2013

Region 2 Climate Change Workgroup

USEPA Region 2 New York, NY

9/18/2013

DRAFT

EPA Region 2 

Climate Adaptation Plan
2 

 

Disclaimer

To the extent this document mentions or discusses statutory or regulatory authority, it does so for informational 

purposes only. This document does not substitute for those statutes or regulations, and readers should consult 

the statutes or regulations to learn what they require. Neither this document, nor any part of it, is itself a rule or 

a regulation. Thus, it cannot change or impose legally binding requirements on EPA, States, the public, or the 

regulated community. Further, any expressed intention, suggestion or recommendation does not impose any 

legally binding requirements on EPA, States, tribes, the public, or the regulated community. Agency decision 

makers remain free to exercise their discretion in choosing to implement the actions described in this Plan. Such 

implementation is contingent upon availability of resources and is subject to change. 
3 

 

Preface

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is committed to identifying and responding to the challenges 

that a changing climate poses to human health and the environment.

Scientific evidence demonstrates that the climate is changing at an increasingly rapid rate, outside the range to 

which society has adapted in the past. These changes can pose significant challenges to the EPA’s ability to fulfill 

its mission. The EPA must adapt to climate change if it is to continue fulfilling its statutory, regulatory and 

programmatic requirements. The Agency is therefore anticipating and planning for future changes in climate to 

ensure it continues to fulfill its mission of protecting human health and the environment even as the climate 

changes. 

In February 2013, the EPA released its draft Climate Change Adaptation Plan to the public for review and 

comment. The plan relies on peer-reviewed scientific information and expert judgment to identify vulnerabilities 

to EPA’s mission and goals from climate change. The plan also presents 10 priority actions that EPA will take to 

ensure that its programs, policies, rules, and operations will remain effective under future climatic conditions. 

The priority placed on mainstreaming climate adaptation within EPA complements efforts to encourage and 

mainstream adaptation planning across the entire federal government.

Following completion of the draft Climate Change Adaptation Plan, each EPA National Environmental Program 

Office, all 10 Regional Offices, and several National Support Offices developed a Climate Adaptation 

Implementation Plan to provide more detail on how it will carry out the work called for in the agency-wide plan. 

Each Implementation Plan articulates how the office will integrate climate adaptation into its planning and work 

in a manner consistent and compatible with its goals and objectives.

Taken together, the Implementation Plans demonstrate how the EPA will attain the 10 agency-wide priorities 

presented in the Climate Change Adaptation Plan. A central element of all of EPA’s plans is to build and 

strengthen its adaptive capacity and work with its partners to build capacity in states, tribes, and local 

communities. EPA will empower its staff and partners by increasing their awareness of ways that climate change 

may affect their ability to implement effective programs, and by providing them with the necessary data, 

information, and tools to integrate climate adaptation into their work.

Each Program and Regional Office’s Implementation Plan contains an initial assessment of the implications of 

climate change for the organization’s goals and objectives. These “program vulnerability assessments” are living

documents that will be updated as needed to account for new knowledge, data, and scientific evidence about 

the impacts of climate change on EPA’s mission. The plan then identifies specific priority actions that the office 

will take to begin addressing its vulnerabilities and mainstreaming climate change adaptation into its activities. 

Criteria for the selection of priorities are discussed. An emphasis is placed on protecting the most vulnerable 

people and places, on supporting the development of adaptive capacity in the tribes, and on identifying clear 

steps for ongoing collaboration with tribal governments.

Because EPA’s Programs and Regions and partners will be learning by experience as they mainstream climate 

adaptation planning into their activities, it will be essential to evaluate their efforts in order to understand how 

well different approaches work and how they can be improved. Each Implementation Plan therefore includes a 

discussion of how the organization will regularly evaluate the effectiveness of its adaptation efforts and make 

adjustments where necessary.
4 

 

The set of Implementation Plans are a sign of EPA’s leadership and commitment to help build the nation’s 

adaptive capacity that is so vital to the goal of protecting human health and the environment. Working with its 

partners, the Agency will help promote a healthy and prosperous nation that is resilient to a changing climate.

Bob Perciasepe

Deputy Administrator

September 2013
5 

 

 EPA REGION 2 CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTA TION PLAN

Prepared by the following EPA Region 2 Climate Change Workgroup contributors:

Irene Nielson Clean Air and Sustainability Division, Workgroup Co-chair

Joseph Siegel Office of Regional Council, Workgroup Co-chair

Alyssa Arcaya Clean Water Division

Heather Barnhart Office of Policy and Management

Dale Carpenter Clean Air and Sustainability Division

David Cuevas Caribbean Environmental Protection Division

Melissa Dimas Public Affairs Division

Anhthu Hoang Office of the Regional Administrator

Grant Jonathan Office of the Regional Administrator

Nica Klaber Emergency and Remedial Response Division

Gavin Lau Clean Air and Sustainability Division

Kathleen Malone-Bogusky Division of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance

Ameesha Mehta-Sampath Clean Air and Sustainability Division

Esther Nelson Division of Environmental Science and Assessment

Douglas Pabst Clean Water Division

Rebecca Ofrane Emergency and Remedial Response Division

Alexandre Remnek Clean Water Division

Alex Rivera Caribbean Environmental Protection Division 

Derval Thomas Division of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance

Janice Whitney Clean Water Division
6 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8

Background: Region 2’s Known Vulnerabilities to Climate Change Impacts......................................................................................... 8

Our States & Territories & INDIAN NATIONS: New York, New Jersey, Puer to Rico & the U.S. Virgin Islands........................ 8

Vulnerable Communities.....................................................................................................................................................................11

EPA Region 2’s Programmatic Vulnerabilities to Climate Change ........................................................................................................16

1. Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality...................................................................................................16

2. Protecting America’s Waters..........................................................................................................................................................19

3. Cleaning Up Communities...............................................................................................................................................................24

4. Assuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution.....................................................................................................25

5. EPA Region 2’s Facilities and Operations.....................................................................................................................................27

EPA Region 2 Priority Actions......................................................................................................................................................................30

Short Term Priorities.................................................................................................................................................................................31

Air.............................................................................................................................................................................................................31

Water ......................................................................................................................................................................................................31

Waste: Superfund & RCRA ..................................................................................................................................................................32

Emergency Response...........................................................................................................................................................................32

Communities & Vulnerable Populations...........................................................................................................................................33

Indian Nations.......................................................................................................................................................................................33

Facilities..................................................................................................................................................................................................34

Long Term Priorities..................................................................................................................................................................................34

Air.............................................................................................................................................................................................................34

Water-Caribbean...................................................................................................................................................................................35

Waste: Superfund & RCRA ..................................................................................................................................................................35
7 

 

Emergency Response...........................................................................................................................................................................35

Communities & Vulnerable Populations...........................................................................................................................................35

Moving Toward A Climate Resilient Region..............................................................................................................................................36

Tracking Progress Over Time: Measurement & Evaluation...................................................................................................................38

References.......................................................................................................................................................................................................40
8

INTRODUCTION

The firstsection of the Regional Implementation Plan provides an initial assessment of the implications of 

climate change for EPA Region 2’s programs and objectives. This regional vulnerability assessment builds on the 

preliminary agency-wide vulnerability assessment contained in EPA’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan (draft 

released Feb 20131

) and was developed in concert with vulnerability assessments developed by EPA’s national 

program offices.

This Assessment is divided into three main sections: Background on projected climate change effects; EPA 

Region 2’s Vulnerability Assessment based on programmatic expertise; and an attached Summary Table 

analyzing the range of vulnerabilities. The information on climate change impacts in the Background section 

comes from peer-reviewed scientific literature, including the major climate assessments produced by the U.S. 

Global Change Research Program. The Vulnerability Assessment section sets forth the Region’s preliminary 

judgment regarding the risks that those climate change impacts pose to the programs that Region 2 implements 

and to our facilities, assets and day-to-day operations. Finally,the Summary Table follows a common format put 

forth for all the Regions and Program Offices, and presents a broad picture of how climate change impacts may 

affect programs in Region 2. 

This assessment of our programmatic risks and vulnerabilities should be viewed as a living document that will be 

updated as needed and when possible, to account for new knowledge, data and scientific evidence. As in the 

agency-wide Climate Change Adaptation Plan, our assessment of regional programmatic vulnerabilities is 

organized around EPA’s strategic goals.

BACKGROUND: REGION 2’S KNOWN VULNERABILITIES TO CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS

In order to determine our region-specific vulnerabilities, EPA Region 2began with a research effort to 

understand the current science and modeling on climate change effects. This section summarizes the state of 

the science for known or expected vulnerabilities for the region.

OUR STATES & TERRITORIES & INDIAN NATIONS: NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY, PUERTO RICO & THE 

U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS

Climate change, interacting with changes in land use and demographics, will affect important human facetsin 

the United States, especially those related to human health, communities, and welfare. The challenges 

presented by population growth, an aging population, migration patterns, and urban and coastal development 

will be affected by changes in temperature, precipitation, and extreme climate-related events. According to the 

International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global average temperature over the 21st century is expected to 

increase by between 3.5and 7°F. The large range is due to uncertainties both in future GHG concentrations and 

the sensitivity of the climate system to GHG emissions. The greatest warming is expected over land and in the 

 

1 http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs.html
9

high altitudes of the 

northern hemisphere 

where local warming 

may exceed 15o

F. In 

these regions, winter 

warming is expected to 

be greatest (NYCPCC 

2010). Hurricane wind 

speeds, rainfall intensity, 

and storm surge levels 

are likely to increase. 

Other changes include 

measurable sea level rise 

and increases in the occurrence of coastal and riverine flooding (NYSERDA 2011). Given the diverse geography 

covered by Region 2 and the varied environmental programs that EPA implements in this region, climate change 

presents a broad array of risks to the achievement of our mission. The risks vary somewhat between the 

continental states (NY/NJ) and the tropical region where Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands are located, but the 

theme of coastal concerns is common for the Region as a whole. 

