As the chart below shows, natural gas easily beats other alternative fuels - like
THE
methanol and diesel - in the battle against pollution. So natural gas vehicles jump
GASOLINE
Pollutant Emissions by Fuel Type
start the environmental move-
In grams per mile
ment by creating significantly
Fuel Selector Switch
Natural Gas produces much less smog-producing gases
permits the driver to change from natural to
than gasoline, and costs about 65c per gallon equivalent.
gasoline and back without stepping
3.5
less smog and contaminants in
3
the air we breathe.
2.5
Reactive Hydrocarbons
2
Nitrogen Oxides
Carbon Monoxide
1.5
1
0.5
Cylinders
Dedicated
Current
METHANOL
GASOLINE
serviced from a vanety of N/A and types. ines are
materied to the which . NA LM " is PROVIDER
(new technology)
technology
with individual shut-off valid
NATURAL GAS
NATURAL GAS
Master
I
.
normals
..
ORCE FOR CLEAN AIR
THE CONVERTIBLE THAT PAYS FOR ITSELF
Filling
Connection
This fitting includes
.4 non-return valve
And even more amazing, natural gas vehicles save us money. They can return
that automatically
wats the system
when refueling
us to the days when fuel cost less than 65c a gallon! That's up to 50% less than
Adost plug pre-
writs dirt from
-ntering the filling
Gasoline
connection
Solenoid
gasoline for the same miles per gallon.
Valve
Electricatly
operated. shuts
off gasoline to the
More than 6 million vehicles nationwide could be economically converted to
carburetor when
natural gas 15
bring used.
natural gas immediately. Buses, taxis, police cars, company trucks and other fleet
vehicles are optimum for conversion.
The average cost of converting ranges from $1,500 to $2,500. But, depending on
the fleet size, the conversion can pay for itself in as little as three years.
Conversion is really a simple process that does not require removal of any
original equipment from the car.
A natural gas engine works much the same way as a gasoline engine. Except
Dual Curve Ignition Box
senition timing for natural gas.
natural gas is much safer than gasoline. It's tank is much stronger than gasoline's
- in fact, tests show they can withstand impacts, bullets and dynamite. And
natural gas ignites at 1200 degrees - a much higher temperature than gasoline's
ignition point of 850 degrees.
Mixer
is connected to the
regulator by low
pressure tubing
FUELING NEW MEXICO'S ECONOMY
It is specifically
designed for effi-
cient mixing and
currect flow rate
for the carboretor
Not only does using natural gas vehicles improve our lives as consumers, but
and the engine.
also as producers. Natural gas production is a thriving business in New Mexico.
Revenues from oil and gas sources combined supplied an estimated $509.3
million of the State General Fund's $1.7 billion income, 95% of the State
Permanent Fund, and 87% of the state's Severance Tax Permanent Fund.
A one percent increase in natural gas production and use
GAS
within New Mexico due to natural gas vehicles could
COMPANY OF
NEW MEXICO
mean millions to the state in added revenue. And we
Fuel Gauge
indicates the amount of natural gas left in the
cylinders. II may be mounted near the selector
have an abundant supply to keep us on the
switch or in the dashboard.
road far into the next century.
WE'RE TALKING GAS.
New Mexico's Best Energy Value.
Ive
al the natural
Application Summary
ID Number: P.016
Project:
Santa Rosa Plateau Agreement
Contact:
Mr. N. Gregory Taylor
Metropolitan Water Dist. of Southern California
P.O. Box 54153
Telephone:
Los Angeles, CA 90054-
(213) 250-6115
Summary:
The Santa Rosa Plateau Management Committee -- MWD of Southern
California, The Nature Conservancy, Riverside County,
California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Services -- saved the unique resources of the Santa
Rosa Plateau and created a model for cooperation in regional
environmental planning which can be used to bring regulatory
agencies and responsible developers together in a program
which can simultaneously benefit wildlife, and people.
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
Bottom paragraph of #5 of practical and altruistic. Can be
turned about -- the environmental groups may have been the
practical ones and the agencies the altruistic ones. This is
a good, workable project, and can be lead in other areas for
protection of unique quality areas.
Unusual. One accomplishment led to a second significant one.
Five members cooperated to add 3,500 acres.
P.016
5.
Summary
The Santa Rosa Plateau in southwestern Riverside
County, California, is one of the last native grasslands in the
southern California, a remnant of southern California's natural
heritage which supports hundreds of rare and native species.
Among other resources, the plateau supports the last remaining
self-sustaining Engelmann Oak forest in the world. In 1990, The
Nature Conservancy (TNC) owned about 3,500 acres of the plateau,
in two parcels separated by a private parcel scheduled to be
developed. Acquisition and preservation of this land was
considered the highest regional environmental priority by TNC and
others, such as the Audubon Society and the Sierra Club.
However, acquisition was beyond the financial capabilities of any
individual party. A partnership was essential.
Faced with imminent loss of this unique and biologically
significant area, six groups united in a public-private partnership
to provide $35.4 million to acquire, preserve, and manage the
3,600-acre parcel separating the TNC lands, thereby creating a
contiguous 7, 100-acre wildlife reserve and ensuring the
conservation of this unique habitat. With the support of "Preserve
Our Plateau" (POP, a group of concerned citizens), the Metropolitan
Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) contributed
about 44 percent of the required funding, setting up an innovative
mitigation bank for its future projects, including a major
reservoir project. The County of Riverside (County) provided $15
million for creation of open space, and the California Department
of Fish and Game (Fish and Game) provided $5 million from its
wildlife conservation funds. TNC provided management support and
helped coordinate with the local community support group, "Save Our
Plateau." The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Fish and wildlife)
provided technical and management support.
The partnership which evolved is an unusual blending
of the practical and altruistic. On the practical side, the
four government agencies each furthered basic agency goals
through this partnership. On the altruistic side, TNC and POP
achieved a long-term goal of unifying the reserve. These
practical accomplishments required compromise, and each of the
partners sacrificed some special interest to achieve the
general goal of preserving the Plateau. The five institutional
members now manage this land by consensus. Each brings funding
and expertise to the task of preserving natural values, while
allowing recreation and public education programs. Management
by a consensus of regulatory agencies, environmental entities,
and a major project developer is a promising experiment in
natural resources governance. The success of this endeavor
demonstrates that a middle ground can be found to meet
environmental challenges.
The Santa Rosa Plateau partnership has been recognized
as model for future inter-governmental and private sector
cooperation in the pursuit of environmental quality. It
demonstrates that diverse interests, including the interests of
those planning significant development in a region, can be brought
together to accomplish a critical regional environmental goal.
6. A.
(1)
The formal partnership consists of the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California, the County of Riverside,
The Nature Conservancy, the California Department of Fish
and Game, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Preserve Our Plateau is involved in an informal manner.
Metropolitan, the County, and the Department contributed
funds to establish and fund the partnership. TNC and the
Service provide planning assistance, technical, and
management expertise. POP provides inspiration and local
community support for management programs.
(2)
Acquisition, preservation, and management of the Santa
Rosa Plateau was the primary goal of the partnership.
Management objectives included management for natural
resource preservation and for interpretation and
education. Establishing and ensuring the success of the
partnership itself was also an objective.
As a part of the partnership agreements, a five-member
operating committee (one voting member from each partner)
was established. It acts by consensus to manage the
entire 7,100-acre reserve, with TNC providing on the
ground resources management and the County providing
security patrols and interpretive services. The
Department also provides interpretive service assistance.
The committee acts under a management plan, with funding
from an endowment of approximately $2.1 million (yielding
about $170,000 per year for management.
The partnership management plan specifies roles of the
partners and outlines the principles of natural resources
and recreation management of the Plateau. The management
committee acts within the framework of these objectives.
(3) The partnership shares management and regulatory
responsibilities normally reserved to individual partners.
For example, the Department and the Service are partners in
management decisions which may, in some instances, require
their regulatory review. Their role as partners means that
they are intimately involved in formulation and
implementation of management activities. Although the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
apply to management activities, the Service and Department
regulatory function is performed as a part of the
management team, as well as independently. Management
activities are thus pre-planned to ensure compliance.
The partnership includes Metropolitan, whose support was
initially related to mitigation for its Eastside Reservoir
Project. Metropolitan's project is underway and its
mitigation has been accepted, but it remains involved in
the partnership, actively engaged in cooperative regional
environmental planning. Metropolitan has taken a lead role
in multi-species planning for the Riverside County area,
basing much of this effort on lands surrounding its
facilities. As an example of Metropolitan's continuing
interest, it has advised numerous other regional and local
agencies in how to establish similar partnerships with
local, state, and federal agencies. Metropolitan and the
Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency are currently
cooperating on the county program to preserve habitat for
the endangered Stephens' kangaroo rat.
TNC and the County Park and Open Space District have also
been challenged by the partnership, which has brought them
into regional planning of sensitive species on an equal
footing with the resource agencies. The partnership has
thus offered the various parties an opportunity to expand
their perspectives, and to explore new management options
for the region's resources.
The primary problem the partnership has overcome is the
problem of adversarial relationships typical of regional
planning. By bringing the partners together on a regular
basis, and establishing a basis for trust and
understanding, the partnership permits long-term land use
planning to occur in a cooperative rather than an
adversarial atmosphere.
(4) The preservation of 7,100 acres of the Santa Rosa Plateau
was accomplished by the partnership in early 1991 when the
3,700-acre parcel scheduled to be developed was instead
acquired and preserved. In addition to acquiring and
preserving the Santa Rosa Plateau, the partnership has
provided a model for other conservation agreements. In
late 1991, the partners participated in a second management
agreement to preserve a , 600-acre area essential to the
endangered Stephens' kangaroo rat. The partners are now
cooperating on a multi-species plan for lands surrounding
Metropolitan's two reservoirs in the region.
Another concrete achievement of the partners was
negotiation of a mitigation banking agreement for
Metropolitan's reservoir project. The formula for
calculating "credits" and "debits" from the bank
established at the Plateau was a significant advance over
traditional habitat quality measurement techniques.
The least concrete, but perhaps the most important,
achievement of the partnership has been establishment of a
general spirit of cooperation and good will among the
partners. This ultimately results in a better
understanding of each partner's role in regional planning.
As a direct result of this good will, resource agencies
have had a positive impact on Metropolitan pipeline to
avoid sensitive species areas.
(5) First, the partnership agreement itself can be adapted to
other settings, because the role definitions and funding
arrangements make sense for both regulatory agencies and
for those seeking to develop in a responsible manner.
Second, to solve the problems of mitigation banking, the
partnership developed a general approach to habitat quality
analysis which can be used as a model for future banking
agreements. This methodology was recently recognized as a
significant innovation in environmental planning by the
Association of Environmental Professionals. Finally, the
partnership's structure can be modeled by other local,
regional, state, and federal agencies.
P.016
Application Form-1992
6. A-D: Please answer only the following Award criteria
questions pertaining to the specific Award category for
which you are applying. (For example: Partnership category,
Please read the application form carefully and provide all information
answer questions A1-A5; EQM, B1-B7; Innovation, C1-C5;
equested. Please type or print clearly. Supplementary pages should
Education, D1-D5).
ollow the format of this form as closely as possible. Incomplete applica-
tions will not be considered.
Answers should be clear, concise and should emphasize
quantifiable results or benefits of the program. Each
1. Select the Award category for which you are competing:
answer to a sub-question should not exceed 100 words.
(Note: A program may be entered in only one category. See descriptions of
Taken as a whole, all answers to criteria questions should
categories in Question 6.)
not exceed two pages.
(01) X Partnership
(02) Environmental Quality Management
A. PARTNERSHIP: awarded to diverse organizations or
(03) Innovation
groups that have fostered cooperative approaches to envi-
(04) Education and Communication
ronmental needs at the local, regional, or national level.
2. Name of the project or program described in this application:
1. Who are the partnership's members? What are their
roles? What resources do they bring to the partnership?
Santa Rosa Plateau Agreement
2. What are the partnership's specific environmental or
3. Name of Award Applicant(s): (Use separate sheet, if needed)
conservation objectives? Has a sustainable plan of con-
Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
certed action for meeting these needs been established?
Name: See attached sheet
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative?
What obstacles, environmental or otherwise, does it
Title:
overcome?
Organization:
4. What measurable environmental or conservation
benefits has the partnership produced?
treet:
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by
City:
State:
Zip:
others and transferred to other settings?
Telephone:
Fax:
B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT:
awarded to organizations which have demonstrated that
environmental values can be integrated into sound man-
4. Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
agement decisions and objectives. (Note: This category
XXMr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
reflects broad-based organizational approaches. Special
programs or projects may be more appropriate for entry
Name: N. Gregory Taylor
in one of the other three award categories.)
Title: Assistant to the General Manager
1. What are the organization's environmental policies
and objectives?
Organization: Metropolitan Water Dist. of Southern
California
2. How has the organization's top management
Street:
P.O. Box 54153
demonstrated commitment to these policies and objec-
tives? Do the policies demonstrate commitment
CityLos Angeles State: CA
Zip: 90054
beyond legal compliance?
Telephone: 213-250-6115
Fax: 213-250-6950
3. What are the organization's environmental stan-
dards for its product(s) and operations? (Explain how
NOTE: The Selection Committee will rely heavily on Questions 5-6 in
they go beyond legal constraints and how they relate to man-
determining how well the application meets the award criteria.
agement control mechanisms.)
