Alaska aims to regulate its own hazardous waste – KTOO

State of Alaska Seeks Authorization for Hazardous Waste Management Program

Program Objectives and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The State of Alaska is pursuing federal authorization from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to manage its own hazardous waste program. This initiative, led by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC), aims to localize regulatory oversight, currently handled by the EPA. The transition represents a significant step towards strengthening local environmental governance and aligns with several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

• SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production): The program’s core mission is to ensure the environmentally sound management of hazardous chemicals and wastes throughout their life cycle, directly contributing to SDG 12 targets by minimizing their impact on the environment and human health.
• SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being): By implementing robust local oversight of hazardous materials, the program will safeguard Alaskan communities from exposure to toxic substances, thereby promoting public health and well-being.
• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): Effective management of hazardous waste is critical for creating safe, resilient, and sustainable communities, reducing the environmental risks posed by industrial and household waste.
• SDG 14 & 15 (Life Below Water & Life on Land): The program will play a crucial role in protecting Alaska’s unique marine and terrestrial ecosystems from contamination, preventing pollution that threatens biodiversity.
• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): Establishing a state-authorized program builds effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at the local level, enhancing environmental justice and regulatory capacity.

Regulatory Framework and Operational Transition

Legislative and Institutional Developments

In 2023, the Alaska Legislature adopted new hazardous waste regulations, which became effective in the summer, largely mirroring the federal standards of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. A dedicated team of six ADEC employees has undergone three years of training to assume responsibility for the program. Upon federal approval, this team will manage all permitting, inspections, and clean-up operations within the state, providing a local point of contact for all stakeholders.

Hazardous Waste Profile in Alaska

Generation and Composition

According to 2023 EPA data, Alaska generated 2,729 tons of hazardous waste. This volume is comparatively low, partly because petroleum is not singularly classified as hazardous waste. The primary sources of this waste are industrial and commercial activities.

1. Petro Star Valdez Refinery
2. Eielson Air Force Base
3. A specialized hazardous waste and spill handling company

Common hazardous waste items generated in the state include:

• Cleaning solvents
• Paints
• Oil contaminated with other chemicals
• Pressurized gas cylinders (hazardous due to reactivity)

Management, Disposal, and Public Engagement

The majority of hazardous waste generated in Alaska is transported to specialized disposal facilities in the contiguous United States. The ADEC program’s jurisdiction will cover the management of this waste while it is within state boundaries. A primary focus of the new program will be extensive public outreach and education to ensure businesses and residents understand proper waste identification and management protocols, a key component of achieving SDG 12. A public comment period on the state’s application to the EPA is open until December 8.

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The article connects to this goal through its focus on the proper management of hazardous waste to prevent negative health impacts. The program manager, Lori Aldrich, explicitly states that a key part of the job is “to make sure that it’s not impacting health or environment here in Alaska.” This highlights the direct link between environmental management and public health.
2. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
   • This is the most central SDG to the article. The entire text revolves around the generation, regulation, and disposal of hazardous waste. The establishment of a state-level program to oversee these processes is a direct effort to improve the management of waste streams, which is a core component of responsible production patterns.
3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article discusses the creation of a new state-level institution, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation’s hazardous waste program, to take over responsibilities from the federal EPA. This represents a move to build more localized, effective, and accountable institutions for environmental governance, as Alaska is one of only two states without such an authorized program.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
   • The article supports this target by describing the new program’s primary goal. The statement about ensuring waste management does not impact “health or environment” directly aligns with the objective of reducing illnesses caused by contamination from hazardous materials like cleaning solvents, paint, and other chemicals mentioned.
2. Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle… and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
   • The article is a case study of this target in action. Alaska’s effort to establish its own program for permitting, inspections, and clean-ups of hazardous waste is precisely about achieving “environmentally sound management.” The mention of common hazardous wastes like solvents and paint, and the fact that most waste is shipped out of state for disposal, underscores the focus on managing the waste life cycle within state boundaries.
3. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • The creation of a six-person team within the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to manage hazardous waste is a clear example of developing an effective institution at the state level. The article notes that this will provide a local point of contact (“somebody at ADEC here to call”) instead of the federal EPA, which can lead to more accountable and responsive governance. The public comment period on the application also points towards transparency.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicator for Target 12.4: Amount of hazardous waste generated.
   • The article explicitly states, “According to the most recent EPA data, 2,729 tons of hazardous waste were generated in Alaska in 2023.” This figure serves as a direct, quantitative baseline indicator for measuring waste generation. Progress could be tracked by monitoring whether this tonnage decreases over time through better management and education, which the program plans to conduct. This relates to the official SDG indicator 12.4.2 (Hazardous waste generated per capita and proportion of hazardous waste treated).
2. Indicator for Target 16.6: Status of state program authorization.
   • The article mentions that Alaska is “one of only two U.S. states without an authorized program.” A key indicator of progress towards building an effective institution would be the successful federal approval of the state’s application. The outcome of the EPA’s decision following the public comment period will determine if this institutional development has been achieved.
3. Indicator for Target 3.9: Number of clean-up actions undertaken.
   • While not providing a specific number, the article implies this indicator by stating that the new state team will “take the lead on permitting, inspections and clean-ups instead of the EPA.” Tracking the number and scale of required clean-ups of hazardous waste spills or improper disposal sites would be an indicator of existing environmental health risks and the effectiveness of the program in managing and mitigating them over time.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: ktoo.org