PRECIPITATION AND INLAND EFFECTS

Nearly all climate models are predicting changes in precipitation patterns. In New York and New Jersey, 

precipitation will fall in heavierevents with hotter and drier periods in between. Similarly, the Caribbean 

may see less frequent but heavier storm events, with more severe drought periods. Severe storms are 

also predicted to increase, with 100-year storms likely to occur every 80 years by the end of the century 

(USGCRP 2009, NYSERDA 2011). In the New York area, average precipitation is projected to increase up 

to 5% by 2020, up to 10% by 2050, and as much as 15% by 2080. Much of this increase is projected to 

fall in the winter months (NYSERDA 2011), and more likely to fall as rain instead of snow. In upstate New 

York, the changing balance between rain and snow has already reduced snowpack. Warming 

temperatures have led to decreases in ice cover on lakes and rivers. By the end of this century, the 

length of the winter snow season in northern New York is predicted to be reduced by half (USGCRP 

2009). 

In the Great Lakes region, which includes portions of upstate NY, reduction in ice cover will lead to cold 

air moving over open water that would have otherwise been frozen. This will increase evaporation, 

leading to heavier and more frequent lake effect snow. Rising atmospheric temperatures will cause 

annual spring runoff due to snowmelt to occur up to two weeks earlier in the year. This change will 

decrease water from runoff later in the year, stressing ecosystems that depend on the availability of 

water in the summer (USGCRP 2009). Studies also predict a decrease in the Great Lakes water levels due 

to increased evaporation and decreased runoff from snowmelt. This has implications for energy 

generation and downstream ecosystems (NYSERDA 2011). Rising air temperatures also increase water 

temperatures. In lakes and reservoirs, warmer surface waters reduce the frequency of turnover with 

cooler bottom waters, resulting in increased periods of stratification (USGCRP 2009). Increased 
10

stratification isolates layers of warm water, which is less capable of holding dissolved oxygen (DO), 

which is critical to supporting aquatic ecosystems (NYSERDA 2011).

SEA LEVEL AND OCEANS

Climate change also has impacts on marine resources and coastal regions. Currently, sea levels are rising

an average of 0.86 to 1.5 inches per decade, as measured by tide gauges, with an average of 1.2 inches 

per decade since 1900. Before the Industrial Revolution, the rate of increase had been approximately 

0.34 to 0.43 inches per decade, mostly as a result of land subsidence (NYCPCC 2010). For the Long Island 

and New York City shorelines, models predict a rise of 7-12 inches by 2050 and 19-29 inches by 2080. 

Under a rapid ice melt scenario in the arctic, sea levels could rise by as much as 55 inches by 2080 

(NYSERDA 2011). Freshwaters and marine waters alike are expected to see increases in temperature 

with higher air temperatures. Models predict an ocean temperature increase of 1.8 – 2.5o

F for nearshore waters by 2050, depending on the model used (NYSERDA 2011). 

When atmospheric CO2 increases, more CO2 is dissolved in the ocean, decreasing the pH of the water 

and creating an acidic environment that dissolves the hard shells of corals, shellfish and smaller 

organisms. This process, called ocean acidification, also decreases the availability of calcium carbonate 

(CaCO3), a building block for the shells and exoskeletons of many marine organisms. Although 

dissolution of CO2 in oceans is a natural process, the current rate of ocean CO2 dissolution is

unprecedented, with serious implications for the marine food chain and ocean ecosystems.

Puerto Rico (PR) and the United States Virgin Islands (USVI) are especially vulnerable to the impacts of 

climate change due to their smaller land size (and therefore diminished resources, population mobility,

infrastructure and resilience), limited water resources, vulnerable ecosystems, susceptibility to natural 

hazards and the location of large urban centers near the coastline (e.g. San Juan, Charlotte-Amalie). 

Threats of climate change to this portion of the Caribbean includethe potential increase in sea level of

at least 15.7 inches based on a linear trend of observed sea level rise (PRCCC 2012), increase in average 

annual temperature between 3.5 - 5 °F, (USGCRP 2009) and decrease in precipitation between 5 to 20% 

by the end of the century (USGCRP 2009). Other impacts include the formation of more intense 

hurricanes and increase in ocean temperature and acidity (USGCRP 2008). These threats will cause 

myriad adverse effects to PR and the USVI including: increasesin coastal inundation, storm surge, 

erosion and increased water pollution as a result of coastal flooding, threatening vital infrastructure, 

settlements and facilities that support the livelihood of near shore and low lying communities; 

compromised water resources in PR and USVI islands; heavy impacts on coralreefsin PR and the USVI;

and changes in fisheries and other marine-based resources. 

HUMAN HEALTH

Climate change is very likely to accentuate the disparities already evident in the American health care 

system. Many of the expected health effects are likely to fall disproportionately on the poor, the elderly, 

the disabled, and the uninsured. The most important adaptation to ameliorate health effects from 

climate change is to support and maintain the United States’ public health infrastructure (USGCRP 

2008). Urban areas are especially prone to increased morbidity and mortality due to heat waves and 
11

poor air quality that results from higher temperatures and dry conditions. In addition to air pollution and 

heat-related impacts on health, extreme weather events due to climate change will likely increase risk 

for injuries such as those from debris during storm events where high winds and fast moving flood 

waters are involved. In Region 2, recent severe storm events have also caused unexpectedly high 

incidences of drowning. Moreover, flood waters can expose people to harmful environmental 

contaminants, especially if the flooding affects people who live nearby industrial sites or facilities that 

store or contain hazardous materials. For coastal and waterfront communities, heavy storms can cause 

storm surges that overwhelm or damage wastewater and drinking water treatment systems with high 

water volumes or salt water. The result is that communities are inundated with sewage- and industrial 

waste-contaminated waters, the health impacts of which could be severe gastrointestinal and 

respiratory illnesses. In PR and the USVI, potential adverse human health impacts are expected due to 

these previously discussed concerns, as well as increased incidence of vector-borne diseases and more 

frequent dust storms.

The 2011 Report Climate Change, the Indoor Environment, and Health addresses the impacts that 

climate change may have on the indoor environment and the resulting health effects. The report points 

to extensive research on how climate change affects the outdoor environment, how the outdoor 

environment affects indoor environments under different climate conditions, and how indoor 

environments affect occupant health, among other related topics. The impacts on the indoor 

environment includepoor indoor air quality, for example, due to changing indoor concentrations of 

pollutants fromincreased outdoor concentrations of those pollutants caused by alterations in 

atmospheric chemistry or atmospheric circulation. Other indoor impacts include:moistureand mold, 

flooding, infectious agents and pests, and thermal stress (NRC 2011).

VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES

OVERBURDENED COMMUNITIES

Certain parts of the population, such as children, the elderly, minority persons, persons of low income, 

persons with underlying medical conditions and disabilities, persons with limited access to information

(such as those with low English proficiency), and tribal and indigenous populations, can be especially 

vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Also, certain geographic locations and communities are 

particularly vulnerable, such as those located in low-lying coastal areas. One of the principles guiding 

EPA’s efforts to integrate climate adaptation into its programs, policies and rules calls for its adaptation 

plans to prioritize helping people, places and infrastructure that are most vulnerable to climate impacts, 

and to be designed and implemented with meaningful involvement from all parts of society. 
12

This Implementation Plan identifies key programmatic 

vulnerabilities and the priority actions that will be taken 

to address those vulnerabilities over time. As the work 

called for in this Plan is conducted, the communities and 

demographic groups most vulnerable to the impacts of 

climate change will be identified. The Agency will then 

work in partnership with these communities to increase 

theiradaptive capacity and resilience to climate change 

impacts. These efforts will be informed by experiences 

with previous extreme weather events (e.g., Superstorm 

Sandy) and the subsequent recovery efforts. 

As noted in the agency-wide Climate Adaptation Plan, the 

populations most vulnerable to climate change often 

include children, elderly, poor, persons with underlying 

medical conditions and disabilities, and tribal and 

indigenous populations, and this appliesin Region 2. The 

primary concerns are extreme storm events, sea level 

rise, and extreme high temperatures. Without strong 

adaptation measures, climate related health impacts may 

become more prevalent as the frequency and severity of

extreme climate events such as heat waves, flooding, and 

severe stormsincrease . 

According to the U.S. Census, the U.S. population is aging; 

the percent of the population over age 65 is projected to 

be 13 percent by 2010 and 20 percent by 2030, at which 

time NY and NJ alone will be home to over 7.8 million 

seniors over age 65. Older adults, very young children, 

persons with underlying medical conditions such as some 

disabilities or compromised immune functions are 

vulnerable to temperature extremes. Heat-related 

mortality affects low-income and minority populations 

disproportionately, because they are generally 

concentrated in highly developed urban environments 

that suffer from heat island effects (USGCRP 2008). For 

the past decade, Region 2 communities from the 

Caribbean to the northeast have faced summers with 

increasing numbers of days over 90o F. For example, 

between 2010 and 2011, San Juan, Puerto Rico 

experienced 100 days of temperatures over 90 degrees; 

the same number of days with such extreme

CASE STUDY: SUPERSTORM SANDY

Superstorm Sandy, which struck the east 

coast in late October 2012, starkly 

illustrated the special vulnerability that 

low-income, elderly and people with 

serious medical conditions face from 

extreme storms and flooding. While Sandy 

was not necessarily a result of, or 

exacerbated by, climate change, it was an 

example of the extreme weather events 

that are expected to become increasingly 

frequent in the NY/NJ region over time, 

due to climate change. The extended 

deprivations wrought by Superstorm

Sandy and the associated flooding (e.g. 

loss of power and heat for days or weeks; 

difficulty in obtaining food and supplies, 

medical care, transportation) were felt 

particularly by vulnerable populations, 

who in many cases lacked some of the 

resources or options available to others --

such as the ability to stay with friends or 

family or at hotels located outside of the 

affected area.

Of the more than 100 people in NY and NJ 

who lost their lives due to Superstorm

Sandy, the majority were seniors. Many of 

the buildings that had to be evacuated in 

New York City as the storm approached 

(because of their location in low-lying 

areas) were public housing for lowincome residents. It was reported that one 

week after the storm, 174 of the 402 

public housing buildings that were 

impacted by the storm still lacked heat 

and hot water; 114 of them lacked power. 

The lack of heat meant enduring nearfreezing temperatures with no heat and 

no hot water for bathing. Lacking power 

meant they had no lights or water for 

ordinary household uses because water 

needs to be pumped up to their homes. 