Please attach a one-page (not to exceed 500 words) summary, suitable
4. How are these policies and objectives incorporated in
r publication, which provides a complete overview of the application.
the: a) Day-to-day management of the organization; b) Orga-
The one-page response should be clear, concise, and should emphasize
nization's decision-making about research and development,
quantifiable results or benefits of the program.
long-range planning, capital, and operating budgets?
5. How are these policies and objectives reflected in the orga-
NOTE: The following questions are for informational purposes.
nization's relationships with employees, customers, suppliers,
and the general public?
7. How long has the technology, program, project or service been
operational?
6. What are the organization's control mechanisms that give
2 years
decision makers objective data to measure continuous perfor-
mance improvement toward its short- and long-term environ-
8. Which of the following most accurately describes the appli-
mental objectives?
cant(s)? (Check more than one, if applicable.)
(01) National Business or Industry
7. What quantifiable, sustained environmental quality results
(02)
Regional or Local Business or Industry
in products and processes have resulted from the organiza-
(03) XX National Nonprofit Organization or Foundation
tion's environmental approach?
(04) XX Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05) XX Local or State Government/Government Agency
C. INNOVATION-awarded to individuals, organizations and
(06) Educational Organization
groups who have demonstrated exceptional creativity or pio-
(07) Voluntary Civic Organization
neered new approaches in the development and/or execution of
(08) Trade or Professional Society
technologies, programs, projects, or services that are environ-
(09) Youth Organization
mentally sound and economically sensible?
(10) Labor Organization
(11) Individual
1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or
(12) XX Other (Please describe): Federal Agency
service?
9. If business or industry, which of the following best describes
2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinc-
the type of business or industry?
tive or innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or other-
(01)
Agriculture/Forestry
wise, does it overcome?
(02)
Aerospace
(03) Communications
3. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior
(04) Construction
to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a
(05)
Electronics/Computers
problem for which no solutions previously existed?
(06) Energy
(07) Engineering
4. Can the technology, program, project or service be replicated
(08)
Environmental Services
in an economically feasible manner?
(09)
Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10)
Manufacturing-Chemical
5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental ben-
(11)
Manufacturing-Other
efits or results of the technology, program, project, or service?
(12) Mining
(13) Recreation
D. EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION-awarded to indi-
(14) Trade-Wholesale
(15)
viduals, organizations, or groups which have developed educa-
Transportation
tional or informational programs that inspire respect for the
(16) Utilities-Electric, Gas or
(17)
environment and raise the public's environmental literacy.
Other (Please describe):
1. What is the program? What are its environmental or conser-
10. Which of the following most accurately describes the environ-
vation objectives?
mental program under consideration for an award? (Check more
than one, if applicable.)
2. Who is the program's audience? How large is the audience?
(01)
agriculture
How is the program's effect on the audience determined?
(02) air quality
(03) XX conservation
3. What is original or distinctive about the program?
(04) education-general public
(05)
education-academic
4. What are the measurable results or benefits produced by the
(06)
energy
program? How does the program promote the development
(07) XX environmental quality management
of an environmental ethic and make a positive contribution to
(08) forestry
environmental awareness?
(09) hazardous waste remediation
(10) international
5. How can the program be used or modeled by others?
(11) natural resources.
(12)
pollution control
14. Please indicate which of the following are the primary audi-
(13) XXrecreation
ences, beneficiaries, or users of the program or service, and esti-
(14)
recycling
mate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
(15)
solid waste
(16)
source reduction/pollution prevention
Type
How Many People
(17)
water quality
(18) wetlands
(01) Business or Industry
(19) wildlife and fish resources
(02) Trade or Professional Society
(20)
Other (Please describe):
(03) Government
(04) Educational Organizations
11. If applicable, list the sources of the program's support and the
(05) Youth
percentage of support provided, including grants and in-kind
(06) Community or Public Interest Groups 300 people
contributions of goods and services. (Use separate sheet if needed).
(07) Local Community or Local Public 25,000 people
(08) General Public
200,000 people
Source Metropolitan: $15.4 Mil %
(09) Employees
(10) Customers or Clients
Source Riverside County $15 Mi %
(11) Other (Please describe):
Source CDF&G $5 Million
%
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project,
or conservation awards in the past five years?
including approximate value of in-kind contributions of goods
On April 28, 1992, the Association of
and services:
Environmental Professionals recognized
the Santa Rosa Plateau Management Agree
40 million
ment as an innivation in environmental
documentation.
13. If the project is ongoing, what is the annual cost?
2 million endownment
16. In one paragraph (not to exceed 50 words), please summarize the program, its objectives and what it has accomplished. Use space
provided below. This paragraph should be suitable for use in a catalog, database or brochure.
The Santa Rosa Plateau Management Committe--MWD of Southern California, The
Nature Conservancy, Riverside County, California Department of Fish and Game,
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services--saved the unique resources of the
Santa Rosa Plateau and created a model for cooperation in regional environ-
mental planning which can be used to bring regulatory agencies, and responsib
developers together in a program which can simultaneously benefit wildlife
and people.
17. Please include 3 one-page letters of recommendation attached
How to Apply
to the application when it is submitted for consideration. Letters
should be addressed: "Attention: Award References." References
Completed applications must be postmarked
should have first-hand knowledge of the environmental program,
by May 22, 1992 and mailed to the:
service, or technology and should offer a candid evaluation of its
The President's Environment and
success or effectiveness. References may also include users or
Conservation Challenge Awards
beneficiaries of your program.
Council on Environmental Quality
NOTE: Letters of recommendation must accompany the applica-
The White House
tion when it is submitted to CEQ. Letters sent directly to CEQ
722 Jackson Place, NW
will not be considered. Please list the references in the spaces
Washington, DC 20503
below.
All information submitted with the application should be
Name:
ATTACHED
considered public information and becomes property of
the President's Challenge Awards program.
Title:
Award recipients will be notified in Fall 1992. Recipients
Street:
must be willing to assist the President's Challenge Awards
program in making nonproprietary information about
their environmental programs available to others who
City:
State:
Zip:
wish to replicate their success.
Telephone:
Fax:
Application Format
Name:
Please submit one original and four photocopies of your
application. You may include up to 10 pages of supporting
Title:
materials. (NOTE: Photocopying both sides of a sheet of
paper will be considered two-pages.) Any oversized items
Street:
must be reduced to fit a standard 8.5" X 11" page format.
City:
State:
Zip:
Supporting materials may include items such as brochures,
photographs, press clippings, and graphs depicting the
Telephone:
Fax:
program's results. The materials may not be used as a
substitute for written responses to Questions 5 and 6.
Name:
The order of pages in the submitted application should be
as follows:
Title:
1. 4-page application (Questions 1-20)
2. 500-word overview summary (Question 5)
Street:
3. 2-page responses to criteria questions (Question 6)
4. 10 pages of supporting materials
City:
State:
Zip:
5. 3 letters of recommendation (Question 17)
Telephone:
Fax:
NOTE: The entire package should be stapled in the upper,
left-hand corner. Any items sent over the 10-page limit of
supporting materials will be disregarded and not reviewed
18. Please sign below to indicate that all applicants agree a) to
by the technical evaluators and selection committee. Do
abide by the rules and requirements of the awards competition,
not put the application or backup materials into a binder,
and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the
notebook or plastic cover.
best of their knowledge.
OMB Control No. 0331-0002, (Exp. 2/95): As required by the
Signature; n.M.ego Taylor
Date:
Mary
Paperwork Reduction Act, CEQ estimates that completion of this
application will take 10 hours. Send comments regarding the col-
Ehee. asst to
The
lection of this information, including suggestions for reducing the
Telephone: 213-250-6115 Southern Calef
Title: General Minager Organization: District
paperwork burden, to CEQ and also to: Paperwork Reduction Pro-
ject, Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., 20503
printed on recycled paper. containing more than 50% post-consumer waste
Application Form - 1992
3.
Names of Applicants:
A.
Mr. Carl Boronkay
General Manager
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
P. O. Box 54153
Los Angeles, California 90054
213-250-6252, 213-250-6950 (FAX)
B.
Mr. Steve McCormick
State Director
The Nature Conservancy
785 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94103
415-777-0487, 415-777-0244 (FAX)
C.
Mr. Boyd Gibbons
Director
California Department of Fish and Game
1416 Ninth Street, 12th Floor
Sacramento, California 95814
916-653-7667, 916-653-1856 (FAX)
D.
The Honorable Walter P. Abraham
Supervisor, District 1
Riverside County
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, California 92501
714-275-1010, 714-275-1105 (FAX)
E.
The Honorable Kay Ceniceros
Supervisor, District 3
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, California 92501
714-275-1010, 714-275-1105 (FAX)
F.
Mr. Marvin L. Plenert
Regional Director
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Eastside Federal Complex
911 NE 11th Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97232
503-231-6118, 503-231-6116 (FAX)
G.
Dr. Daniel Silver
President
Preserve Our Plateau
1422 North Sweetzer Avenue, #401
Los Angeles, California 90069
213-654-1456
5.
Summary
The Santa Rosa Plateau in southwestern Riverside
County, California, is one of the last native grasslands in the
southern California, a remnant of southern California's natural
heritage which supports hundreds of rare and native species.
Among other resources, the plateau supports the last remaining
self-sustaining Engelmann Oak forest in the world. In 1990, The
Nature Conservancy (TNC) owned about 3,500 acres of the plateau,
in two parcels separated by a private parcel scheduled to be
developed. Acquisition and preservation of this land was
considered the highest regional environmental priority by TNC and
others, such as the Audubon Society and the Sierra Club.
However, acquisition was beyond the financial capabilities of any
individual party. A partnership was essential.
Faced with imminent loss of this unique and biologically
significant area, six groups united in a public-private partnership
to provide $35.4 million to acquire, preserve, and manage the
3, , 600-acre parcel separating the TNC lands, thereby creating a
contiguous ,100-acre wildlife reserve and ensuring the
conservation of this unique habitat. With the support of "Preserve
Our Plateau" (POP, a group of concerned citizens), the Metropolitan
Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) contributed
about 44 percent of the required funding, setting up an innovative
mitigation bank for its future projects, including a major
reservoir project. The County of Riverside (County) provided $15
million for creation of open space, and the California Department
of Fish and Game (Fish and Game) provided $5 million from its
wildlife conservation funds. TNC provided management support and
helped coordinate with the local community support group, "Save Our
Plateau. If The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Fish and Wildlife)
provided technical and management support.
The partnership which evolved is an unusual blending
of the practical and altruistic. On the practical side, the
four government agencies each furthered basic agency goals
through this partnership. On the altruistic side, TNC and POP
achieved a long-term goal of unifying the reserve. These
practical accomplishments required compromise, and each of the
partners sacrificed some special interest to achieve the
general goal of preserving the Plateau. The five institutional
members now manage this land by consensus. Each brings funding
and expertise to the task of preserving natural values, while
allowing recreation and public education programs. Management
by a consensus of regulatory agencies, environmental entities,
and a major project developer is a promising experiment in
natural resources governance. The success of this endeavor
demonstrates that a middle ground can be found to meet
environmental challenges.
The Santa Rosa Plateau partnership has been recognized
as model for future inter-governmental and private sector
cooperation in the pursuit of environmental quality. It
demonstrates that diverse interests, including the interests of
those planning significant development in a region, can be brought
together to accomplish a critical regional environmental goal.
6. A.
(1)
The formal partnership consists of the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California, the County of Riverside,
The Nature Conservancy, the California Department of Fish
and Game, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Preserve Our Plateau is involved in an informal manner.
Metropolitan, the County, and the Department contributed
funds to establish and fund the partnership. TNC and the
Service provide planning assistance, technical, and
management expertise. POP provides inspiration and local
community support for management programs.
(2)
Acquisition, preservation, and management of the Santa
Rosa Plateau was the primary goal of the partnership.
Management objectives included management for natural
resource preservation and for interpretation and
education. Establishing and ensuring the success of the
partnership itself was also an objective.
As a part of the partnership agreements, a five-member
operating committee (one voting member from each partner)
was established. It acts by consensus to manage the
entire 7,100-acre reserve, with TNC providing on the
ground resources management and the County providing
security patrols and interpretive services. The
Department also provides interpretive service assistance.
The committee acts under a management plan, with funding
from an endowment of approximately $2.1 million (yielding
about $170,000 per year for management.
The partnership management plan specifies roles of the
partners and outlines the principles of natural resources
and recreation management of the Plateau. The management
committee acts within the framework of these objectives.
(3) The partnership shares management and regulatory
responsibilities normally reserved to individual partners.
For example, the Department and the Service are partners in
management decisions which may, in some instances, require
their regulatory review. Their role as partners means that
they are intimately involved in formulation and
implementation of management activities. Although the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
apply to management activities, the Service and Department
regulatory function is performed as a part of the
management team, as well as independently. Management
activities are thus pre-planned to ensure compliance.