Because of the significant damage 

incurred by many of these buildings 

during the storm, many of the residents 

needed to remain in shelters or temporary 

housing for an extended period.
13

temperatures was experienced between 1900 to 1949 – a span of nearly 50 years (PRCCC 2012). Lowincome seniors are at highest risk for heat-related health impacts. According to estimates from the New 

York City Department of Aging, 55% of people hospitalized for heat-related illness were over 65 years of 

age;most of these were low-income seniors. Fortunately, air conditioning is an effective intervention in 

preserving heat health and reducing risk of heat-related death. However, as the EPA Climate Adaptation 

Action Plan acknowledges, economic constraints prevent some low-income households from using air 

conditioning for relief against extreme heat. For example, a family may not have access to an air 

conditioning unit, or choose not to use one so as to cut down on energy costs. Air conditioning may also 

not be a good solution in some heavily industrialized urban communities because high usage encourages 

power producers to run highly polluting “peaker plants” (e.g., older, high-emission power plants that are 

put into service to meet periods of peak energy demands) or puts the community at risk for power 

outages, which creates other hardships. Warming temperatures will also likely increase ozone 

concentrations. Increased ozone concentrations could in turn contribute to increased morbidity and 

mortality due to cardiovascular and pulmonary illnesses, including exacerbation of asthma and chronic 

obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) if current regulatory standards are not attained. If the 

projections for increased drought risk and lower precipitation in summer months prove correct, ozone 

health impacts will become a major issue for the respiratory health of residents in our region.

With sea level rise and the projected increase in the frequency and intensity of storms, low lying 

communities in our region will also likely see more health issues related to exposure to mold and 

mildew, which have been known to trigger asthma and allergic reaction as well as more severe 

respiratory symptoms. In areas where flooding can damage electrical systems necessitating the use of 

residential generators, we also expect to see more health problems related to carbon monoxide 

poisoning, especially when residents do not know to ensure proper ventilation when such equipment 

are in use. Flooding of industrial and environmental infrastructure also presents unique challenges to 

vulnerable communities. For example, during and after SuperstormSandy, Indian nation communities

like the Shinnecock people who live in the lowlands along the coast of Long Island Sound were faced 

with potential loss of drinking water because floodwaters infiltrated the private wells on which they rely 

for drinking water. Similarly, the low-income community of the Ironbound section in Newark, New 

Jersey, was inundated with flood waters that carried raw sewage and treatment chemicals from the 

nearby sewage treatment plant and industrial operations.

INDIAN NATIONS

EPA values its unique government-to-government relationship with Indian nations in planning and 

decision making. This trust responsibility has been established over time and is further expressed in the 

1984 EPA Policy for the Administration of Environmental Programs on Indian Reservations and the 2011 

Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian nations. These policies recognize and support the 

sovereign decision-making authority of tribal governments.

Supporting the development of adaptive capacity among nations is a priority for the EPA. Nations are 

particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change due to the integral nature of the environment 
14

within their traditional lifeways and culture. There is a strong need to develop adaptation strategies that 

promote sustainability and reduce the impact of climate change on Indian nations.

EPA engaged nations through a formal consultation process in the development of the Agency’s Climate 

Change Adaptation Plan. Nations identified some of the most pressing issues as erosion, temperature 

change, drought and various changes in access to and quality of water. Nations recommended a number 

of tools and strategies to address these issues, including improving access to data and information; 

supporting baseline research to better track the effects of climate change; developing community-level 

education and awareness materials; and providing financial and technical support. At the same time, 

nations challenged EPA to coordinate climate change activities among federal agencies so that resources 

are better leveraged and administrative burdens are reduced. 

This Implementation Plan identifies specific steps that will be taken to partner with tribal governments 

on an ongoing basis to increase their adaptive capacity and address their adaptation-related priorities. 

These collaborative efforts will benefit from the expertise provide by our tribal partners and the 

Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) they possess. TEK is a valuable body of knowledge in assessing 

the current and future impacts of climate change and has been used by nations for millennia as a 

valuable tool to adapt to changing surroundings. Consistent with the principles in the 1984 Indian Policy, 

TEK is viewed as a complementary resource that can inform planning and decision-making.

Networks and partnerships already in place will be used to assist nations with climate change issues, 

including Regional Tribal Operations Committees, the Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals 

and the Indian General Assistance Program (IGAP). Additionally, efforts will be made to coordinate with 

other Regional and Program Offices in EPA, since climate change has many impacts that transcend 

media and regional boundaries. Transparency and information sharing will be a focus, in order to 

leverage activities already taking place within EPA Offices and tribal governments.

Region 2 is also home to eight Federally-recognized Indian nation communities, all located in NY State. 

The nations in Region 2 are likely to be impacted by similar vulnerabilities discussed in other portions of 

this vulnerability assessment. In addition to those vulnerabilities mentioned throughout, nations in 

Region 2 have indicated that there are ecological as well as cultural activities that are vulnerable to the 

effects of climate change, directly affecting many of the cycles of the natural world. 

The nations have noted a 

change in the composition 

of tree species in forests 

due to climate change. The 

change in forest tree 

species may not be moving 

at a rate as fast as that of 

climate change and 

therefore could lead to 

diminishing forest size. This 
15

 

has resulted in an increased reliance on the planting by Indian nation communities of tree speciesthat

are more typically found in southern climates like the Carolina region of the U.S. Moreover, there is a 

growing concern that climate conditions are affecting many species of culturally significant trees such as 

the maple tree, causing an infestation of pests, insects, and fungi attacks. 

The harvesting of culturally important crops such as maple syrup and wild strawberries as well as the 

undertaking of ceremonies to celebrate their harvest and medicinal purposes have also been affected by 

the changing climate. The traditional timing for harvesting crops depends largely upon the weather. If 

there is a cold winter with a lot of snow, the nations will have a good harvest of maple syrup in the 

spring. If there is a mild winter with limited precipitation, the maple syrup is not as plentiful and even in 

some cases, not available. In addition, the wild strawberry plant has unique nutritional and medicinal 

qualities that contribute to blood purifying and blood building. The berries, leaves and roots of the wild 

strawberry plant also contribute to a variety of women’s health concerns and pregnancies. During the 

mid to late spring is traditionally the time that the wild strawberries come into being. But with changing 

climate, they now grow in the summer months, or are not as bountiful as previous years.

The undertaking of cultural activities such as ceremonies held in nations’ longhouses have significantly 

been impacted with the unpredictable climate. For example, the Thunder Dance (or “Welcoming of our 

Grandfathers”) is typically held two times per year with the first being held during the spring when one 

to three thunderstorms are heard and the second ceremony held during a dry period when rain is 

needed for crops. The nations thank the Thunderers or Grandfathers in the ceremony for returning 

again that year and for continuing to perform their responsibility of providing rain and fresh water, 

renewing the lakes, rivers, streams and wells. With the changing climate however, thunder is now 

common during rain and snow storms in the winter months (December thru February). Likewise, the 

ceremonies for the Strawberry, String Bean, andGreen Corn are determined based upon the time for 

harvest, which more often depends upon the unpredictable climate conditions. Other cultural and 

economic activities such as fishing and hunting of wild game have also been impacted by changes in 

streams, other fishing waters, and natural habitats. 

Climate change impacts for indigenous cultures are not expected to be clearly all positive or all negative. 

For example, increased air temperatures have the potential to lengthen the growing seasons of 

medicinal plants, higher CO2 concentrations in the air can enhance plant growth, and in some areas, the 

availability of water resources may increase as rainfall patterns shift as a result of climate change. 

However, increased air temperatures may impair growth of certain species of traditional plants and 

cause them to migrate to zones outside Indian nation communities in our Region while allowing for a 

rise in invasive plant species, and water resources may be negatively impacted by extreme rainfall 

events that compromise drinking water supplies. While the extent and nature of climate related impacts 

are not clear, it is apparent to indigenous cultures that there will be climate related impacts that will 

impact their cultural heritage.
16

EPA REGION 2’S PROGRAMMATIC VULNERABILITIES TO CLIMATE CHANGE

This section focuses on those vulnerabilities that we believe, at this time, are most significant to EPA Region 2, 

and are presented in alignment with EPA’s priorities where possible. A summary of program vulnerabilities to 

climate change is contained in the attached table. 

1. TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY

 TROPOSPHERIC OZONE POLLUTION

Various studies project daily ozone levels to increase between 2 and 5 parts per billion (current 8 hour 

ozone standard is 75 ppb) across the eastern U.S. between 2020 and 2080 due to climate change if no 

additional emissions controls for ozone precursors are implemented. The lengthening of the ozone 

season has also been projected, as reported in the 2007 IPCC Report and ClimAID. Region 2 States are 

located in the Ozone Transport Region2

, which indicates the sensitivity of the area to tropospheric 

ozone. The Jamestown, NY, NYC metro area and Philadelphia metro area currently violate the 2008 8-hr 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). 

The projected ozone impacts of climate change may make it more difficult for New York and New Jersey 

to maintain compliance with existing ozone standards. Sources in or upwind of the Region may be 

required to implement additional control measures or emissions controls. EPA’s air programs would 

oversee states’ efforts to develop State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions to address the issue. 

 PARTICULATE MATTER (PM)

WILDFIRES

Though wildfires are not common in Region 2, they have been known to occur in the Pinelands region of 

central/southern NJ. The risks of wildfire occurrences could be enhanced by climate change-induced 

effects such as higher temperatures, decreased soil moisture, and longer and more numerous periods of 

drought (IPCC 2007). All of these factors could increase the number, length, and size of wildfires.

The projected particulate impacts from wildfires could, but are not likely to, hinder areas in Region 2 

from meeting or maintaining compliance with the PM NAAQS. Region 2’s air program would oversee 

states’ efforts to develop SIP revisions to address the issue if wildfire events lead to issues in complying 

with the PM NAAQS. 

OTHER SOURCES OF PM AIR EMISSIONS

An increase in extreme weather events, which in the case of storms could include strong winds and/or 

heavy precipitation, increase the risk of disrupting energy delivery to many areas in Region 2. For 

example, electrical and natural gas distribution could be disrupted by downed trees and flooding. 

 

2 See Clean Air Act §184(a) for list of states in the Ozone Transport Region.
17

Extended periods with energy delivery disruption in cold seasons could lead to increased use of 

alternative heating fuels such as wood or backup generators. Residences which rarely use fireplaces 

could begin using them in a manner that does not reflect best practices. Using wood for heating that has 

not been seasoned properly or using fireplaces improperly increases the amount of wood smoke 

exhausted from wood burning devices, which can have negative impacts on human health and air 

quality. Occupants of the indoor environmentwhere wood is burned could experience respiratory 

difficulties in the short-term and, with continued use, increased morbidity from asthma and other 

cardiopulmonary diseases. The increased PM could affect also an area’s ability to comply with the PM 

NAAQS, which could have regional health impacts. In addition, weather events with high winds and 

storm surgessuch as those many areas in Region 2 have experienced, can generate a tremendous 

amount of debris through, among other things, destroyed buildings and felled many trees. Efforts to 

remove construction debris (e.g., from buildings) could require months and involve a large number of 

vehicles which could generate combustion related emissions. Biomass removal could involve 

incineration which could also operate for months. Region’s 2 air program would be required to monitor 

clean-up efforts to assure compliance with the PM NAAQS. 

INDOOR ENVIRONMENTS 

INDOOR AIR QUALITY 

Indoor environments can be contaminated by chemical, organic, and particulate pollutants that migrate 

from outdoors. Indoor migration is likely to be of particular concern on high temperature days in 

residences without air conditioning. Indoor air can also be contaminated by gas stoves and other indoor 

emission sources, such as building materials, radon, wood stoves, and environmental tobacco smoke. 

Climate change can affect these factors in various ways. For example, changes in the outdoor 

concentrations of a pollutant due to alterations in atmospheric chemistry or atmospheric circulation will 

affect indoor concentrations. The expected increased use of air conditioning, if accompanied by reduced 

ventilation, could increase the concentrations of pollutants emitted from indoor sources. Additionally, 

power outages—caused by heat waves or other extreme weather events—could lead to the use of 

portable electricity generators that burn fossil fuels and emit poisonous carbon monoxide.

DAMPNESS, MOISTURE, AND FLOODING

Extreme weather conditions associated with climate change may lead to more frequent breakdowns in 

building envelopes—the physical barrier between outdoor and indoor spaces—followed by infiltration 

of water into indoor spaces. Dampness and water intrusion create conditions that encourage the growth 

of fungi and bacteria and may cause building materials and furnishings to decay or corrode, leading in 

turn to chemical emissions. Poorly designed or maintained heating, ventilation, and air conditioning 

systems may introduce moisture and create condensation on indoor surfaces. Humid conditions can, 

however, be improved by well designed and properly operating systems. Mold growth prevention and 

remediation activities also may introduce fungicides and other agents into the indoor environment.

PESTS AND INFECTIOUS AGENTS 
18

Weather fluctuations and seasonal to annual climate variability influences the incidence of many 

infectious diseases which may affect the evolution of existing and emergence of new infectious diseases, 

for example, by affecting the geographic range of disease vectors. The ecological niches for pests will 

change in response to climate change, leading to changed patterns or routes of human exposure and 

potentially, increased use of pesticides in these locations. Climatechange may also lead to shifting 

patterns of indoor exposure to pesticides as occupants and building owners respond to infestations of 

pests (e.g. termites) whose geographic ranges may have changed. Although decreases in pest 

populations in some locationsmay lower the incidence of allergic reactions to particular pests, the 

overall incidence of allergic disease may not go down, because those individuals with a predisposition to 

allergies may become sensitized to other regional airborne allergies (NRC, 2011).

THERMAL STRESS

Extreme heat and cold have several well-documented adverse health effects. High relative humidity 

exacerbates these effects in hot conditions. As increased frequency of extreme weather events may 

result in power outages, corresponding increased use of portable generators may expose occupants to 

potentially dangerous conditions indoors. Seniors, persons with medical conditions, persons of lowincome, and residents of urban environments are more likely to be exposed to extreme temperature 

events. These vulnerable populations experience excessive temperatures almost exclusively in indoor 

environments. Increased temperatures will result in increased use of air conditioning. Air conditioning 

provides protection from heat but is associated with higher reported prevalence of some ailments, 

perhaps because of contaminants in HVAC systems (NRC, 2011).

BUILDING VENTILATION AND WEATHERIZATION

Leaky buildings are common and cause energy loss, moisture problems, and migration of contaminants 

from the outdoors (e.g. pests, chemical, volatile organic compounds, and particulates). Research 

indicates that poor ventilation is associated with occupant health problems and lower productivity in all 

populations, and is exacerbated in vulnerable populations such as children, seniors and persons with 

medical conditions. 

Residents may weatherize buildings to increase comfort and indoor environmental quality in addition to saving 

energy. Although in general these actions should be encouraged, this may lead to a reduction in ventilation and an 

increase in indoor environmental pollutants unless measures are taken to preserve or improve indoor air quality. 

EPA has developed practical guidance for improving or maintaining indoor environmental quality during home 

energy upgrades or remodeling in single-family homes and schools. EPA’s guidance and protocols may need to be 

revised to include state and local considerations for projected climatic changes. In addition, these programs may 

need to increase partnerships with other agencies to address training needs and workforce development for 

building owners, managers, and others, as well as develop new tracking mechanisms to assess the effectiveness of 

weatherization and remodeling techniques as they relate to indoor environmental quality. 

INCREASED ENERGY DEMAND

Increased temperatures due to climate change could have a potential two-fold effect on energy 

consumption for heating and cooling. Energy used for heating is likely to decrease while energy used for 
19

cooling is likely to increase. Summer peak demand in the New York metro area could increase 7 to 17%. 

Increases in peak demand without changes to energy infrastructure could lead to increased brownouts

(IPCC 2007, NYSERDA 2011) or operation of “peaker” electric generating units in order to meet the 

increased demand.Duringhigh energy demand days, peaker units operate and generally produce more 

emissionsthan the typical electric generating unit. Furthermore, increased energy use for cooling would 

occur in the summer, which would lead to increased emissions during the ozone season (unless there is 

an increase in the supply of renewable energy to match the increased energy demand). The emissions 

impacts from increased energy demand could hinder areas in Region 2 from meeting or maintaining 

compliance with the NAAQS (PM, O3, NOx). Sources in or upwind of the Region may be required to 

implement additional control measures or emissions controls. Region 2’s air program would oversee 

states’ efforts to develop SIP revisions to address the issue. 

MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS

Warming due to climate change could lead to damages to transportation infrastructure. Increased 

frequency, intensity, and/or duration of heat events could lead to railway deformities, road softening, 

and traffic-related rutting due to the road softening (IPCC 2007).Damages to transportation 

infrastructure could lead to increased congestion and traffic related emissions. The costs of maintaining 

roads and rail lines in good repair could divert limited funds from planned mass transit capital projects. 

This would hinder work performed by the Region 2 states and EPA Region 2 in promoting and supporting 

mass transit projects to reduce transportation related emissions.

Heavy precipitation events resulting from climate change can threaten travel routes on coastal and low 

lying roadways, lead to the closure of airports, and damage to shipping channels and ports(IPCC 2007). 

These damages and closures can lead to traffic congestion in other locations and cause increases in 

mobile source emissions. Extreme events experienced in Region 2, such as hurricanes, that hinder 

refinery operations or fuel transportation could require EPA to grant fuel waivers to allow more 

polluting fuels to be used for a short time period. Extended periods of congestion could arise in areas 

that are flooded, which would lead to increased transportation related emissions. 

2. PROTECTING AMERICA’S WATERS

WATERSHEDS, AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS AND WETLANDS

SEWERS AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS

Variability in precipitation patterns and an increase in the intensity and severity of storms will lead to an 

increase in the number of sewer overflows and wastewater bypasses. This will result in increased 

combined sewer overflow (CSO) discharges in heavily urbanized regions in New York and New Jersey. 

New York State has 76 CSO permit holders with 966 outfalls, and New Jersey has 30 CSO permit holders 

with 254 outfalls. These include the Region’s largest cities, such as Albany, Binghamton, Rochester, 

Syracuse, Buffalo, Jersey City and Newark. Furthermore, increased heavy precipitation events could 

trigger increased sewer overflows and wastewater bypasses, especially in low-lying communities like 

those surrounding the Martín Peña Canal in San Juan, PR. These overflows contain not only stormwater 
20

but also pollutants such as untreated human and industrial waste, toxic materials, debris, and oil and 

grease. Consequences include an increased risks of waterborne diseases, greater loads of pollutants 

entering our waterways, aquatic habitat impairments, loss of recreational access to water bodies due to 

high bacteria levels, fish kills, fishing and shellfishing restrictions, and increased flows in streams and 

other conveyance channels that could be eroded. This reduces EPA’s ability to ensure human health and 

safety and our goal to make waterbodies fishable and swimmable. Communities seeking to improve 

sewer and wastewater overflows would require greater investment provided by EPA’s State Revolving 

Fund (SRF).

Increased precipitation may also result in additional pollutant loadings of nutrients, pesticides, and 

other chemicals, further challenging permittees’ ability to meet water quality standards and permit 

requirements. For industrial dischargers and wastewater treatment plants, lower baseflows due to 

increased evapotranspiration and increased likelihood of drought conditions will make meeting permit 

requirements more challenging. This will have an impact on our watershed programs as well as our 

regulatory programs, including the NPDES and TMDL3 programs.

WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND PERMITTING

Under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, states, territories and authorized tribes are required to 

develop lists of impaired waters (i.e., “the 303(d) list”). These are waters that are too polluted or 

otherwise degraded to meet the water quality standards set by states, territories, or authorized tribes 

after the implementation of effluent limitations or other pollution control requirements. For future 

TMDLs, models to evaluate impacts under a range of projected future climatic shifts, using the best 

information and tools available, will need to be used. For the NPDES program, there will be a need to 

incorporate greater uncertainty into permit calculations to reflect the uncertainty in climate projections 

related to NPDES permitting (e.g., precipitation projections), revise low-flow stream estimates, and 

consider warmer surface waters when evaluating applications for variances from thermal effluent 

limitations.