The partnership includes Metropolitan, whose support was
initially related to mitigation for its Eastside Reservoir
Project. Metropolitan's project is underway and its
mitigation has been accepted, but it remains involved in
the partnership, actively engaged in cooperative regional
environmental planning. Metropolitan has taken a lead role
in multi-species planning for the Riverside County area,
basing much of this effort on lands surrounding its
facilities. As an example of Metropolitan's continuing
interest, it has advised numerous other regional and local
agencies in how to establish similar partnerships with
local, state, and federal agencies. Metropolitan and the
Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency are currently
cooperating on the county program to preserve habitat for
the endangered Stephens' kangaroo rat.
TNC and the County Park and Open Space District have also
been challenged by the partnership, which has brought them
into regional planning of sensitive species on an equal
footing with the resource agencies. The partnership has
thus offered the various parties an opportunity to expand
their perspectives, and to explore new management options
for the region's resources.
The primary problem the partnership has overcome is the
problem of adversarial relationships typical of regional
planning. By bringing the partners together on a regular
basis, and establishing a basis for trust and
understanding, the partnership permits long-term land use
planning to occur in a cooperative rather than an
adversarial atmosphere.
(4) The preservation of 7,100 acres of the Santa Rosa Plateau
was accomplished by the partnership in early 1991 when the
,700-acre parcel scheduled to be developed was instead
acquired and preserved. In addition to acquiring and
preserving the Santa Rosa Plateau, the partnership has
provided a model for other conservation agreements. In
late 1991, the partners participated in a second management
agreement to preserve a 1,600-acre area essential to the
endangered Stephens' kangaroo rat. The partners are now
cooperating on a multi-species plan for lands surrounding
Metropolitan's two reservoirs in the region.
Another concrete achievement of the partners was
negotiation of a mitigation banking agreement for
Metropolitan's reservoir project. The formula for
calculating "credits" and "debits" from the bank
established at the Plateau was a significant advance over
traditional habitat quality measurement techniques.
The least concrete, but perhaps the most important,
achievement of the partnership has been establishment of a
general spirit of cooperation and good will among the
partners. This ultimately results in a better
understanding of each partner's role in regional planning.
As a direct result of this good will, resource agencies
have had a positive impact on Metropolitan pipeline to
avoid sensitive species areas.
(5) First, the partnership agreement itself can be adapted to
other settings, because the role definitions and funding
arrangements make sense for both regulatory agencies and
for those seeking to develop in a responsible manner.
Second, to solve the problems of mitigation banking, the
partnership developed a general approach to habitat quality
analysis which can be used as a model for future banking
agreements. This methodology was recently recognized as a
significant innovation in environmental planning by the
Association of Environmental Professionals. Finally, the
partnership's structure can be modeled by other local,
regional, state, and federal agencies.
SACRAMENTO ADDRESS
COMMITTEES
STATE CAPITOL
95814
California State Senate
APPROPRIATIONS (CHAIRMAN)
JUDICIARY
AGRICULTURE AND WATER
(916) 445-9781
RESOURCES
DISTRICT OFFICE
360
JOINT COMMITTEES
00 LIME STREET
SUITE 111
PRISON CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATIONS (CHAIRMAN)
ERSIDE CA 92501
LEGISLATIVE ETHICS
(714) 782-4111
(VICE CHAIRMAN)
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT
REVISION OF THE PENAL CODE
STATE SENATOR
SELECT COMMITTEES
ROBERT PRESLEY
CHILDREN AND YOUTH (CHAIRMAN)
MOBILEHOMES
PACIFIC RIM (VICE CHAIRMAN)
THIRTY-SIXTH SENATORIAL DISTRICT
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
CHAIRMAN
FAIRS & RURAL ISSUES
PLANNING FOR CALIFORNIA'S
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
GROWTH
SPECIAL COMMITTEES
SOLID & HAZARDOUS WASTE
May 21, 1992
THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT.
OZONE DEPLETION &
ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION
The Honorable George Bush
President of the United States
c/o The Council on Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place, Northwest
Washington, D.C. 20503
Dear President Bush:
I am writing to express my support for the submittal made by The
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California in the
innovative partnership category of the above-captioned awards
program.
MWD is one of five partners that jointly manage the Santa Rosa
Plateau Ecological Reserve, which is located in my district in
Riverside County. The Reserve embraces nearly 7,000 acres of
virtually undisturbed native grasslands and oak woodlands that
have nearly vanished from Southern California.
The other partners are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
Nature Conservancy (which made the initial land acquisition for
the Reserve in 1984), the California Department of Fish and Game,
and the Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District.
The State and the County contributed, respectively, $5.0 million,
and $15.0 million, which, when combined with MWD's $15.4 million,
funded the acquisitions necessary to complete protection of this
important example of California's natural heritage.
The five partners make management decisions about the Reserve on
a consensus basis, with no split votes. While this process can
be time-consuming, the partners all recognize that the process of
building consensus results in decisions that are stronger because
they have the commitment of all the partners.
While the Reserve partly serves as a "mitigation bank" for one of
MWD's nearby projects, this approach has successfully blurred the
distinction between regulating and regulated parties, thereby
enabling the focus of the partnership to remain the protection
The Honorable George Bush
President of the United States
c/o The Council on Environmental Quality
May 21, 1992
Page Two
and management of the natural resources of the Reserve. In this
setting, the partners can utilize their own particular and
different areas of expertise and carry out their particular
responsibilities in the management of the Reserve.
I believe this successful and innovative partnership approach to
the management of significant and sensitive natural habitat is
deserving of your award, and the recognition thereby conferred
will assist in acquainting others with the possibilities of this
approach.
Sincerely,
State Senator
RP:ja/ca:cl
SEMEL YMHN KELLEY
IEL:916-324-1393
May 22,92 10:08 No 001 P.02
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE
SACRAMENTO OFFICE:
CAPITOL
DISTRICT OFFICE:
P
942649
Si
ENTO 94249-0001
(916) 445-7852
STATE
6840 INDIANA AVENUE
SUITE 150
FAX (916) 324-1393
ORNE
RIVERSIDE 92506
NANCY J. NEWBILL
(714) 369-6644
SENIOR ASSISTANT
FAX (714) 369-0366
COMMITTEES
MARGI WEGGELAND
AGRICULTURE
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
HEALTH
LABOR & EMPLOYMENT
WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE
TOLL FREE
DAVID G. KELLEY
1-800-824-5200
ASSEMBLYMAN, SEVENTY-THIRD DISTRICT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
VICE CHAIRMAN
WATER. PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE
May 21, 1992
The Honorable George Bush
President of the United States
c/o The Council on Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20503
Subject: "The President's 1992 Environment and
Conservation Challenge Awards"
Dear Mr. President:
I am writing to express my support for the Santa Rosa Plateau
Ecological Reserve which has been submitted for consideration for an
award in the partnership category.
The management of the Plateau is an innovative, successful model
for integrating diverse public agencies and private entities. The
partners all serve on a management committee that makes decisions on
the basis of a natural resource management plan and in accordance with
the parties.
a cooperative management agreement that assigns responsibilities among
follows: The five partners, and their respective responsibilities, are as
*U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE provides consulting services in
biological management and oversees research.
*THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME is the principal
trustee agency. It is charged with the protection of wildlife
and their habitat, and will participate in providing interpre-
tive programs for the visiting public.
+19164475022
DANGERMOND & ASSOC
288 P02
MAY 22 '92 11:07:
024-1095
May 22,92
10:09 No.001 P.03
President George Bush
May 21, 1992
Page Two
*THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
provides interpretive services.
patrols the Reserve, supervises visitors, administers funds and
*THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
participated in the acquisition of the land for the Reserve
mitigation has for a project it proposes to construct nearby; and, as
provided a substantial endowment for day-to-day operations
resources. at the Reserve, as well as research concerning its' natural
*THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, which made the first acquisitions for
the Reserve in 1984, serves as Reserve Manager, planning and
carrying out responsibilities on a daily basis for the protection
and enhancement of the Reserve's natural resources.
contributions financial possible from each partner and reflects their legal and
This allocation of responsibility takes fullest advantage of the
interests in the Reserve.
deserving of your award.
I respectfully suggest that this innovative partnership is most
DAVID Sincerely, G. s KELLEY Kelley
Member of the Assembly
State of California
DK:nln
ROGERS
CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING
May 20, 1992
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
Re: The President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards
Dear Mr. President,
May I suggest that you consider the Santa Rosa Plateau Agreement as a
worthy candidate for the above-referenced award. This agreement
enabled the Santa Rosa Plateau Preserve, in southwestern Riverside
County, California, to be expanded in size from 3,600 acres to 7,100
acres, and almost certainly saved the original preserve from a very
uncertain fate as a semi-urban park surrounded by housing tracts.
This was an incredible demonstration of the fact that, with proper
leadership, major public agencies and private environmental groups can
form strong and positive alliances which far exceed their individual
capabilities, and which certainly provide an outstanding model for
similar arrangements in other parts of the country.
I live near the Preserve, and I have hiked many of its trails with my
family. We have just begun to appreciate how beautiful this part of
the state must have been in 1840 or 1850, and we will always be
grateful to the agencies involved and, most particularly to The Nature
Conservancy, for their efforts in completing this agreement.
You should be aware of the essential part which a small, local grass-
roots organization called "Preserve Our Plateau" played in bringing
the situation to the attention of both elected officials and agency
management. Without the long-term efforts of this group, led by Dr.
Dan Silver, I do not believe that the plateau agreement would have
ever been seriously considered by any of the involved agencies.
The Plateau Agreement is exactly the kind of cooperative
private/public partnership which will enable us to protect and
preserve many aspects of the natural majesty which makes this Country
such a special place in the World. I would urge your approval of the
nomination of this Agreement to receive The President's Environment
and Conservation Challenge Award.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully yours
ROGERS ENGINEERI
John B. Rogers P.E.
27393 Ynez Road Suite 154 Temecula, CA 92591-4605 Telephone (714) 676-2529 FAX (714) 699-3591
MURRIETA SPRINGS
May 20, 1992
The President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
THE WHITE HOUSE
722 Jackson Place NW
Washington, DC 20503
Attention: Award References
Dear Mr. President:
Please consider for your Environment and Conservation Challenge Award a truly
exceptional co-operative project known as the Santa Rosa Plateau Preserve.
This exceptional, biologically significant area of Southwest Riverside County, California
faced inanimate loss from the pressures of urbanization until disparate and frequently
opposing groups melded together in a common objective preservation of this natural
resource.
Private sector development interests, governmental agencies of diverse charge and
ordinary citizens all sought the singular goal of acquiring, planning and managing for
all generations the Santa Rosa Plateau.
Our project, a nearby regional shopping mall, has joined in the spirit of this effort and
committed significant resources to the goal.
We hope you will agree with us, that the unique accomplishments of this partnership
in preserving such a significant environmental asset, deserves the recognition of your
award.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
DONAHUE SCHRIBER, a
California corporation
John Haskell,
John Haskell
Project Developer
JH/irl
The
Santa Rosa Plateau
a Park by Nature
PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU
P.O. Box 1534
Wildomar, CA 92395
PRESERVE OUR PLATEAU
P.016
Post Office Box 1534 Wildomar, California 92595
May 29, 1992
The Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20503
RE: The President's 1992 Environmental and Conservation Challenge Awards
Dear Council Members:
This letter is in support of the submittal made by the Metropolitan Water District
of Southern California on behalf of the Santa Rosa Plateau Partnership. The other
partners are the Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District, The Nature
Conservancy, the California Dept. of Fish and Game, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. What this group did was precedent-setting, nationally significant, and will be
meaningful for all future generations of Southern Californians.
The work "challenge in your award is particularly appropriate in this case.
While our grassroots citizens group, Preserve Our Plateau, was instrumental in making
the public aware of the great wildlife and ecological values represented by the Santa
Rosa Plateau, its actual preservation required obstacle after obstacle to be overcome
in a short period of time. The partners did just that. To implement the sale and
management agreement required enormous innovation in creating novel financing
and mitigation banking mechanisms. It required unprecedented cooperation among
parties with diverse needs, and the realization that only in partnership could a task of
this magnitude be undertaken. It took a remarkable dedication of purpose borne of a
true love of nature and the desire to serve the public with the finest parklands in our
region. It united ordinary citizens, private landowners, public officials, and multiple
agencies with a common purpose. And the challenge was succesfully met.
We believe that the Santa Rosa Plateau partnership has created a new "win-
win" ethic in problem-solving and a new methodology for land protection. What we
have learned will be applied again and again in the future. Our group hopes that more
people across the country will also learn and be inspired by this partnership via your
award.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Dan Salver, mD
Dan Silver, MD
President
Den
P.01
JUN 9 1992
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Regional Park And Open-Space District
4600 Crestmore Road
P.O. Box 3507
Riverside, CA 92519-3507
(714) 275-4310
Fax (714) 684-7044
PAUL D. ROMERO
June 1, 1992
General Manager
The Honorable George Bush
President of the United States
c/o The Council on Environmental Quality
722 Jackson Place, Northwest
Washington, D.C. 20503
Dear President Bush:
The President's 1992 Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards
I am writing to express my support for the submittal made by The Metropolitan
Water District of Southern California in the innovative partnership component
of the 1992 Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards program which is
sponsored by your Council on Environmental Quality.
The property known as the Santa Rosa Plateau is a true treasure. No other
area in southern California possesses the unique qualities and character of
this important natural resource. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California (MWD) and its partners developed a program to acquire, protect,
manage, and enhance these precious resources for future generations. Through
their leadership, what was once only a dream became a reality. Certainly,
recognition of their tremendous success is warranted.