WETLANDS AND WATER BODY ECOSYSTEMS

As sea level rises, barrier island configurations will change and coastal shorelines will retreat. Wetlands 

will be inundated and eroded, and low-lying areas will be inundated more frequently –some 

permanently –by the advancing sea. Since coastal areas are already well developed, there would be 

limited opportunity for wetlands to migrate upland. As sea level rises, temperature increases and rainfall 

patterns change the salinity of estuaries, coastal wetlands, and tidal rivers, which are likely to become 

more variable, further altering the composition and ecosystem function of existing wetlands. 

Furthermore, mangrove forests and other coastal ecosystems in the Caribbean which provide important 

services for shoreline protection, species habitat, and nutrient cycling in the environment will be 

 

3 A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still meet 

water quality standards, and an allocation of that load among the various sources of that pollutant.
21

vulnerable with sea level rise. EPA Region 2’s wetland and mangrove restoration and protection efforts 

will face challenges due to uncertainty with regards to sea level rise and the wetland’s ability to migrate. 

Changing water flow to lakes and streams, increased evaporation, and changed precipitation in some 

areas will affect the size of wetlands and lakes. 

For example, water levels in the Great Lakes 

are expected to fall. Headwater streams will 

be increasingly dry during summer months as 

drought conditions occur more often and 

evapotranspiration increases. This will have an 

effect on aquatic ecosystems because species 

that are susceptible to higher temperatures or 

lower dissolved oxygen levels, such as 

freshwater trout fisheries in New York and 

New Jersey, will lose viable habitat.

Increasing sea surface temperatures and ocean acidification have the potential to reduce the stability of 

corals in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, especially in the presence of stresses from the existing landbased sources of pollution and overuse of the reefs for fishing and recreation. In the Caribbean, already 

stressed coral reef ecosystems will be highly compromised by the increasing sea surface temperature 

which will result in more chronic bleaching events and subsequent vulnerability to diseases associated 

with bleaching. Ocean acidification will reduce the capacity of reef corals to calcify and protect 

themselves against more frequent hurricanes(EPA 2012). The collapse of coral reef ecosystems will 

have a significant impact on greater ocean ecosystems, food supplies and recreation and tourism 

industries. This will make implementation of local stormwater runoff reduction and improved coral reef 

management efforts by EPA and its partner agencies much more critical for preserving current coral reef 

habitat. 

DRINKING WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE

WATER INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY

An increased number of flood events of greater intensity is impacting water infrastructure. Many water 

and wastewater treatment systems and pumping stations in New York and New Jersey were damaged 

due to Hurricane Irene and Superstorm Sandy in 2011 and 2012. For example, many of the wastewater

facilities were flooded and/or shut down or lost power during these events, after which they only 

performed primary treatment for a period until the digester systems stabilized and discharged 

untreated or partially treated sewage to local waterbodies. In New Jersey,the Passaic Valley Sewerage 

Authority facilities alone suffered $300 million dollars of damage due to SuperstormSandy. This has 

required majorfinancial resources to pay for the repair or replacement of damaged infrastructure or 

proactively retrofit existing infrastructure, including treatment plants, pumping stations and conveyance 

systems.
22

 

Flood barriers, similar to those built in the Netherlands and Venice, Italy, have been proposed by NYC’s 

Mayor as a means of protecting the New York City metropolitan area from hurricane-induced storm 

surges 4.. EPA and the United States Army Corps of Engineers are jointly responsible for overseeing the 

dredged materials program and permitting of such facilities. This would also have an impact on our 

ability to maintain water quality in the New York and New Jersey Harbor and Estuary.

General population growth combined with a loss of snowpack in the Northeast and declining surface 

and groundwater quality and quantity, particularly in the Caribbean, will increase competition for water 

among energy, agriculture sectors, public drinking water supply, and maintenance of ecological service. 

This will have an impact on water supply and water use, along with the water body’s ability to provide 

ecosystem services. An example is the stress placed on the cold-water trout fishery due to inadequate 

reservoir releases in the Pequannock River in New Jersey due to drinking water diversions which causes 

water temperatures to be elevated in the stream during the summer months.

Sea level rise in coastal areas puts fresh water supplies for all uses, particularly drinking water, at 

increased risk. Salt water intrusion into coastal aquifers is a problem in some areas where withdrawals 

are outstripping recharge; increased pressure head from a higher sea-level worsens this problem. As sea 

level rises, community drinking water intakes may end up in brackish waters as the salt front migrates 

up coastal rivers and streams. For example, sodium concentrations could increase at the drinking water 

intakes on the Delaware River that serve Camden, NJ, degrading the community’s supply of drinking 

water5

. The integrity of coastal water infrastructure systems could be put at increased risk because 

systems designed for current sea levels are likely to have to operate under conditions where the sea 

level is 2 to 5 feet greater than current levels. Wastewater outfalls will have reduced capacity and will 

have to be redesigned given increased water heights in receiving waters. Communities may need 

infrastructure improvements to become more resilient to sea level rise and more frequent storm events.

In Region 2, many low-income and/or minority communities are located within or near floodplains or in 

areas with older water infrastructure which may not be designed to handle increased water flows. 

Residents of these areas are vulnerable to flooding impacts from a variety of sources; a major concern in 

this regard is the incidence of wastewater and stormwater sewer systems back-ups that could cause 

localized flooding and water inflows into basements in urban areas. These flooding events are likely to 

increase in frequency and magnitude with more frequent heavy rainfall events under climate change 

(NYSERDA 2011). Unfortunately, communitiesmost impacted by this flooding risk are also those least 

able to relocate from flood-prone areas, and therefore are more likely to be impacted by weather 

events that could disrupt the drinking water and electrical supply as well as damage plumbing and 

electrical systems at homes and businesses. 

 

4 See “Storm Surge Barriers to Protect New York City: Against the Deluge” - http://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/9780784412527 
23

GROUNDWATER RECHARGE

Increased temperatures will lead to increased evapotranspiration, thereby reducing the amount of 

water available to recharge groundwater aquifers. This will place strains on the use of groundwater for 

municipal, industrial, and agricultural water supply. For example, the Long Island Aquifer is a source of 

drinking water for 2.7 million people in New York State, and over 900 million gallons per day (mgd) of 

water is used (8% of total water use). Aquifers supply drinking water to New Jersey atthe rate of 570 

mgd (31% of total water use) and Puerto Rico at the rate of 137 mgd6

. In order to ensure adequate 

water supplies, the importance of groundwater protection from contamination will become more crucial 

in maintaining water supplies for the Region.

SEPTIC SYSTEMS

When there is flooding, or when soils are saturated for extended periods of time, septic systems cannot 

function properly. Proper septic system performance depends on having aerated conditions in the soil 

so that bacteria can properly treat wastewater by removing pathogens and other contaminants. 

Flooding events and rising groundwater tables due to sea level rise and increased precipitation saturate 

the soils and causes sewage backing up in buildings. Flooding also allows contaminants to enter ground 

and surface water, reducing water quality and recreational access. In Region 2, the major contaminants 

that could increase due to climate change are bacterial contamination, greater algal blooms due to 

increased nutrient loadings, and higher nitrate concentrations in groundwater. Additionally, certain 

areas such as Suffolk County, NY or some coastal areas of Puerto Rico rely primarily on cesspools and 

septic systemsfor sanitation;these areas are particularly threatened by impacts from climate change. 

EPA works with local officials and partner organizations to support onsite wastewater management and 

develops voluntary policies and guidance for onsite wastewater management programs.

QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY OF SAFE DRINKING WATER

Protecting public health from contaminants in drinking water will require adapting to the impacts of 

climate change. Warmer waters foster pathogen growth, which affects the reliability and the cost of 

drinking water disinfection. Increased precipitation may result in additional pollutant loadings of 

nutrients, pesticides, and other chemicals, further challenging drinking water treatment. New York City’s 

ability to continue tomeet the criteria for the drinking water filtration avoidance, thereby reducing the 

need for water supply treatment,may be affected due to increased runoff and turbidity. Small water 

systems, such as non-PRASA (Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority) systems in Puerto Rico, are 

particularly vulnerable due to reduced water yields and/or poor water quality. Longer periods of 

drought are expected to occur and may produce an increase in the energy and costs associated with the 

production of drinking water. 

Rising sea levels cause intrusion of saltwater into the underground freshwater lens, contaminating the 

supply of usable groundwater and reducing the freshwater supply for the Caribbean islands, on Long 

 

6 http://www.ngwa.org, http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2004/circ1268/htdocs/table04.html
24

Island, and in coastal sections of New Jersey. This is already the case in the USVI where desalination is 

one of the main sources of drinking water.

New drinking water sources and/or enhanced treatment will be needed in some localities, such as 

desalinization plants and relocation of water intakes. Desalination to treat marine or brackish water is 

becoming increasingly important in certain locationsin the Virgin Islands and circumstances where 

demand is driven by population growth or drought. Wastewater or stormwater utilities could distribute 

reclaimed water from a centralized treatment system for park irrigation or other uses, which may 

require additional treatment. EPA’s drinking water and groundwater protection programs will be 

involved in permitting and monitoring the systems and providing technical support. 

Aquifer Storage & Recovery (ASR) is a process of storing water underground to provide future domestic, 

industrial and agricultural water supplies. ASR is increasingly used where fresh water demand is 

beginning to or projected to exceed supply, and ASR is likely to increase in drought prone areas. When 

applied to stormwater, this practice can also reduce nonpoint source pollution of our lakes, streams and 

rivers. However, the infiltration or injection of polluted stormwater increases the risk of contamination 

of fresh water aquifers. In Region 2, the majority of ASR facilities are located in New Jersey. In light of 

increasing demand, EPA will need to ensure that groundwater quality and supply are maintained given 

greater use of this resource (EPA 2012).

3. CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES 

RISK OF CONTAMINANT RELEASES 

The prospect of more intense and more frequent storms and sea-level rise carries with it the risk of 

contaminant releases from RCRA Corrective Action sites, Superfund sites, Brownfield sites and landfills. 

As noted in EPA’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan, inundation and flooding may lead to transport of 

contaminants through surface soils, groundwater, surface waters and/or coastal waters. Uncontrolled 

migration of contaminantsmay pose an increased risk of adverse health and environmental impacts. An 

example in Region 2 is American Cyanamid, a Superfund site on the banks of the Raritan River in 

Bridgewater Township, NJ. The site has two impoundments of harmful chemicalsthat release 

contamination during major flood events, notably Hurricanes Floyd and Irene (1999 and 2011 

respectively). There is currently no remedy selected for the impoundments area of the site, so future 

flood events will continue to release contamination on the site and into the riveruntil a remedy is 

selected and implemented. 