Being one of the partners in this "great adventure," I can attest to the
difficulties encountered by MWD in convincing all parties that the innovative
process proposed for a multi-million dollar acquisition could be successful.
Certainly, no individual or agency questioned the value in protecting the
Santa Rosa Plateau, but many were skeptical of the complicated process used to
acquire and manage this natural resource. To the credit of all parties,
especially Mr. Gregory Taylor of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California, what was accomplished will be acknowledged as a benefit to all
Americans who respect and value environmental quality. I would urge your
consideration of the nomination and recognition of the innovative partnership
by presenting the Environment and Challenge Award for 1992 to the successful
joint venture that preserved the Santa Rosa Plateau in southwestern Riverside
County, California.
Sincerely,
Paul D. Romeró
General Manager
0181R
To acquire, protect, develop. manage and interpret for the inspiration, use and enjoyment of all people,
a well-balanced system of areas of outstanding scenic, recreation, and historic importance."
Application Summary
ID Number: P.041
Project:
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
Contact:
Ms. Yolette C. Zepeda
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
101 E. 9th Street, #1103
Telephone:
Austin, TX 78701-
(800) 253-2689
Summary:
Texans are getting a great return on their investment as Keep
Texas Beautiful, Inc. strives to preserve and enhance the
natural beauty of the Lone Star State. It is building
successful public/private partnerships, and bringing diverse
groups together for a common goal -- the precious natural
environment. When one compounds each year's results by the
long term commitment, the full effect is as big as Texas. Who
keeps America beautiful? Why partner Keep Texas Beautiful
does!
NOTE: Some technical evaluators provided written opinions, based on their
view of the criteria. The following is included for your
background only.
Comments:
State-wide in activities; diverse in scope of initiatives;
well-established with 25-year history; involves numerous
groups.
Hard to see what they really do.
Good program but not really a partnership.
payrem,
KEEPTEXAS
BEAUTIFUL
PHI
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
P.O. BOX 2251
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78768
512/478-8813
SUMMARY: The mission of Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc., is to preserve the
natural beauty and environment of Texas by forging a partnership between
grassroots volunteer organizations and the public and private sectors to improve
the quality of life, to enhance economic development and tourism, and to conserve
public and natural resources through education and public awareness activities
including those that encourage proper solid waste management and responsible
behavior by all Texans and visitors to Texas.
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. :
Since 1967, has been providing grassroots solutions to Texas' solid waste and
litter issues by bringing together a diverse coalition of state and local government
officials, businesses, industry, civic leaders, educational and environmental
groups and dedicated citizens.
Has a statewide cost benefit ratio of $3 private dollars to every $1 contributed to
our program.
Is under contract with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to provide public
education, technical assistance and training services promoting integrated solid
waste management to Texas communities; the Texas Department of
Transportation as the grassroots component of its "Don't Mess With Texas" litter
reduction campaign; and the Texas Water Commission to provide an integrated,
statewide litter/solid waste management education program to all Texas public
and private schools.
Sponsors the annual Governor's Community Achievement Awards, now the
largest volunteer community environmental improvement awards program of its
kind in the nation, offering guidance, incentives, and recognition for outstanding
partnership programs that promote waste reduction/recycling, cleanups, litter
law enforcement, adult and youth environmental education, public awareness
and beautification.
In 1991 alone, KTB won "Best State-wide Program in the Nation Award" for a
unprecedented second consecutive year from Keep America Beautiful; received
the "Environmental Excellence Award" for recycling education from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency; involved 5.4 million Texans in 400 Affiliate
Communities, 1,556 civic groups, 6,000 public and private schools, 419,564 youth,
3,806 Adopt-a-Highway groups, 4,792 businesses; recorded a total of 554,175 people
hours in community cleanups; helped reduced litter along Texas highways and
roadways by 72%; co-sponsored the Great Texas Beach Trash Off, netting 394 tons
of beach litter with the help of 23,000 volunteers; recorded over $10 million in cash
and in-kind donations; removed 490,905 cubic yards of trash along 14,338 miles of
city streets, 7,695 miles of highway, 2,532 miles of creeks, 2,194 miles of
lakeshores, and 123 miles of beach front; participated in the Texas Glad Bag-A-
Thon program with the help of more than 80,000 Texans, part of the nation's
largest organized cleanup and recycling effort.
A. Partnership:
1. Some of the Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. partners (most since 1967)
include: the Clean World International, United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Keep America Beautiful, Inc. (and their vast network of
public/private partners), National Wildflower Research Center, National
Forest Service, National Urban Forest Council, United Nations Children's
Alliance for the Protection of the Environment, Rotary International, Lions
International, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, 4-H, FFA; and, Texas' Department of
Transportation, Water Commission, General Land Office, Attorney
General, Governor's Office, Education Agency, Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Extension Service, Department of Public Safety, Council of
Governments, Municipal League, Garden Club, Junior League; and, an
additional 1,556 civic groups, 4,792 businesses, 3,806 Adopt-a-Highway
groups, 6,000 public and private schools , and 5.4 million program
participants in over 400 KTB Affiliate Communities. Partners brought over
$10,000,000 in cash and in-kind contributions, a $3 to $1 cost benefit ratio,
554,175 volunteer hours, knowledge, experience, contacts, commitment and
fun.
2. Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. objectives include: Involve 100% of Texas
communities in the KTB programs; and, become the state-wide
clearinghouse for environmental issues relating to solid waste disposal,
recycling, litter prevention, and tree programs; and, eliminate litter from
Texas highways; and, encourage and promote beautification of Texas
communities; and, educate all Texas citizens in proper solid waste
management; and, support continued growth of the Keep America Beautiful
System in Texas. Yes. KTB has a Long Range Plan; and, a Fund
Development Policy; and, an ongoing, and well established, organized, and
trained outreach and state-wide, regional, county, and community network
support system; and, an ongoing leadership development, programs, and
issue training system; and, 25 years of broad-based support and experience.
3. The Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.'s partnership is distinctive and
innovative because it creates and supports local efforts to form grassroots
partnerships to positively seek solutions to local environmental issues. Built
on community pride, broad-based and diverse community support and
participation create a sense of local and individual ownership, crossing
political, socioeconomic, ethnic, technological, and environmental "fashion"
lines or barriers. The collective efforts benefit the state, the nation, and the
world.
4. The Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. partnership's provide the following
measurable environmental benefits: (some are given in #1 above and most
are totals for the 1991 program year)
Litter along Texas highways and roadways was reduced by 78%.
The Great Texas Beach Trash Off, netted 394 tons of beach litter with the
help of 23,000 volunteers.
Texas teachers spent 73,814 hours teaching the Keep America Beautiful
solid waste curriculum, "Waste In Place."
49,675 minutes of radio time, 104,333 column inches of newspaper and
magazine, and 181,739 minutes of television time record for local public
awareness programs.
Volunteers removed 490,905 cubic yards of trash along 14,338 miles of city
streets, 7,695 miles of highway, 2,532 miles of creeks, 2,194 miles of
lakeshores, and 123 miles of beach front.
Over 80,000 Texans participated in the Texas Glad Bag-A-Thon program,
part of the nation's largest organized cleanup and recycling effort sponsored
by Keep America Beautiful, Inc. and GLAD Wrap and Bags.
KTB affiliate communities planted more than 1 million trees
142,021 acres of parks and 58,483 unsightly vacant lots cleaned and mowed,
11,184 junked cars removed, 2,850 indiscriminate dumpsites cleaned and
removed 2,352 dilapidated homes removed.
1,031,332 educational brochures and pamphlets, 1,020,643 litter bags, and
415,393 newsletters distributed.
154,882 Texans trained in litter reduction workshops.
83% of 400 KTB Affiliate Communities' populations reached.
3,545 littering citations and 11,867 warnings were issued, resulting in 1,848
convictions.
1 million tons of aluminum, cardboard, glass, metal, paper and plastic
356,000 batteries, 1.6 million tires, 370,000 gallons of motor oil, 155,000 cubic
yards of yard waste, and 42,000 yards of Christmas trees recycled.
5. The Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. partnership is a formula transferable to
drug awareness, teen pregnancy, literacy, homelessness and other such
issues. It involves behavior modification and attitude change through
education and awareness. The formula is the foundation of the Keep
America Beautiful System, of which Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. is the
leading state-wide affiliate, and it works. The formula includes five steps:
GET THE FACTS
INVOLVE THE PEOPLE
DEVELOP A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH
FOCUS ON RESULTS
PROVIDE POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT
P041
Application Form-1992
6. A-D: Please answer only the following Award criteria
questions pertaining to the specific Award category for
which you are applying. (For example: Partnership category,
"lease read the application form carefully and provide all information
answer questions A1-A5; EQM, B1-B7; Innovation, C1-C5;
equested. Please type or print clearly. Supplementary pages should
Education, D1-D5).
follow the format of this form as closely as possible. Incomplete applica-
tions will not be considered.
Answers should be clear, concise and should emphasize
quantifiable results or benefits of the program. Each
1. Select the Award category for which you are competing:
answer to a sub-question should not exceed 100 words.
(Note: A program may be entered in only one category. See descriptions of
Taken as a whole, all answers to criteria questions should
categories in Question 6.)
not exceed two pages.
(01) X Partnership
(02) Environmental Quality Management
A. PARTNERSHIP: awarded to diverse organizations or
(03) Innovation
groups that have fostered cooperative approaches to envi-
(04) Education and Communication
ronmental needs at the local, regional, or national level.
2. Name of the project or program described in this application:
1. Who are the partnership's members? What are their
roles? What resources do they bring to the partnership?
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
2. What are the partnership's specific environmental or
3. Name of Award Applicant(s): (Use separate sheet, if needed)
conservation objectives? Has a sustainable plan of con-
Mr. Mrs. X Ms. Miss Dr.
certed action for meeting these needs been established?
Name: SueAnn Wade-Crouse
3. How is the partnership distinctive or innovative?
What obstacles, environmental or otherwise, does it
Title: President
overcome?
Organization: Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
4. What measurable environmental or conservation
benefits has the partnership produced?
treet: 101 E. 9th Street, Suite 1103
5. What aspects of the partnership can be modeled by
City: Austin
State: Texas
Zip: 78701
others and transferred to other settings?
Telephone: (1-800-CLEAN-TX) Fax: (512) 478-2640
B. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT:
awarded to organizations which have demonstrated that
environmental values can be integrated into sound man-
4. Program contact who can answer questions regarding the application:
agement decisions and objective (Note: This category
Mr. Mrs. X Ms. Miss Dr.
reflects broad-based organizational approaches. Special
programs or projects may be more appropriate for entry
Name: Wade-Crouse or Ms. Yolette C. Zepeda
in one of the other three award categories.)
Title: Programs Coordinator
1. What are the organization's environmental policies
and objectives?
Organization: Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
2. How has the organization's top management
Street: 101 E. 9th Street, Suite 1103
demonstrated commitment to these policies and objec-
tives? Do the policies demonstrate commitment
City: Austin
State: Texas
Zip: 78701
beyond legal compliance?
Telephone: (1-800-CLEAN-TX) Fax: (512) 478-2640
3. What are the organization's environmental stan-
dards for its product(s) and operations? (Explain how
NOTE: The Selection Committee will rely heavily on Questions 5-6 in
they go beyond legal constraints and how they relate to man-
determining how well the application meets the award criteria.
agement control mechanisms.)
Please attach a one-page (not to exceed 500 words) summary suitable
4. How are these policies and objectives incorporated in
publication which provides a complete overview of the application.
the: a) Day-to-day management of the organization; b) Orga-
The one-page response should be clear. concise, and should emphasize
nization's decision-making about research and development,
quantifiable results or benefits of the program.
long-range planning, capital, and operating budgets?
5. How are these policies and objectives reflected in the orga-
NOTE: The following questions are for informational purposes.
nization's relationships with employees, customers, suppliers,
7. How long has the technology, program, project or service been
and the general public?
operational?
25 years
6. What are the organization's control mechanisms that give
decision makers objective data to measure continuous perfor-
8. Which of the following most accurately describes the appli-
mance improvement toward its short- and long-term environ-
cant(s)? (Check more than one, if applicable.)
mental objectives?
(01) National Business or Industry
7. What quantifiable, sustained environmental quality results
(02) Regional or Local Business or Industry
in products and processes have resulted from the organiza-
(03) National Nonprofit Organization or Foundation
tion's environmental approach?
(04) X Regional or Local Nonprofit Organization
(05) Local or State Government/Government Agency
(06)X Educational Organization
C. INNOVATION-awarded to individuals, organizations and
(07) X Voluntary Civic Organization
groups who have demonstrated exceptional creativity or pio-
(08) Trade or Professional Society
neered new approaches in the development and/or execution of
(09) Youth Organization
technologies, programs, projects, or services that are environ-
(10) Labor Organization
mentally sound and economically sensible?
(11) Individual
(12) Other (Please describe):
1. What is the purpose of the technology, program, project or
service?
9. If business or industry, which of the following best describes
the type of business or industry?
2. How is the technology, program, project, or service distinc-
tive or innovative? What obstacles, environmentally or other-
(01)
Agriculture/Forestry
wise, does it overcome?
(02) Aerospace
(03) Communications
3. How is the technology, program, project, or service superior
(04) Construction
to other approaches? Does it offer a viable alternative to a
(05)
Electronics/Computers
problem for which no solutions previously existed?
(06) Energy
(07) Engineering
4. Can the technology, program, project or service be replicated
(08) Environmental Services
in an economically feasible manner?
(09) Financial Services/Insurance/Real Estate
(10) Manufacturing-Chemical
5. What are the measurable, net long-term environmental ben-
(11)
Manufacturing-Other
efits or results of the technology, program, project, or service?
(12) Mining
(13) Recreation
(14) Trade-Wholesale
D. EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION-awarded to indi-
(15)
Transportation
viduals, organizations, or groups which have developed educa-
(16) Utilities-Electric, Gas or
tional or informational programs that inspire respect for the
(17) Other (Please describe):
environment and raise the public's environmental literacy.
10. Which of the following most accurately describes the environ-
1. What is the program? What are its environmental or conser-
mental program under consideration for an award? (Check more
vation objectives?
than one, if applicable.)
2. Who is the program's audience? How large is the audience?
(01)
agriculture
How is the program's effect on the audience determined?
(02)
air quality
(03) X conservation
3. What is original or distinctive about the program?
(04) X education-general public
(05) X education-academic
4. What are the measurable results or benefits produced by the
(06) energy
program? How does the program promote the development
(07) X environmental quality management
of an environmental ethic and make a positive contribution to
(08) forestry
environmental awareness?
(09) hazardous waste remediation
(10) international
5. How can the program be used or modeled by others?
(11) X natural resources
(12) pollution control
14. Please indicate which of the following are the primary audi-
(13) recreation
ences, beneficiaries, or users of the program or service, and esti-
(14) X recycling
mate how many persons are served: (Select up to 3 categories.)
(15) X solid waste
(16) X source reduction/pollution prevention
Type
How Many People
(17) X water quality
(18) wetlands
(01) X Business or Industry (Businesses) 2,941
(19) wildlife and fish resources
(02) Trade or Professional Society
(20) X Other (Please describe): beautification
(03) X Government
18,945
(04) X Educational Organizations (Schools) 6,000
11. If applicable, list the sources of the program's support and the
(05) X Youth (Directly Involved)
137,149
percentage of support provided, including grants and in-kind
(06) X Community or Public Interest Groups
4,734
contributions of goods and services. (Use separate sheet if needed).
(07) X Local Community or Local Public
400+ communitie
Private Contributions
(08) X General Public (Involved)
5.4 million
Source Corporate & Individual
(09) Employees
Cash
17%
(10) Customers or Clients
In-Kind
58%
(11) Other (Please describe):
Government Grants/Contracts
Source
Cash
11%
In-Kind
14%
15. Has the program been honored with any other environmental
12. Please estimate the cost to develop the program or project,
or conservation awards in the past five years?
including approximate value of in-kind contributions of goods
Keep America Beautiful "Best Statewide Program
and services:
In The Nation,' 1987, 1990, 1991
United States Environmental Protection Agency
$
$12.2 million
"Environmental Excellence" Award for
Recycling Education - 1991
13. If the project is ongoing, what is the annual cost?
American Society of Association Executives
"Award of Excellence" 1991
$800,000
16. In one paragraph (not to exceed 50 words), please summarize the program, its objectives and what it has accomplished. Use space
provided below. This paragraph should be suitable for use in a catalog, database or brochure.
The citizens of Texas are getting a great return
on their investment as Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
strives to preserve and enhance the natural beauty
of the Lone Star State. We are building successful
public/private partnerships, and bringing diverse
groups together for a common goal - our precious
natural environment. When you compound each year's
results by our long term commitment, the full effect
is as big as Texas. Who keeps America beautiful?
Why partner
Keep Texas Beautiful
does!
Yeeeeeeeeeee Hawwwwww!!!
17. Please include 3 one-page letters of recommendation attached
How to Apply
to the application when it is submitted for consideration. Letters
should be addressed: "Attention: Award References." References
Completed applications must be postmarked
should have first-hand knowledge of the environmental program,
by May 22, 1992 and mailed to the:
service, or technology and should offer a candid evaluation of its
The President's Environment and
success or effectiveness. References may also include users or
Conservation Challenge Awards
beneficiaries of your program.
Council on Environmental Quality
NOTE: Letters of recommendation must accompany the applica-
The White House
tion when it is submitted to CEQ. Letters sent directly to CEQ
722 Jackson Place, NW
will not be considered. Please list the references in the spaces
Washington, DC 20503
below.
All information submitted with the application should be
Name: The Honorable & Mrs. William Clements, Jr considered public information and becomes property of
the President's Challenge Awards program.
Title: Former Governor of Texas
Award recipients will be notified in Fall 1992. Recipients
Street: 4800 Preston Road
must be willing to assist the President's Challenge Awards
program in making nonproprietary information about
State: TX Zip: 75205
their environmental programs available to others who
City: Dallas
wish to replicate their success.
Telephone: (214) 720-0336 Fax: (214) 871-0321
Application Format
Name: William D. Ruckelshaus
Please submit one original and four photocopies of your
application. You may include up to 10 pages of supporting
Title: Chairman of the Board, CEO, BFI
materials. (NOTE: Photocopying both sides of a sheet of
paper will be considered two-pages.) Any oversized items
Street: 757 N. Eldridge at Memorial Dr.
must be reduced to fit a standard 8.5" X 11" page format.
City: Houston
State: TX Zip: 77253
Supporting materials may include items such as brochures,
photographs, press clippings, and graphs depicting the
Telephone: (713) 870-8100 Fax: (713) 584-8686
program's results. The materials may not be used as a
substitute for written responses to Questions 5 and 6.
Name: Maurice Acers & Ebby Halliday
The order of pages in the submitted application should be
as follows:
Title: Chairperson & President, Acers Investment
Co¹. 4-page application (Questions 1-20)
2. 500-word overview summary (Question 5)
Street: 4455 Sigma Road
3. 2-page-responses to criteria questions (Question 6)
4. 10 pages of supporting materials
City: Dallas
State: TX Zip: 75234
5. 3 letters of recommendation (Question 17)
Telephone: (214) 980-6666 Fax: (214) 991-9142
NOTE: The entire package should be stapled in the upper,
left-hand corner. Any items sent over the 10-page limit of
supporting materials will be disregarded and not reviewed
by the technical evaluators and selection committee. Do
18. Please sign below to indicate that all applicants agree a) to
not put the application or backup materials into a binder,
abide by the rules and requirements of the awards competition,
notebook or plastic cover.
and b) that all information submitted is true and accurate to the
Signature: best of their knowledge. sec Date: 5/22/82
OMB Control No. 0331-0002, (Exp. 2/95): As required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act, CEQ estimates that completion of this
application will take 10 hours. Send comments regarding the col-
lection of this information, including suggestions for reducing the
Title: President
Organization: Keep Texas
paperwork burden, to CEQ and also to: Paperwork Reduction Pro-
Beautiful, Inc.
ject, Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and
Telephone: (1-800-CLEAN-TX)
Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., 20503
printed on recycled paper containing more than 50% post-consumer waste
KEEP TEXAS
BEAUTIFUL
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
P.O. BOX 2251 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78768 512/478-8813
SUMMARY: The mission of Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc., is to preserve the
natural beauty and environment of Texas by forging a partnership between
grassroots volunteer organizations and the public and private sectors to improve
the quality of life, to enhance economic development and tourism, and to conserve
public and natural resources through education and public awareness activities
including those that encourage proper solid waste management and responsible
behavior by all Texans and visitors to Texas.
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. :
Since 1967, has been providing grassroots solutions to Texas' solid waste and
litter issues by bringing together a diverse coalition of state and local government
officials, businesses, industry, civic leaders, educational and environmental
groups and dedicated citizens.
Has a statewide cost benefit ratio of $3 private dollars to every $1 contributed to
our program.
Is under contract with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to provide public
education, technical assistance and training services promoting integrated solid
waste management to Texas communities; the Texas Department of
Transportation as the grassroots component of its "Don't Mess With Texas" litter
reduction campaign; and the Texas Water Commission to provide an integrated,
statewide litter/solid waste management education program to all Texas public
and private schools.
Sponsors the annual Governor's Community Achievement Awards, now the
largest volunteer community environmental improvement awards program of its
kind in the nation, offering guidance, incentives, and recognition for outstanding
partnership programs that promote waste reduction/recycling, cleanups, litter
law enforcement, adult and youth environmental education, public awareness
and beautification.
In 1991 alone, KTB won "Best State-wide Program in the Nation Award" for a
unprecedented second consecutive year from Keep America Beautiful; received
the "Environmental Excellence Award" for recycling education from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency; involved 5.4 million Texans in 400 Affiliate
Communities, 1,556 civic groups, 6,000 public and private schools, 419,564 youth,
3,806 Adopt-a-Highway groups, 4,792 businesses; recorded a total of 554,175 people
hours in community cleanups; helped reduced litter along Texas highways and
roadways by 72%; co-sponsored the Great Texas Beach Trash Off, netting 394 tons
of beach litter with the help of 23,000 volunteers; recorded over $10 million in cash
and in-kind donations; removed 490,905 cubic yards of trash along 14,338 miles of
city streets, 7,695 miles of highway, 2,532 miles of creeks, 2,194 miles of
lakeshores, and 123 miles of beach front; participated in the Texas Glad Bag-A-
Thon program with the help of more than 80,000 Texans, part of the nation's
largest organized cleanup and recycling effort.
A. Partnership:
1. Some of the Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. partners (most since 1967)
include: the Clean World International, United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Keep America Beautiful, Inc. (and their vast network of
public/private partners), National Wildflower Research Center, National
Forest Service, National Urban Forest Council, United Nations Children's
Alliance for the Protection of the Environment, Rotary International, Lions
International, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, 4-H, FFA; and, Texas' Department of
Transportation, Water Commission, General Land Office, Attorney
General, Governor's Office, Education Agency, Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Extension Service, Department of Public Safety, Council of
Governments, Municipal League, Garden Club, Junior League; and, an
additional 1,556 civic groups, 4,792 businesses, 3,806 Adopt-a-Highway
groups, 6,000 public and private schools, and 5.4 million program
participants in over 400 KTB Affiliate Communities. Partners brought over
$10,000,000 in cash and in-kind contributions, a $3 to $1 cost benefit ratio,
554,175 volunteer hours, knowledge, experience, contacts, commitment and
fun.
2. Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. objectives include: Involve 100% of Texas
communities in the KTB programs; and, become the state-wide
clearinghouse for environmental issues relating to solid waste disposal,
recycling, litter prevention, and tree programs; and, eliminate litter from
Texas highways; and, encourage and promote beautification of Texas
communities; and, educate all Texas citizens in proper solid waste
management; and, support continued growth of the Keep America Beautiful
System in Texas. Yes. KTB has a Long Range Plan; and, a Fund
Development Policy; and, an ongoing, and well established, organized, and
trained outreach and state-wide, regional, county, and community network
support system; and, an ongoing leadership development, programs, and
issue training system; and, 25 years of broad-based support and experience.
3. The Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.'s partnership is distinctive and
innovative because it creates and supports local efforts to form grassroots
partnerships to positively seek solutions to local environmental issues. Built
on community pride, broad-based and diverse community support and
participation create a sense of local and individual ownership, crossing
political, socioeconomic, ethnic, technological, and environmental "fashion"
lines or barriers. The collective efforts benefit the state, the nation, and the
world.
4. The Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. partnership's provide the following
measurable environmental benefits: (some are given in #1 above and most
are totals for the 1991 program year)
Litter along Texas highways and roadways was reduced by 78%.
The Great Texas Beach Trash Off, netted 394 tons of beach litter with the
help of 23,000 volunteers.
Texas teachers spent 73,814 hours teaching the Keep America Beautiful
solid waste curriculum, "Waste In Place."
49,675 minutes of radio time, 104,333 column inches of newspaper and
magazine, and 181,739 minutes of television time record for local public
awareness programs.
Volunteers removed 490,905 cubic yards of trash along 14,338 miles of city
streets, 7,695 miles of highway, 2,532 miles of creeks, 2,194 miles of
lakeshores, and 123 miles of beach front.
Over 80,000 Texans participated in the Texas Glad Bag-A-Thon program,
part of the nation's largest organized cleanup and recycling effort sponsored
by Keep America Beautiful, Inc. and GLAD Wrap and Bags.
KTB affiliate communities planted more than 1 million trees
142,021 acres of parks and 58,483 unsightly vacant lots cleaned and mowed,
11,184 junked cars removed, 2,850 indiscriminate dumpsites cleaned and
removed 2,352 dilapidated homes removed.
1,031,332 educational brochures and pamphlets, 1,020,643 litter bags, and
415,393 newsletters distributed.
154,882 Texans trained in litter reduction workshops.
83% of 400 KTB Affiliate Communities' populations reached.
3,545 littering citations and 11,867 warnings were issued, resulting in 1,848
convictions.
1 million tons of aluminum, cardboard, glass, metal, paper and plastic
356,000 batteries, 1.6 million tires, 370,000 gallons of motor oil, 155,000 cubic
yards of yard waste, and 42,000 yards of Christmas trees recycled.