While this issue is, of course, most relevant to sites that have not yet been remediated, some sites 

where a containment remedy has been performed may also be vulnerable. For example, saltwater 

intrusion and increased groundwater salinity in coastal aquifers may increase the permeability of clay 

liners installed at waste sites, such as landfills, allowing contaminants to spread to nearby properties.

Several landfills in Puerto Rico and the USVI are located at or near sea level. Many of these landfills are 

still operating and/or have been improperly closed. Rising sea level poses a significant risk of erosion to 

these landfills and the potential migration of contaminants towards nearby communities and 
25

ecosystems (i.e. coastal wetlands and coral reefs). Examples of these are the Culebra Island Landfill and 

the Rincón Municipal Landfill.

Severe storms, storm surge and sea level rise may also cause flooding of coastal or other riparian located 

facilities in Region 2 where chemicals, oil or other hazardous substances are present. Of notable concern 

are pesticide and chemical production or storage facilities, which are governed by the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Toxics Substances Control Act (TSCA), 

respectively. These facilities are also vulnerable to extreme weather events, possibly leading to the 

dispersal of such materials to nearby properties or surface waters and, in turn, creating risks to public 

health and the environment. This is an issue about which local Environmental Justice groups have raised 

concerns to EPA, as a number of such facilities in our Region are located near low-income minority 

communities. Releases of hazardous substances or other materials from such facilities could potentially 

lead to cleanup actions by EPA’s Superfund program, the oil spill response program, or state or local 

government response programs to conduct cleanup actions. 

ADVERSE EFFECTS ON CLEANUPS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE

As noted in the Agency-wide Climate Change Adaptation Plan, changes in precipitation patterns and 

temperature as a result of climate change may adversely affect the performance of some site cleanup 

remedies and may require some remedies to be changed. In February 2012, EPA’s Office of Solid Waste 

and Emergency Response (OSWER) released a report, Adaptation of Superfund Remediation to Climate 

Change, which identified vulnerabilities to site remedies nationwide. The assessment identified sites 

with on-site pump and treat or containment remedies within 100- and 500-year floodplains, as well as 

those within the modeled 5 ft.sea level rise zone. While the report concluded that there are multiple 

programmatic systemsin place to address effects of climate change on Superfund sites, more evaluation 

is ongoing to look at more specifics regarding vulnerabilities during a site’s lifecycle, as well as at 

sediment and other types of sites. The report also found that climate change effects could be accounted 

for within the remedy assessment criteria or the Five Year Review process, but site managers may need 

to be more aware of these opportunities for addressing adaptation issues. Other vulnerabilities include 

changes in site conditions and contaminant characterization of groundwater plumes as groundwater 

recharge may be affected by climate change. Flooding and storm surge is also likely to affect ongoing 

ecological redevelopment of sites, as well as oil tank storage. 

4. ASSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION

USE OF TOXIC CHEMICALS 

A changing climate will likely result in changes in the kind of agricultural crops planted in New York, New 

Jersey, and the Caribbean. For example, current cash crops in the Northeast such as apples, maple 

syrup, and cranberries will likely move further north into Canada while crops now grown in the 

Southeast will move into the region (USGCRP 2009). This in turn will affect the quantity, type, and timing 

of agricultural chemical use as well as the appropriate application method. These changes in chemical 

use and application could impact the appropriate risk management decisions made by EPA Region 2's 

Pesticides Program in determining what pesticides and geographic areas to focus our efforts to ensure 
26

 

compliance with the Federal Fungicide, Insecticide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), particularly with regard 

to the protection of migrant farm workers and rural communities. For instance, soil fumigation as a 

method to apply pesticides is now rarely used in Region 2 but would be expected to become more 

common as crops move into the area that requires pest techniques that are associated with longer 

growing seasons and warmer winters (NYSERDA 2011). Soil fumigants are among the most hazardous of 

all pesticides and rapidly volatilize once in the soil. Once in gaseous form, the fumigant can disperse 

throughout the soil and contact target pests making them extremely effective. However, because of the 

volatility of fumigants, people who live, visit, and/or work near fumigated fields may be exposed to 

these toxic emissions if the gases travel offsite either via wind aboveground or through wells, sewers, 

vaults and other underground pathways to the surface. Consequently, EPA Region 2’s Pesticides 

Program would likely need to reevaluate its priorities if spray drift from fumigants becomes more 

common in Region 2. 

Similarly, changes in temperature and precipitation levels are expected to result in increased cases of 

the West Nile Virus and other diseases carried by mosquitoes, some not usually found this far north. In 

fact, the migration of Aedes albopicus(Asian tiger mosquito) has resulted in increasing populations in 

more northern regions, especially Region 2(Shope 1991). These mosquitoes have begun to take over 

areas previously inhabited by the Culex species of mosquito during the winter(i.e., NYC). The movement 

of this invasive species may increase the northward spread of Dengue. As the incidence and type of 

diseases carried by mosquitoesincreases, EPA Region 2’s Pesticides Program will likely need to broaden 

their knowledge of new types of pesticides and/or application methods to ensure compliance with 

FIFRA. EPA will also need to engage diverse stakeholders with disparate views on the merits of spraying 

pesticides. These activities will have resource implications for EPA Region 2 as will most of the 

programmatic impacts referenced in this Assessment. 

EXPOSURE TO TOXIC CHEMICALS FROM INFRASTRUCTURE DAMAGE 

The extreme weather events that are likely to occur as a result of climate change (e.g., high winds, heavy 

precipitation events) may damage community infrastructure (e.g., schools and child care facilities) and 

residential homes. As a result, there may be an increased risk of exposure to lead, asbestos and PCBs, 

when these buildings are initially damaged and when they are renovated/demolished as part of the 

recovery efforts. Children are particularly vulnerable to this risk, particularly those living in 

disadvantaged communities where buildings tend to be older and poorly maintained. Therefore, to 

mitigate/prevent such exposure and ensure compliance with the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 

EPA Region 2’s Toxics Substances program will need to educate the affected communities about 

safeguarding themselves and provide technical assistance to debris removal companies and the 

construction/renovation industry. Depending on the extent of the communities impacted and the 

amount of damage resulting from these extreme weather events, the capacity of EPA Region 2 Toxic 

Substance program to provide such information/assistance in a timely manner, especially in a face-toface format, could be sorely tested. 
27

5. EPA REGION 2’S FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS

EPA Region 2’s main office is in Lower Manhattan, with otherfacilities in Edison, NJ, and Guaynabo, PR, as well 

as small field offices in Hudson Falls and Buffalo, NY, Stamford, CT and in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Our Edison, NJ 

facility houses, among other things, our regional laboratory and EPA’s Emergency Response Team. Overall, 

Region 2 currently has about 840 employees. The climate change impacts discussed in the above sections

present a number of risks to Region 2’s staff, facilities, assets, and day-to-day operations, as summarized below. 

FACILITY OPERATIONS, SAFETY AND EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS 

Extreme heat, bad air quality or other weather conditions exacerbated by climate change may increase 

the health risks of EPA Region 2 employees and contractors engaged in field work --such as sampling, 

remediation and inspections -- or force them to delay such work. In addition, increased demands placed 

on electrical grids during heat waves could jeopardize the grids’ integrity or force utility providers to 

institute rolling brownouts or blackouts. The occurrence of such outages would force EPA to use 

auxiliary power sources (generators, uninterrupted power supplies). Building lighting, HVAC systems 

and/or elevator service may have to be reduced or adjusted to compensate for the loss of power. EPA 

offices in the Caribbean could potentially close for short periods of time due to impacts of hurricane, 

tropical storms or other weather events and potential impacts on the facilities themselves and the 

employees’ ability to safely travel to and from work. In addition, potential water shortages due to 

reduced water availability as a result of prolonged drought could disrupt day to day operations. Severe 

storms (for example, as seen during SuperstormSandy) could also cripple public transportation systems, 

highways and roads, and/or result in significant gasoline shortages, thus preventing Region 2 employees 

from being able to come into work. We have prepared for such scenarios through our telework 

program, portable computing equipment for employees, and remote networking capabilities, but at a 

minimum, some impact on productivity can be expected. In addition, many regional staff conductsfieldbased work, such as site remediation and inspections. Instability of weather patterns (with more heavy 

snow and ice events in winter months) also impacts the safety of staff traveling to and from remote (and 

sometimes off-road) locations and increases the chance for automobile accidents with government 

vehicles. 
28

EPA Region 2 has Continuity of Operations Plans that are

formulated to address an “all hazards” approach. Damages 

to EPA facilities and/or impacts to critical infrastructure due 

to extreme weather events could force Region 2 to 

implement those plans, or even Devolution of Operations 

Plans, in order for EPA to continue to execute Mission 

Essential Functions. The Region maintains a Continuity of 

Operations site in Edison, NJthat is capable of providing 

fully supported workspace for up to 200 emergency support 

personnel. The site has backup power and was constructed 

to withstand hurricane force winds and earthquake level 

forces.

Over time, climate change may result in EPA Region 2 

personnel –including those working in our emergency 

response program or who collect or analyze environmental 

samples, as well as our contract support staff, public affairs 

staff, and others -- being increasingly drawn away from their 

normal day-to-day activities to respond to extreme weather 

events or emergencies. This, in turn, could lead to a reduced 

capacity to perform regular duties (e.g., monitoring 

compliance with and enforcing hazardous waste laws). 

IMPACTS ON WATER SUPPLIES USED BY EPA REGION 2 

As described previously, water availability, quality, and 

safety could be compromised by climate-influenced events. 

At all regional offices and the laboratory, the staff relies 

upon potable drinking water from municipalities. The 

availability of safe drinking water (as described in the 

SuperstormSandy example) needs to be considered for all 

offices. Water supply issues could impact the Regional Lab 

at Edison, NJ and its ability to operate. In Edison, the ORD 

National Risk Management Research Laboratory conducts 

research on stormwater management practices and 

technologies. In-situ research requires copious amounts of 

water to mimic various storm intensities (and related 

overflows). Droughts can impact the Laboratory staff’s 

ability to test technologies and conduct research because 

access to water could be limited through 

rationing/availability.