5. The Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. partnership is a formula transferable to
drug awareness, teen pregnancy, literacy, homelessness and other such
issues. It involves behavior modification and attitude change through
education and awareness. The formula is the foundation of the Keep
America Beautiful System, of which Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. is the
leading state-wide affiliate, and it works. The formula includes five steps:
GET THE FACTS
INVOLVE THE PEOPLE
DEVELOP A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH
FOCUS ON RESULTS
PROVIDE POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT
OLID WASTE COORDINATION TEXAS TEX EDUCATION INTEGRATIONAL ATION COMMUNTTRAINING OF A AND PUBLIC SOLID WASTE EDUCATION PROGRAM AGEMENT CAMP a UNITED AIGN
AGENCY
PONMENTAL PROTECTION
STATES JUL TEAPS 1991
1
NO
4
PROPECTO
als
sexal and tog
ENVIRON
States
This M5. submitted Aubmitted Wade-Crouse: letter President (EPA) for is solid various reference waste to inform to to the he fundingnked you proposal clication and that your The your for organization Federal and total funding no later of later in 67 proposal than amount. the August forlowing follo of ranked (6M-AG) include
of
SueAnn
Dear
of the of Representations United DE 20515-4306 1991
riciently
pleased
high
242
surficity
are
we
sportcation Ms. Julie kit. made no Audit.Section Work Agency
apply
Our
18.
242
that
is
(EPA) Texasegional
Chief Dallas, is directed thermart Ross Texas List to The the required Appl the ion Cher PEP:
PAS POSS 1200 PROTECTION AGENCY
6
and
FOR
Ann Nade-Crouse
the
BY
#35
SQATED
EFFect
TNO.
10/01/91 01/01/2019
56
NS.
the
and
the
Oo
Keep Bast 6th
WE
most Your comitment
Austin,
au?
of
stontly
were
S31
On
not
would
gratitude.
JUL 19
Dear
on
EPA
sincere
to
Beant
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
the
organiza
3
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
OF
o
all
JaBarton Jpe Barton Congress
3
1991 to be am the "n August As. 15. $0178 Texas. you on to 1991, at for Program 2:00 the the YES Awards Peller there to at are Street 6 AMOUNT the #35 STATE ox of tn with the the THE THE The Instion the
"
environment
19
cleaner
and
Solid Waste (OS-305) Response
spxal *5W 2583 keep 901
to a United Statental (A-108)
Communications
Agency 21K-2002
Dear
THE Environmental will Envi "th Conference Avenue Texas
The Administrator's
EPA
1ng 778850
Municipal Solid Waste Recycling Programs
exas sweeps National
America Beautiful Awards
370
ep Texas Beautiful has won a
receive awards include Buffalo
few years, Texas has been hit hard.
Place award in the State
PAL, Houston, 1st Place, Schools
Determined to see, their way
gory of Keep America
Category: Angelelina Beautiful
throught these difficult times,
tiful, Inc.'s 1990 National
Clean, Angelina County, 1st Place,
Texans have anded closer together.
rds program. and 8 other
Communications: CLEAN
Keep
s
Beautiful, Inc. has
KEEP TEXAS BEAUTIFUL, INC. 1991 ANNUAL CONVENT
Texas Beautiful affiliates
Greenville, 1st Place, under 25,000
This sense of unity, and
P.O. Box 2251 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78768
1
ared six 1st Places, one 2nd
population; Fort Worth
State Depart-
:, and two 3rd Place awards to
City, Inc., 1st Place
Public
guish Texas as the undisputed
500,000 populatic
I in these national awards
Beautiful
ned to honor ongoing com-
mill:
RECYCLING
MACHINE
ty programs that motivate
idual responsibility
.ote changes in ind:
munity
ices.
(
GALLONS
PRESSURE
TEMP
SONTINENTAL BREAKFAST
LENCE
EP TEXAS BEAUTIFUL, INC.
TH ANNUAL CONVENTION, PLANO
). Box 2251
STIN, TEXAS 78768 RISING
Don't
messwith
Texas.
DEXCELLENCE
BEAUTI
May 7, 1992
The President's Environmental and Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
As Governor and First Lady for 10 years, and life-long residents of
Texas, we have a deep and abiding commitment to quality of life for
all Texans. One of the finest organizations we have ever worked with
to that end, is Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
Since the inception of KTB, 25 years ago this year, we and hundreds
of thousands of hard working - long term dedicated volunteers all
across our state in over 400 communities have focused on bringing
together businesses, people, governments, and organizations in
partnerships to create public awareness and to educate citizens about
the importance of clean and beautiful communities.
These grassroots partnership efforts have resulted in a 78%
reduction in roadside litter state-wide, national recognition for our
state and many of our businesses, organizations and communities, a
$33 to $1 private dollar to public dollar cost benefit ratio for the
programs, a tremendous tax savings at every level, a wonderful
sense of pride that has spread all across the state from community to
community, and very importantly a model for what can be
accomplished through partnerships.
Keep Texas Beautiful and the 5.4 million citizens involved in its
programs deserve this prestigious recognition.
Your
acknowledgement would be felt and appreciated from El Paso to
Beaumont, Sonora to Longview and Dalhart to Harlingen.
Thank you for your consideration of a program we hold very close to
our hearts.
Sincerely,
Bill and Reta Clements
The Honorable and Mrs. William Clements Jr.
xc: Bill Yenne, Chairman of the Board, KTB
SueAnn Wade-Crouse, President, KTB
Recycled paper
BFI
BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES
P.O. BOX 3151
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77253
713/870-8100
William D. Ruckelshaus
Chairman of the Board
Chief Executive Officer
May 18, 1992
The President's Environmental and Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, DC 20503
Attn: Award Reference
It has been my experience that through partnerships we accomplish more to save our
environment than any one entity could ever achieve alone. Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. (KTB)
has been successfully bringing public and private entities together for 25 years to help beautify
the State of Texas. The results - a clean and beautiful Texas.
Education about the environment and solid waste management issues is a direct result of
a KTB-established partnership. They have emphasized the all-important local consensus on a
solid waste management plan. After years of research, it has been determined that solutions to
reduce waste and promote recycling are most effective when they are organized at the grassroots
level.
KTB programs in more than 400 Texas communities, that reach over 5.4 million Texans
every year do just that. They offer a structured, results-oriented program involving businesses
such as BFI, civic and neighborhood groups, the media, schools and government. Together,
through local KTB programs and active Boards of Directors, we analyze problems and options,
and accept responsibility for making and keeping each community clean and beautiful.
I personally support KTB's many excellent accomplishments as the organization continues
to develop quality partnerships for a quality environment. This organization truly represents the
spirit of partnerships, and deserves to be recognized for its 25 years of continuous service to the
citizens of Texas.
CORPORATE OFFICES: 757 N. ELDRIDGE AT MEMORIAL DRIVE
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77079
TELEX 794-592
The President's Environmental and Conservation Challenge Awards
May 18, 1992
Page Two
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. has my highest recommendation.
Sincerely yours,
William D. Ruckelshaus
WDR:dc
MAY 1992
CACERS INVESTMENT COMPANY
EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 4455 SIGMA ROAD . DALLAS, TEXAS 75234 . (214) 980-6666
MAURICE ACERS
May 8, 1992
PLEASE ADDRESS REPLY TO:
PRESIDENT
POST OFFICE Box 12348
DALLAS, TEXAS 75225
The President's Environmental
and Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, DC 20503
Attention: Award Reference
I have been involved with Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc., (KTB) since its inception
as the Beautify Texas Council 25 years ago. Through numerous political and
business endeavors, I have grown to appreciate politicians, environmentalists,
educators, business people, civic leaders and citizens coming together to work
toward a common goal. KTB is an organization that best illustrates this
principle by effectively working toward a "cleaner and more beautiful Texas."
In the early 1970's, I joined with other Beautify Texas Council members in
recognizing the importance of grassroots involvement and cooperation through
public/private partnerships. During my term as President, from 1972-1974,
these partnerships doubled both the size of the organization and number of
cities participating in the Governor's Community Achievement Awards
Program. Through leadership representing all sectors of Texas, the Beautify
Texas Council became an official part of the Governor's Office, where it
benefitted from increased support by each Governor of Texas. With the
Governor on our side, along with the support of other state, business, and civic
leaders, we worked to become the "cleanest, most beautiful state in the Nation".
The partnership paid off when it resulted in Texas being recognized as "First"
among State programs in the nation by Keep America Beautiful, Inc. These
successful partnerships have continued, illustrated by KTB's two consecutive
wins in 1990 and 1991.
Great deeds have been accomplished in Texas through KTB's programs during
ts 25-year history. As a long-term Texas businessman, I can personally see
that partnerships forged by KTB have worked to increase tourism, attract new
business, and therefore increase the economic stability of our great state.
The President's Environmental
and Conservation Challenge Awards
May 8, 1992
Page Two
I am proud of Keep Texas Beautiful and its many excellent accomplishments in
striving for a quality environment. This organization truly represents the
spirit of this award and deserves to be recognized for its 25 years of continuous
service to the citizens of Texas.
Thank you SQ much for your consideration of this letter.
Sincerely,
Maurice Acers
MA:fd
CAUS
Ebby Halliday, Realtors
Executive Offices
4455 Sigma Road
Dallas, Texas 75244-4597
(214) 980-6600
FAX (214) 991-9142
May 7, 1992
The President's Environmental and
Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
Attn: Award Reference
My husband, Maurice Acers and I have been involved with Keep
Texas Beautiful, Inc. (KTB) since its inception in 1967 as the
Beautify Texas Council. This being the organization's 25th year
anniversary of providing grassroots solutions to the state's litter
and solid waste issues, Ifeel it appropriate for KTB to receive
Presidential recognition for its many milestone accomplishments
attained through public/private partnerships.
As a Texas resident, KTB past president (1986-87), and a member of
the Dallas business community since the 1950's, I have been
privileged to witness firsthand more than 400 Texas communities
bring business, industry, educators, youth, government and
environmentalists together at one table to adopt KTB philosophies.
When these separate entities came together, they accomplished
something bigger than any one of them could have accomplished
alone. Two fine examples of partnership occurred in 1986, during
my term as president. This was the second year of funding by the
Texas Department of Transportation, (then the State Department
of Highways), and the year I linked KTB with Texas' current
economic agenda through service on the Governor's Task Force on
Jobs and Economic Development. These partnerships were
MEMBER
RELO/Inter City Relocation Service
Arlington Board of REALTORS®, Collin County Board of REALTORS, Greater Denton Board of REALTORS®. Garland Board of REALTORS, Greater Dallas Association of REALTORS
Greater Fort Worth Board of REALTORS, Irving Board of REALTORS®, Southeast Denton County Board of REALTORS®, Northeast Tarrant County Board of REALTORS®.
International Real Estate Federation, Multiple Listing Services, National Association of REALTORS®, Texas Association of REALTORS, REALTORS®. National Marketing Institute.
Page 2
responsible for a string of KAB System Certifications that year, as
well as heightened exposure and strength needed to achieve our
goals.
As a Dallas REALTOR, I have experienced a deep professional
appreciation for the effect that KTB affiliates and their programs
have on the quality of life in neighborhoods. Houses sell in
neighborhoods where KTB volunteers have cared enough and have
dedicated their time to clean up and beautify. No one wants to live
in dirty neighborhoods full of dilapidated houses and vacant lot
dump sites.
Traveling the state in the past 25 years I increasingly hear the word
"pride" used to describe a citizen's feelings about his or her
community. When I ask why, the answer usually leads back to the
work done through the type of public/private cooperation I
mentioned before. These KTB partnerships have led, and continue
to lead communities to beautify, clean, recycle, and educate the
public (young and old) about the importance of proper solid waste
management. Positive results in these areas have consequently led
to public/private cooperation on other projects, have brought new
business and industry to many communities, as well as having
increased the tourism industry.
I am very proud of my involvement in KTB, and am proud of the
many goals that have been achieved throught the effective
cooperation of public/private partnerships. KTB is a fine example
of what a community and a state can do if everyone works together.
Thank you so much for your consideration of this letter.
Sincerely,
Ebby Halliday
EH:a
OF CITY
CITY OF LAKE JACKSON
LAKE JACKSON
25 Oak Drive - Lake Jackson, Texas - 77566-5289 - (409) 297-2481 - FAX (409) 297-9804
May 18, 1992
The President's Environmental and Conservation Challenge Awards
Council on Environmental Quality
The White House
722 Jackson Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20503
Attn: Award Reference:
Just as each area of Texas has something beautiful to offer - the
store front in Corpus Christi, the blazing sunsets of West Texas,
the piney woods of East Texas, the glorious Hill Country, the
bayous of Southeast Texas, the high plains in the Panhandle, El
Paso and its Old Mexico charm - a state this vast does not have
one climate, one topography or one way of life. So, in this way
Texas is a reflection of its people. East Texas citizen, civic
organization, business, industry and school has some special
contribution to bring to a partnership that is working towards a
common goal.
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc., (KTB) has brought these different
groups together for the past 25 years to form positive,
successful partnerships. Specifically, KTB's partnerships with
the Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas Water
Commission, and the EPA are unique and effective in making and
keeping Texas a cleaner and more beautiful place to live. As
City Manager for the City of Lake Jackson, Texas, I see how the
citizens of Lake Jackson, and anyone visiting our city, have
benefited from a clean and beautiful community. Thanks to a
unique partnership between Lake Jackson church groups, civic
organizations, small businesses, and schools and Dow Chemical,
our city flourishes with enthusiasm for our planet.
Together, we are doing more than any of us could do separately.
Not just in Lake Jackson, but all over the state, Texans have
rolled up their sleeves, joined hands and have made a commitment
to keeping this glorious State clean and beautiful for future
generations. From litter control to beautification, to
preservation, to recycling, Texans, through KTB partnerships,
have "taken the bull by the horns" and have worked to find
solutions to the problems that face us.
After 25 years of award-winning success, we now have the
responsibility to continue, in fact redouble, our partnership
effort, and we are. The work goes on.
The awards that creative partnerships have brought to more than
400 KTB communities across the state are great, but the substance
of what we are doing is better. Partnerships are making a
difference. Together we are making the Lone Star State a shining
example to the rest of the nation of how a state can overcome
entrenched behavioral barriers and make significant progress on
controlling the litter problem and getting the public to
understand that proper solid waste handling is a major issue of
concern.
The often used quote is true, "We don't inherit the world from
our ancestors, we borrow it from our children." KTB and its
partnerships are working to make this happen. For this, I
strongly believe that Keep Texas deserves Presidential
recognition.
Thank you for your consideration of this letter.
William Sincerely, P. Yenne
City Manager
WPY/dlm
JANUARY 1992
GRASSROTS
PTEXAS
Texans working together for a clean and beautiful Texas
BEAUTIFUL
AMERICA KEEP
T
HIRTEEN
NATIONAL
TEXAS WINNERS
AWARDS !
PHOTO ABOVE LEFT:
Front Row, Left to Right-Susan Gorman,
TEXAS FLAGS WAVE
Keep El Paso Beautiful; Stacy George,
Angelina Beautiful/Clean; Nelda Lewis,
IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
KTB Board Member; Teemus Warner,
Keep Waco Beautiful; Bonita Turner, Keep
San Antonio Beautiful. Back Row, Left to
Texas communities, businesses and in-
Right-Roger Powers, President Keep
dividuals dominated the scene, December
America Beautiful; SueAnn Wade-
Look Inside:
6, 1991, at the 38th Annual Keep America
Crouse, President KTB; Joanne Higgs,
Beautiful, Inc. Awards Luncheon in Wash-
BASF Corporation, Freeport; Bill Yenne,
Letters
2
ington D. C., winning thirteen national
Chairman of the Board, KTB; Emily
Shelton, Chairman of Board, Angelina
Austin's Cost/Benefit Report 4
awards. See page three for announcement
Beautiful/Clean; Don Fitch, Chairman of
of winners.
Board, Clean Houston. Not shown:
Is Recycling the Solution?
4
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc. won First
Mayor Charles Womack, Keep Haltom
Place-State in the National Awards for an
City Beautiful.
Trash-Off 1992 Info
5
unprecedented second year in a row! Credit
PHOTO ABOVE RIGHT:
is due to the thousands of Texas citizens
Bill Yenne, Chairman KTB, receives 1st
Litter Laws In Obio
5
working wholeheartedly in their commu-
Place State and 2nd Place Federal High-
Odessa Success Story
6
nities to clean up, beautify, recycle, and
way Administration National Awards
on behalf of Keep Texas Beautiful; Iron
educate in the area of solid waste manage-
Meet the Board
7
Eyes Cody, The Crying Indian; Nelda
ment.
Lewis, Kilgore, recipient of the national
Resources
8
Congratulations and thank you to all.
Mrs. Lady Bird Johnson Award.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 3
NOVEMBER
SSROOT
KEEPTEXAS
Texans working together for a clean and beautiful Texas
BEAUTIFUL
LEFT: Errol Kapellusch, General Manager of
KTRE- [Vin Lufkin, accepts the First Place 1991
IV Media Award for KTRE.
RIGHT: Crockett Elementary representatives
trene Silva, left, and Mary Atkinson, Princi-
actept the 1991 Sadie Ray Graff 1st
Place Award in the Elementary School Cat-
legon presented by Bill enne
G
overnor's Community
Achievement Awards for '91-'92!
$700,000 in Landscaping Prizes / Recognition for Your
Community & Citizens / Cleanup, Recycling, Beautification
YOUTH LEADERSHIP AWARDS
PLICATIONS CALL 1-800 CLEAN TX ABLE
MEDIA AWARDS
SCHNABEL STATUS CITIZEN AWARDS
SADIE RAY GRAFF EDUCATION AWARDS
Which awards will you enter this year?
Achievement Award is more than a report
Now is the time to start thinking about your
of accomplishments. The application can
Look Inside:
programs and nominees. We are happy to
be used as a blueprint for developing your
announce that the awards applications are
community cleanup/recycling/beautifica-
Letters
2
now available in the KTB office. Just call 1-
tion programs. The entry questions pro-
800-CLEAN TX to receive a packet.
vide guidance for program focus and con-
Plastics News
3
As many Texas communities know, any
tent, and KTB is here to help you with our
4
size town can bea winner. The Governor's
1-800-CLEAN TX toll free information line.
Marketing Recyclables
Community Achievement Award, co-
Participate in this award program and your
Adopt-a-Highway News
5
sponsored by the Texas Department of
city is guaranteed to be cleaner and more
Transportation, is awarded to nine differ-
beautiful.
Texas EPA Award Winners
5
ent population sizes, so each entry com-
Each of the other five awards highlights
Community News
6
petes with cities their own size for land-
special groups or individuals in your com-
scaping prizes worth $700,000.
munity:
Meet the Board
7
What if your city has no organized
The Youth Leadership Awards
cleanup/recycling/beautification program?
recognize youth groups whose efforts are
Resources
8
No problem! The Governor's Community
bringing about
CONTINUED ON PAGE 2
RASSROTS
KEEP-TEXAS
Texans working together for a clean and beautiful Texas
GREAT
BEAUTIFUL
TRASH OFF
THE GULF IS
SPECIAL
B
ring It
Back!
KTB's contract with the Texas Department of Transportation
makes it possible for KTB to work as co-sponsor with the Texas
General Land Office for the 1992 Great Texas Beach Trash Off.
Saturday, April 25, 1992
Most of us realize that
2000 and Mobil, Inc., schools, youth groups
9a.m.-12noon
all the debris dumped
and individuals unite each spring to clean
offshore from ships is a
up to 185 miles of Texas coast.
threat to wildlife, as well
These efforts are making a big differ-
Sponsors
as to the beauty of the
ence. Join in! Everyone can help protect
Texas General Land Office
coast. But did you know
the Gulf and make its beaches beautiful
Adopt-A-Beach Program
that about 3,000 square
again. 30% of the debris on the coast
miles within the Gulf have be-
comes from inland rivers, so even inland
come an oxygen deficient dead
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
river and lake shore cleanups directly af-
zone? The Gulf of Mexico is in
fect the Gulf.
danger. It is at risk. But thanks to
ALSO:
Look Inside:
"The Great Texas Beach Trash-Off" the Gulf
Keep litter, pet wastes, leaves, motor oil
is not only being cleaned up but is also
and debris out of street gutters and storm
KTB Proud Community!
2
better protected.
drains-these lead directly to lakes,
K-6 Solid Waste Curriculum
3
The Texas General Land Office's Adopt-
streams and rivers which drain into the
A-Beach Program and Keep Texas Beauti-
Gulf.
Xeriscape Landscaping
4
ful, Inc. invite you to the sixth annual Great
Apply lawn and garden chemicals cor-
TxDOT News
5
Texas Beach Trash-Off from 9 a.m. to noon
rectly and sparingly.
on Saturday, April 25, 1992.
Protect drinking water by using fewer
District Governors Report
6
County coordinators, community lead-
pesticides.
Meet the Board
7
ers, independent volunteers, up to 190
For Great Texas Beach Trash Off
active Adopt-A-Beach civic organizations,
Information, call 1-800-85-BEACH
Resources
8
private companies such as Coors Pure Water
or 1-800-CLEAN TX.
FEBRUARY 1992
TRASSROTS
PTEXAS
Texans working together for a clean and beautiful Texas
BEAUTIFUL
Millard Bruce, left, a training specialist
with the Texas Department of Health,
discusses the role of worms in composting
with Texas educators. The aim of the
three-day workshop is to introduce an
environmental awareness curriculum to
schools.
Photo by David Kennedy, Austin Ameri-
can-Statesman
T
exas Teachers Attend
Trash Class
Look Inside:
For five years the Texas Department of Transportation has provided funding for the
promotion of Waste In Place and other litter prevention and solid waste curricula.
Recently the Texas Department of Health/Texas Water Commission added their
Letters
2
support to develop and strengthen these education programs
Glad Bag-A-Thon '92
4
By Bill Collier. Reprinted courtesy of
day [1/18/92] on a new curriculum to teach
TxDOT News
5
the Austin American-Statesman.
schoolchildren about waste disposal issues.
Bluebonnets made from plastic six-pack
The event was the kickoff of the first
Recycling News
5
rings? Yellow roses made from soft-drink
statewide environmental education pro-
Harlingen Wins Again
6
cans? Worms dining on banana peels in the
gram, a joint effort by Keep Texas Beautiful,
classroom? Radical, man.
Inc., the Texas Department of Health, and
Community News
6
Perhaps so. But then, considering the
the Texas Water Commission.
7
enormity of modern man's solid waste prob-
The never-ending waste stream from
Meet the Board
lems, maybe radical is right on-as in
today's throwaway society has overwhelmed
Beach Trash Off.
8
radical change.
landfills, polluted groundwater supplies and
Fostering change was the goal of 38 edu-
littered scenic landscapes throughout Texas
Order Your T-Shirts Now!
8
cators from across Texas who were in Austin
despite the herculean pickup efforts of
for a three-day training session ending Satur-
volunteers.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 3
KEEPTEXAS
Texans working together for a cleanand beautiful Texas
BEAUTIFUL
M
is for May
Membership Month
First 500 NEW MEMBERS Receive FREE
25th Anniversary Keep Texas Beautiful/
Look Inside:
"Don't Mess with Texas" T-shirt
KTB Wins ASAE Award
2
See new membership form on Page 6.
Litter Law Enforcement
3
Now is the time to become part of the
touch with what's going on around Texas,
Keep Texas Beautiful network of concerned
Litter Law Ed. Pilot Program
3
support for your local program will grow
Texas citizens who strive to make Texas the
stronger and stronger.
Community News
4
cleanest, most beautiful state in the nation.
April was a busy, successful cleanup
Twenty-Fifth Anniversary T-shirts will be
month for KTB communities across the
Tires, Tires, & More Tires
5
given to the first 500 NEW KTB members
state, with many folks participating in local
enrolling after May 1st at the new dues
events ranging from Trash Bashes to Ap-
TxDOT News
5
levels, and other new benefits have been
preciation Breakfasts. Invite all partici-
6
added for all levels of new or renewing
"Waste in the Workplace"
pants to become KTB members!
members. How about a gift membership
Membership dues and membership
Meet the Board
7
for a dedicated volunteer, a relative's birth-
categories have changed. A revised mem-
day, or a Mother's Day present?
bership form is on Page 6. Call KTB at
Resources
8
If everyone in a community keeps in
1-800-CLEAN TX for more applications.
Need Trash Cans?
1992 Tens Halendar
P
lastic Trash Drums are available
to city, county and state agencies,
MAY '92 - TAKE PRIDE IN AMERICA MONTH
and non-profit organizations within the
8 Deadline for Governor's Community Achievement Awards applications.
state of Texas, from D.C. Parrish & Associ-
15 Deadline for Youth Leadership Awards, Media Awards, Sadie Ray Graff
ates, Inc.:
Education Awards, and Schnabel Status Citizen Awards applications.
"We [D.C. Parrish] represent the All
28-29 "WASTE WISE: A Conference for Decision Makers." Texas A&M at Dallas.
Poly Drum Service & Supply Co, Inc.,
Discussions, tours and exhibits on waste management issues-household,
LaPorte, Texas, reconditioners of plastic
landscape, municipal, hazardous and medical waste. $140. Call 409-845-1332.
drums. During the reconditioning process
some poly drums are rejected and not
JUNE '92
reusable for shipment. Prices: 10-50 drums
12 Plastics Recycling Workshop, Dallas. (See article below.)
cost $8.00 each, 50 drums cost $7.00
13 Recycling Coalition of Texas, Dallas Convention Center. Call 214-472-1913.
each, 100 drums cost $6.00 each, and a
15-18 Technology Against Graffiti Conference. Houston Astrodomain, 1-800-776-4995.
truckload of 200 drums costs $5.00 each.
JULY '92
Bottoms or tops removed for $1.00 each.
7-10 KTB 25th Anniversary Convention, Hyatt Regency Hotel on the Riverwalk, San
You will receive random styles and colors
Antonio, Texas.
at these prices. All drums sold as is.