EPA Operations & 

Superstorm Sandy

When Superstorm Sandy struck the east 

coast in October 2012, EPA Region 2’s 

main office – located in lower 

Manhattan – lost its main power supply 

for five days and its heat supply longer, 

which forced the closure of the building 

for almost two weeks (9 business days). 

Closing the main office had a major 

impact on our operations, and due to 

the extent of impact – power outages, 

wireless and landline telephone service 

limitations – employees had limited 

ability to access their work virtually. 

The storm also knocked out the normal 

power supply for our Edison, NJ facility, 

forcing the facility (and the Region’s 

command center for emergency 

response) to operate on emergency 

backup power. For nonessential 

Edison, NJ staff – including laboratory 

staff – the Edison facility was closed for 

five business days, creating a backlog in 

regular work while additional stormrelated needs were developing. 

Edison’s Regional Emergency 

Operations Center (REOC) ran on 

generator power from Monday through 

Saturday. Bottled water and dispensers

had to be brought in to supply potable 

water for staff working at the REOC. 

In addition to building operations, road 

and tunnel closures, hobbled public 

transportation (NYC subway, PATH, NJ 

Transit trains and light rail) and 

gasoline shortages created hardships 

mobilizing the workforce at both 

locations, whether bringing employees 

into the office or more importantly 

deploying employees to the field to 

assist other state and federal agencies.

Regardless of whether Superstorm 

Sandy can be directly attributed to 

climate change, the storm is illustrative 

of the sort of extreme weather events 

that are expected to occur in the 

Northeast with greater frequency in the 

future, as a result of climate change. 
29

 

EPA developed a Water Conservation Strategy that identifies water conservation projects and 

approaches that reduce potable water use by 2% annually. This strategy applies to EPA-owned spaces, 

such as the Edison, NJ facility and laboratory that are owned and operated by the Regional office. 

Projects to ameliorate local water supply issues include gray water(rain water runoff and water 

condensation) capture for cooling. Increased drought intensity – and overall changes with the frequency 

and intensity of storm events – may reduce the availability of gray waterover time. 

In addition, water shortages could impact office operations of leased space in Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin 

Islands, New York and New Jersey. Spaces leased from the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) 

may be dependent upon water for consumption, cooling, landscaping, etc. However, GSA (directly or 

indirectly) is the responsible party for addressing water conservation and stormwater reduction. During 

extreme drought conditions, employees may be asked to conserve water such as limit watering plants, 

showering at the facility gym, etc. Long-term droughts and increased scarcity of water may cause local 

water rates to increase thereby increasing operational costs related to potable water use in office 

buildings and negotiated during lease renewal.
30

EPA REGION 2 PRIORITY ACTIONS

Adaptation planning efforts in Region 2 began with a vulnerability assessment of Regional programs to identify 

how climate impacts may affect our mission, program and operations. Region 2 focused on actions that would 

address the areas of highest likely risk and subsequently developed a preliminary list of action items to address 

the impacts identified in the vulnerability assessment. Next the group identified criteria to select the best 

actions from the preliminary list and developed a draft set of priority actions selected by applying the criteria.

See the criteria listed below. 

CRITERIA 

• Action meets other regional/national objectives [Consider whether action is part of EPA's core or 

optional programs]

• Action must be implemented in order to enable other actions (sequencing)

• Region 2 is the best fit as implementer or co-implementer

• Action is achievable

• Action fills a gap

• Action reduces risk significantly

• We can measure benefits of the action

• There are resources available to do the action

• Action has short-term and long-term benefits 

• Actions that address current impacts are more important than actions that address projected

impacts 

• The action avoids maladaptation 

• Action addresses EJ communities and vulnerable areas/populations

• The law can provide an opportunity for the action; There is legal authority for the action

• The action is scalable and transferable

• Action advances sustainability

• Action has durability/stability/longevity

The following section lists priorities that represent regional actions to reduce the impacts of climate change to 

EPA Region 2 programs. Region 2 priority actions are categorized to demonstrate the region’s short-term 

priorities, and long term priorities. The short-term actiondesignation reflects the regional offices’ assessment of 

appropriate resources and ability to implement the actionsin the near-term while long-term actions are slated 

for the future and pending resource allocation. Additionally, the region identifies goals that are best suited for a 

headquarters or nationally-led initiative, due to factors such as scope, rulemaking authority, and resource 

requirements. Region 2 is committed to supporting the development of potential legal strategies underlying 

existing and new priority actions on adaptation and will more broadly consider options to improve the effective 

use of legal tools in the response and recovery phases following impacts from climate change. Such legal tools 

are relevant to consideration of a range of issues including but not limited to access issues, waivers, no-action 

assurances, and efforts to secure staging areas. Region 2 will also seek opportunities and develop options to 

increase resilience at entities regulated by environmental statutes and regulations by incorporating information 

and knowledge on vulnerabilities into permits, environmental reviews, injunctive relief portions of enforcement 

documents, and other EPA decisions and approvals, where appropriate. 
31

 

Region 2 recognizes the iterative nature of adaptation planning and will use an adaptive management 

framework, ordevelop adaptation strategies based on assessments that are monitored, revisited, redesigned 

and adjusted over time, to implement these priority actions. An adaptive management framework will be 

particularly helpful given uncertainties about Regional climate change impacts and the effectiveness of our 

priority actions as well as changing resources and needs. Through an adaptation management framework, 

Region 2 will be able to more nimbly and effectively reprioritize and revise our actions.

SHORT TERM PRIORITIES 

THE SHORT-TERM PRIORITY ACTION DESIGNATION REFLECTS THE REGIONAL OFFICES’ ASSESSMENT 

OF APPROPRIATE RESOURCES AND ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT THE ACTIONS IN THE NEAR-TERM.

AIR

• Focus enforcement resources on emitters of tropospheric ozone precursors, volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) and NOx, to reduce the impacts on air quality associated with projected temperature rise due to 

climate change.

• Increase outreach regarding the effects of emissions from emergency generators and wood smoke. 

Educate emergency generator purchasers about newer, cleaner, and more efficient generators. Promote 

best practices for using emergency generators and wood burning to reduce emissions associated with 

generating electricity and heat during extreme weather events which disrupt energy delivery. Enhance 

messaging on dangers from increased use of back-up electricity sources (e.g. generators) and heat 

sources (e.g. woodstoves, fireplaces) during power outages. 

WATER

Region 2 contributed to the development and implementation of the National Water Program 2012 Strategy: 

Response to Climate Change7 which identifies 19 Goals and 53 Strategic Actions that are being implemented 

nationally. The priority actions listed here include short-term priorities for which sufficient levels of funding and 

resources are available for implementation in 2013. 

• Promote the Climate Ready Water Utilities program and the Climate Resilience Evaluation and 

Awareness Tool (CREAT) tool to water utilities and municipalities. Support utilities in modifying 

treatment plants to withstand future storm surges. 

• Work with states to establish SRF criteria for building resistance to climate change impacts through 

infrastructure investment.

• Promote Green Infrastructure practices to state and municipal governments to help them better 

manage increased precipitation and flooding. Develop and finalize the regional Green Infrastructure 

Action Plan.

 

7 http://water.epa.gov/scitech/climatechange/2012-National-Water-Program-Strategy.cfm
32

• Identify and assess public water supply systems that are close to streams or rivers that may be subject to 

climate impacts, including flooding and severe storm events.

• Implement the Coral Reef Protection Plan, which addresses climate impacts to corals such as ocean 

acidification and coral bleaching, as well as waste discharges, water quality criteria, and areas to be 

protected through a watershed management approach.

• Incorporate climate change considerationsinto funding and support for coastal habitat restoration 

activities. 

• Engage with Regional National Estuary Programs (NEPs) to implement climate change priorities 

identified in NEP Action Plans and other key documents. Work with regional NEP programs to 

incorporate climate change considerations into funding and coastal habitat restoration activities, as 

appropriate.

• Improve coordination of Clean Water Act funding that supports wetland protection and monitoring to 

incorporate resilience of wetlands to climate change and sea level rise. Funding sources include CWA 

104, 106, 319, and 320 grant programs. 

• Collaborate with NOAA, US Fish & Wildlife, and FEMA to identify opportunities for coordination of 

wetland restoration funding. Identify duplicative actions and possibilities for collaboration to ensure 

more efficient use of federal funds. Streamlining restoration spending may free up funds that can be 

used for further restoration work, which can protect coastal communities from sea level rise, erosion 

and storm surge.

• Promote wetland conservation and restoration through Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) in 

the Caribbean. 

WASTE: SUPERFUND & RCRA

• Assess vulnerabilities of existing Superfund/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)sites, 

including proximity to flood zones, coastal or riverfront sites, etc. (National Priorities List or NPL, nonNPL, RCRA corrective action facilities, Formerly Utilized Site Remedial Action Programor FUSRAP sites) 

working with state and other federal agencies as appropriate. To be completed internally by site 

managers with a vulnerability checklist. Additional resources would be needed for a more complex 

vulnerability assessment, which may be more appropriate as a nationally-led report.

• Include consideration of potential climate change impacts in Five Year Reviews of NPL sites (e.g. flooding 

impacts to capped sites, changes to aquifers and plume migration, etc.). 

EMERGENCY RESPONSE

Since Superstorm Sandy made landfall on the coast of New York and New Jersey the evening of Oct. 29, 

2012, EPA Region 2 has been providing ongoing emergency response in our two northeastern states. In 

addition to emergency response actions provided by our on-scene coordinators, Region 2 staff persons 

were stationed at the FEMA Joint Field Operations as part of the federal response to Superstorm Sandy 

in New York and New Jersey to develop Recovery Support Strategies. Region 2 continues to coordinate 

with other federal agencies on addressing climate risk in the rebuilding process. The region’s immediate 

response work is not fully captured within the scope of this plan. Response work addresses a number of 

environmental and human health concerns including monitoring water quality, managing household 

hazardous waste and disaster debris. EPA Region 2 has been implementing response and recovery 

actions in accordance with the SuperstormSandy Supplemental Appropriations bill. The bill provides 

funds for EPA in the following program areas: the drinking water and waste water State Revolving Loan 

Funds, Superfund sites, and monitoring environmental conditions. The Region is working with state and 
33

federal partners to build climate resiliency into the recovery activities implemented by many federal and 

local organizations through the SuperstormSandy Supplemental Appropriations bill. In the long-term, 

the Region will take into consideration lessons learned from recent climate events, including Superstorm 

Sandy response operations work, to address climate change in emergency response preparedness. 