9-10 E.P.A. Conference on recently issued guidelines for procurement and market
Drums offered are uncut, one-piece molded
development of products made from recycled content, especially for all
polyethylene, round and dimensionally
entities using appropriated Federal funds. Clarion Hotel, New Orleans. Call
similar to tight head steel drums. Our
Deborah Bahm or Nick Woolverton at 504-286-5587.
plastic trash barrels resist the elements
and will not rust, are ideal near salt or fresh
water, and last for years with no mainte-
can plastics be effciently recycled? Learn
waste haulers attending this workshop will
nance."
how to identify specific resins, survey po-
receive current information with which to
Call 713-461-5138 for recorded mes-
tential markets, update your knowledge
make cost-effective choices for recycling
sage, or write 10141 Eddystone, Houston,
on current and new collection system tech-
plastics. This workshop provides informa-
TX 77043.
nologies, consider appropri-
tion that recyclers need to know. Hands-
ate measures when designing
on plastics recycling ex-
collection and processing
perts present the topic
systems, plan and imple-
from a municipal per-
Plastics Recycling
ment effective community
spective and allwo ample
Workshop in Dallas
education campaigns, ne-
time for question. An out-
gotiate a contract with a
standing informational
n Friday, June 12, 1992, the Coun-
market.
guide, How to Implement a
O
cil for Solid Waste Solutions will
The workshop pre-
Plastics Recycling Program,
present a half-day workshop, Plastics Re-
sents the latest in-
a $50 value, will be provided
cycling: What Works & What Doesn't, in
formation, drawn
to every workshop participant.
Dallas. KTB is a workshop co-sponsor.
from extensive research and real world
THE COUNCIL FOR SOLID
The workshop will be the vehicle for
experience and is targeted for an interme-
WASTE SOLUTIONS WILL COVER ALL
ont
answering one of the most pressing recy-
diate to advanced audience. Solid waste
COSTS OF THE WORKSHOP.
SWith
cling questions from coast to coast: How
managers, recycling coordinators and
To register, please call 512-834-6682.
Keep Texas Beautiful, Inc.
KEEP
ALXAS
NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION
P.O Box 2251 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78768 1-800-CLEAN TX
IFUL
U.S. Postage
PAID
Address Correction Requested
Austin, Texas
Permit No. 673
An Affiliate of Keep America Beautiful
Printed On Recycled Paper with Soybean Ink
Endorsed by:
Texas Society of Architects
CLEAN BUILDER
titute of Architects, Austin Chapter
Contractors, Central Texas Chapter
intractors, Austin Building Chapter
CLEAN BUILDER
ciation of Remodeling Contractors
CLEAN BUILDER
The City of Austin
Capitol Area Builders Association
actors Association, Austin Chapter
Ease
A PROGRAM OF CLEAN HOUSTON
Beautification awards dinner
Clean Builder Membership Agree
The president of Keep Texas
Texas Beautiful Top Youth Pro-
Beautiful will be the keynots
gram to 1980 and the top high
speaker at the 34th armual awards
school, middle school and general
dinner of the Keep Brazorts Coun-
anti-litter programs in 1989.
ty Beautiful Association on Thurs-
Under her tutelage, the associa-
day.
tion also won environmental
I,
Sue Are will ad-
awards from the Greater Austin
dream the attendees of the dinner,
Chamber of Commerce, the Low-
(print name)
to be beld at the Branssport Hilton
or Colorado-River Authority and
Membership fee: $25.
In of Lake Jackson, beginning at
the city environmental board.
agree to conform to the requirements of the Keep Austi
0:30 p.m. with a eash bar. Dinner
Wade-Crouse is currently on the
will
be
served
at
7:30
board of directors of the Chil-
Members receive a Clean Builder
Builder Program. Failure to do SO may result in my rem
lowed by the program.
dren's Alliance for the Protection
Wade-Crouse has served as the
of the Environment and the advi-
Certificate, 2 metal signs, 5 vinyl
and forfeiture of the right to use any of the literature, I(
president of Keep Texas Beautiful
sory board of the Texas Recycling
since
September
1990,
Prier.
to
Coalition.
advertising of the Keep Austin Beautiful-Clean Builder
that she was the executive direc-
She also serves en the steering
stick 6 decals, and 1 ad sheet.
ter of Keep Austin Beautiful. Dur-
committee of the National Wom-
membership fee is enclosed.
Ing her three years with the Austin
en's Political Caucus and is the
organization.
It
woo
numerous
president of board of the Central
awards.
Texas Mutual- Housing Associa-
The program was awarded the
Non.
Keep America Beautiful Award in
In addition to the keynole ad-
SUE ANN WADE-CRI
Company Name
1980
for
having
the
best
program
dreas, the awards committee.
Association preeid
in its population category and one
chaired
by
Woody
Eastmas,
will
of the 10 recycling programs in
recognize
members
for
outstand
person. Reservations
the
nation.
trg volunteerism.
made with Woody Eastr
a Included Keep
Tickets to the event are 315 per
4533.
How
low-cost to get a
ter container
program
off the
K.A.Be
ground.
says
JOHN & JAME DOE
for KYZ COUNTY
F E consid
or 't I itt
BE -008-L
*
TRASH
QD
RECYCLER
COUNTY new LE DRV4
PARK RUN THE
THE
BEAUTIFUL
*
TEXAS TEX YEAR
TEP AUSTIN BEAUTIFUL PRAISES
WATSON FOR RECYCLING EFFORTS
OSS Texas
on the re-
It's envi-
it saves
e guy in
KEEP MIDLAND BEAUTIFUL
dent Kirk Watson.
LAKE JACKSON CLEAN & GRE
Results That Measure Up
Watson's endeavors were
publicly saluted Jan. 25 by
Keep Austin Beautiful at their
fifth annual awards luncheon.
He received special recogni-
tion in the category of individ-
ual contributions for his lead-
ership in recycling.
Since taking office as
TYLA president last June,
Watson has encouraged law-
Under Kirk Watson's direction, TYLA has sponsored tree and flower pla
ves
yers across the state to recycle
in the office as well as at home.
it is important to educate children about their envir
-ent.
Under his leadership
TV'
has sponsored lunch
Beautiful attracts more than in
"Keep Austin
our
neys about firm rec
attorney volunteer
President of
oals, said L.
Date-
cycling brochures (
Austin chapter is
cycling, be
and en-
and held tree and
of the Austin fi
al educati
ant
in conjunction WN
& Oaks Hartli
just pic
and activities. He is
tomeysalso
tic advocate of involvi
tiful's boar
young age to take pri
practitioner; Ken
ility in the S"
Sechrest & Mi
undings
Keep Lubbock
Beautiful
PLANO PRIDE
ANGELINA BEAUTIFUL/CLEAN
PARTNERS AGAI PAL
abc CLEAN COMMUNITY
PLANO E
AUSTIN BEAUTIFUL
Z
A
Clean is in your hand
CLEAN
ANGELINA BEAUTIFUL/CLEAN
bar
DALLAS,IN
CLEAN COMMUNITY SYSTEM
N'T DROP IT
SOLID OPTIONSIE 11 MANAGEMENT 90
ENVIR NENTAL
Environmental
Connection:
to
ON
Austin
by
P.O
Box
DALLAS COUNTY
Clean is in
COMMISSIONERS' COURT
your hand'
August 12, 1991
DON'T
MS. SueAnn Wade-Crouse
DRO'
President
Keep Texas Beautiful
P. O. Box 2251
Austin, TX 78768
IT!
Dear Ms. Crouse:
Over the past thirteen years, Dallas County has remained invol
and committed to the efforts of the Keep America and Keep Te
Beautiful campaign. This involvement has included the ann
introduction and passage of a resolution proclaiming April as "K
Stor photo
America, Keep Texas and Keep Dallas County Beautiful Month".
:Ipants in Coakley Junior High activities that led to two Keep Texas Beautiful awards
The Dallas County Commissioners Court pledgo
to continue
ded, front, from left, Jennifer Vittitoe, Cade Smith and Estella Lopez; back row, teacher
commitment to enhancing environmental
Y for
Thomason, Slivigno Ortiz, Michael De La Rosa and teacher Gall Vittitoe.
jenerations by assisting in the development
cal, indix
ind community action programs within the mur
ties loca,
chools
Keep Earth clean
)allas County. This enhanced citizens invol
ill furth
volunteer spirit underlying the succes
is worth
tampaign.
bakley Proud and the
"on
Several other Harlingen schools also won
Sincerely,
place in the category for
za-
recognition.
for a project aimed at
her
us and and community.
Zavala Elementary yas second in competition
for Graff
OF
cellence with honorable
pak)
Awar
men
goin
CLEAN
ckson
ssicmer Dist #1
HOUSTON 2700 POST OAK BLVD. SUITE 1728:ommissio
V.
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77056
(713) 621-7020
SMOX
ADMIT ONE
MASTER OF CEREMONIES RONALD MCDONALD
PRESENTS: "WEECOLOGY"
YOUTH
RDS
LUN
N
THURSDAY, JUNE
12:00-2:00PM
CHINE
op honors at convention
HARLINGEN
WINNER
BURDMING With
1991 Governor's Community
Keep Texas Beautiful
Achievement Awards
LEADI
Star photo by
cudly displaying a banner won at the Keep Texas
size, winning the 1991 Governor's Com
autiful convention in Plano are Jay-Teens Rosie
Achievement Award which goes to the city
pinosa, Sandra Ramirez, Erica Fuentes, Juana
to have the best litter reduction, recycling
onzalez, Jesus Yanez and sponsor Berta Quin-
planting and overall beautification program.
na. Harlingen took the top honor for a citv its
Icent
Texas School Children to Lea
More About Solid Waste Is
Garbage pizza -- the idea ma
grown-ups, but kids love
using garbage pizza to
waste: it. Some a hidden resource
of solid waste we generate, and why
ON HEALTH
that waste is of concern to them. And 1.
AC NO RESPONSIBLE TOWASTE MANAGEMENT
Beautiful.
Texas
458-7405
Keep
West Street Health Texas Waste 78756 Issues (512)
,ust for the Children in Texas to Learn About Solid has ann
is
The teaching Texas Department materials to of help Health and students a (TDH) variety in Texas of other public cover solid
WE
FULL
cate it reducing The contract, waste, in recycling, the amount of $348,948 for will Texas the C'
help WE'
FOR Immediate Release (El to Paso Write Meala Solid Waste from Lesson E1 Plans Paso, has waste been educati chosen to am
S
u
has
tein, M.D.,
er
Wade-Crous
Local Debbie Teacher Grammer. training Selected a fifth materials grade for teacher a statewide solid Waste Sciencevelop to
,AY 16 1991
Au- 3 tin, Box Texas
Dear 2251 Ann: inform keep you that WASTE WASTE WASTE WASTE looking 101
teacher
IN PLACE IN both
AS.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< waste education
Elementary Curriculum Guide
KEEP * BEAUTIFUL AMERICA
he
Vednesday
Plano Star Courier
May 29, 1991
Good morning!
A Harte-Hanks Community Newspaper
y's cleanup efforts
ng in $125,000 prize
ID MAY
"I think as you can tell I am not
er
alone," Jones told Bullock after
V of Plann got a lot greener
some two dozen people, including
city officials and Keep Plano Beauti-
ful supporters, applauded the
ONE
1,000 cash prize for winning
ter reduction and recycling
announcement.
vill go toward Landscaping
"We are very excited. As you
dification efforts along the
know, we have tried for this several
te highways. including Pre-
years and we are very honored to
di and State Highway 121.
receive this award.
Ann Richards' office made
Keep Plano Beautiful Chairman
2 announcement of Plano's
Doug Cargo also spoke to Bullock.
e finish in the 1991 Gov-
"All of the citizens of Plano should
Community Achievement
take this congratulations, he said.
ADMITIONAL
1 the category of cities with
"We will continue to beautify Plano."
ans between 100,000 and
Cargo noted that Plano won't have
to 20 far to receive its award: It will
O. P. Schnabel
WASTEWARDS IN
Status Citizen Awards Luncheon
4
rkburnett capture
first in KTB cortest
1
rs a great day.
Those were the
Balock, wife of Lieutenant Governor
ds of Burkburnett Mayor Pat Nor-
Bob Bullock. As & first place finisher.
Tuesday after learning, via tele-
Burkhornett will be the beneficiary
x that the city placed first in CMO-
$40,000 worth of state highway rig'
of-way landscape projects designe
amunity Achievement Awards further beacify the roadways iv
Sibr After By Beautiful News two HETHCOCK award wins
achievenent
O.P. SCHARDEL S
four of the annual Governor's
ment
year's
Harlingen Herlingen's has planting North population. to have Cities Richland best are divided divisit the Hilkin, presented litter into beautification reduction, to communities programs. recycling. honors judged tree Achieve- in this
OF
have The and competition. Award, best Governor's took runner-up Community top for the Keep
as
/
CHEY,
award
Prouded,
in
the
Hills
the
26
I
to
San
based
and
THE
also
Board
and
to
city
first
Haltory
"It
area
for
an
of
I
time
ities
are
the
able
il
I
of
Rio
the
Matz,
Matz
to
She
/
Credited ate.
/
that
the
award
for
BEAUT
the
I
high
we
team
the
/
the
Matz
I Enest STATE this / and Rith !! the it or / / Re OF have il Re 808
Harlingen this said. / RISING July PLANO, Ends May for Airlines in a drawing 31st! Keep Must to Texas Drawing be win
in
Bea
an
two
the
prese
convention
Early Session, BY SOUTHWEST not AN AIRL your
-GD