COMMUNITIES & VULNERABLE POPULATIONS

• Inspect regulated facilities in flood prone areas that store hazardous waste, chemicals, and oil to promote climate 

resilient practices. Design materials to distribute containing environmental assistance resources for regulated 

facilities in flood prone areas and distribute through inspections, meetings, and outreach events and in partnership 

with other technical assistance providers such as small business assistance programs. Make use of existing 

mapping applications with new climate data projections to identify regulated facilities in flood prone areas, 

especially in EJ areas.

• Identify areas of opportunity in hazard mitigation planning to integrate sustainability principles (including land use 

principles) into community planning documents to reduce further impacts and connect sustainability to long term 

recovery from extreme weather events. Expand partnership with research institutes, and FEMA to develop tools

that planners can access.

• Use the EPA Environmental Justice Screening tool, EJSCREEN, to do an assessment of Superstorm Sandy-impacted 

communities. Support FEMA and the Federal Disaster Recovery Support Strategy to identify communities with 

potential areas of EJ concern for purposes of targeting and prioritizing technical support/assistance for local 

recovery efforts. Develop a plan for incorporating EJ in community development scenario planning protocols that 

will help communities rebuild sustainably.

• Develop outreach such as workshops, webinars, etc. for Sandy recovery, planning and beyond on building 

reconstruction according to EPA Indoor airPLUS and building upgrades following EPA’s Healthy Indoor Environment 

Protocols for Home Energy Upgrades, and, featuring research on resilient buildings. Prepare information and 

recommendations regarding mold and indoor air quality issues due to increase in extreme weather events and 

flooding, and residents spending more time indoors for distribution to the public.Disseminate factsheets on reentry to homes, schools, daycare centers, buildings, etc. Address energy efficiency impacts on indoor air quality for 

homes and schools to avoid maladaptation.

• Incorporate climate adaptation concerns for communities and vulnerable populations into regional science 

priorities which prioritize future science and research funding.

• Use GIS-mapping and existing climate model information to assess vulnerabilities of public infrastructure (electric 

utilities, wastewater treatment plants, chemical storage facilities, public transport facilities, gasoline and oil 

storage locations).

• Create a regionally specific website to provide resources and information to stakeholders on preparing for the 

impacts of climate related events such as heat waves. Highlight priority actions as they are accomplished via press 

events, social media, and/or press releases.

• Address vulnerabilities regarding the water infrastructure and other industrial facilities with emphasis on lowincome communities located near coastal water bodies in the Caribbean (e.g. Martín Peña and G-8 communities).

• Address climate change-related impacts in NEPA reviews, including consideration of options to reduce 

environmental consequences of climate change-related impacts on proposed federal actions.

INDIAN NATIONS

• Support Region 2 Nations in assessing impacts to tribal lands and cultural activities. EPA Region 2 

awarded a grant to the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe (SRMT) to assess and characterize climate change risks
34

 

and vulnerabilities affecting Indian nation cultural, spiritual, and economic activities, with a focus 

towards developing adaptation responses to these concerns on Indian nation lands in New York State. 

Region 2 provides guidance and suggestions to SRMT for providing outreach and conducting workshops 

on climate change characterization for the other Indian nations; engages in discussions with the SRMT 

for assessing and identifying key impacts of climate change that is presently within Indian nation 

communities or expected in the future; and assists in the understanding of how to identify applicable 

adaptation strategies. 

• Support tribal climate change information sharing amongst tribes in Region 2 and beyond. A major 

provision in the SRMT climate change grant is that the SRMT Environment Division will work closely with 

other Indian nations in Region 2 in the assessment and identification of climate change impacts and in 

the development of potential adaption responses and plans. Region 2 will promote increased capacity 

for Indian nations to create and maintain adaptation plans for their communities, and promote 

improved communications between EPA and Indian nation communities, and also tribal organizations, 

on climate change activities.

FACILITIES

• Update communication methods to staff during incidences of long and short term disruptions to 

wireless and phone capabilities. Address methods for communicating staff availability to other 

Regions, HQ, etc. during long and short term office and facility closures.

• Update disaster/emergency planning for operations, including protocols for asset management and 

tracking as well as the transition from normal operations to emergency status and vice versa.

• At our Guaynabofacility, promote use of WaterSenseproducts. 

LONG TERM PRIORITIES

LONG-TERM ACTIONS ARE SLATED FOR THE FUTURE AND PENDING RESOURCE ALLOCATION.

AIR

• Establish post-storm planning with multiple components to address air quality aspects of waste removal,

including maximizing potential for re-use or composting of vegetative debris; removal of non-reusable 

debris *(e.g. asbestos); cleanest transportation options, e.g. marine, rail instead of trucks.

• Work with Headquarters to implement any necessary changes to air quality guidance and procedures to 

account for a changing climate (e.g., adjustments to waiver and waiver extension request procedures in 

response to more frequent or severe extreme weather impacts on facilities).

• Bring air pollution consequences of transportation systems due to climate change to the attention of

state and local partners.
35

WATER-CARIBBEAN8

• Foster renewal of discussions about the implementation of source water protection programs in the 

Caribbean islands.

• Train Caribbean enforcement officers to increase awareness of the impact of climate change to 

regulated facilities and their activities. Give out information to public works personnel during Municipal 

Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) inspections.

• Improve communications with Puerto Rico Department of Natural & Environmental Resources and U.S. 

Virgin Islands Department of Planning & Natural Resources and other state agencies for collaborations in 

the respective coastal zone management programs in the Caribbean to work together in addressing 

coastal vulnerabilities.

• Implement water conservation programs to address anticipated levels of reduced precipitation in the 

Caribbean. Promote more sustainable small water systems infrastructure, operation and maintenance 

for the Caribbean islands.

• Outreach and implementation of water reuse/reclamation programsto address future water scarcity for 

the Caribbean islands.

WASTE: SUPERFUND & RCRA

• In the Caribbean, promote Climate Change Adaptation SEPs, in future enforcement orders, permits to

CWA sites as well as RCRA Hazardous Waste sites.

• Promote more P2/Sustainable Practices in the Caribbean to prevent/minimize releases of hazardous 

material as a result of hurricanes, flooding, etc.

EMERGENCY RESPONSE

• Develop database/resource guide for reuse and recycling of disaster debris. Simultaneously develop inhouse expertise for debris management and conduct training for EPA staff through ICS exercises.

• Conduct outreach with states & municipalities to encourage development and implementation of 

disaster debris management plans.

• Conduct outreach with states and municipalities to improve management of household hazardous 

waste to prevent releases during extreme weather events. Increase awareness among federal, state and 

local agencies/first responders about the impacts of climate change in emergency situations in the 

Caribbean.

• Review CEPD’s emergency response plan to ensure that the vulnerabilities of the new San Juan office 

location are considered.

• Improve communications with DNER/DPNR and other Caribbean state agencies for collaborations in the 

respective coastal zone management programs to mitigate impacts during emergencies.

COMMUNITIES & VULNERABLE POPULATIONS

• Increase number of communities that receive information about availability of technical assistance, such 

as Complete Streets, planning for older populations in communities.

• Promote more Pollution Prevention/Sustainable Practices in the Caribbean to prevent/minimize releases 

of hazardous material as a result of hurricanes, flooding, etc.

 

8 New York and New Jersey long-term priority actions are identified in the “Moving Toward a Climate Resilient Region” 

Section.
36

 

• Compile case studies that showcase implementation of climate adaptation and mitigation efforts to

describe their effectiveness. 

• Coordinate with states and local governments that are piloting and demonstrating use of climate 

information in research, planning and rebuilding efforts. 

• Support economic development strategies for building communities with climate resiliency through job 

training, education and coordination.

MOVING TOWARD A CLIMATE RESILIENT REGION

Like other regions and program offices in EPA, Region 2 faces significant constraints on funding and employee 

resources. Region 2’s decision to segregate our priority actions into short-term and long-term actions in the 

preceding sections of this document recognizes those constraints. There are additional actions that EPA has not 

included in either the short-term or long-term actions, above, because the timing of those additional actions 

might not be clear or because this document is not seen as the vehicle to drive those actions. In addition to 

funding and employee resource constraints, these additional actions may require difficult policy or legal 

decisions before we can implement them. They might also require action by another party. For example, many

of these actions must be addressed in partnership with states, territories, tribes and municipalities, all of which 

face serious budget restrictions and difficult policy choices of their own. In some cases, EPA is already 

implementing portions of additional actions through work driven by factors external to this Adaptation Plan. 

Below are some of the actions that fit into this additional category. EPA Region 2 will consider the appropriate 

timing of these additional actions in the context of the adaptive management framework.

Region 2 sees future opportunities to work with state regulators during the planning and permitting process, for 

the air programs and the NPDES program with particular focus on sewage treatment plants, in accounting for 

climate change related issues. Region 2 sees future opportunity to work with state regulators during the 

planning and permitting process, for the air and oil sector and sewage treatment plants, in accounting for 

climate change related issues. This could require considering the elevation of a facility, location of facility 

intakes, and location of emissions control equipment to account for project climate change impacts. In the 

Caribbean, we could explore the possibility of implementing green infrastructure and green energy in consentdecrees and orders (for both Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act). 

In the area of watershed management,the regional water program supports continuing to work with state, 

territory and tribal partners to further integrate climate change adaptation considerations into non-point source 

management plans and programs. This collaboration with our partners could also entail enhancing the 

protection and creation of buffers to rivers, lakes, wetlands and other coastal resources to build resiliency and 

protect water quality. Region 2 could also work with partners to prepare for increased runoff by encouraging 

development of infiltration basins, aeration of soils compacted by development, adoption of erosion and 

sediment controls, increases in culvert sizes and the adoption of other BMPs that mitigate runoff. These 

activities could be supported in part by leveraging state and federal resources, includingClean Water Act Section

319 grant funds. Finally, Region 2 could encourage states to incorporate climate change issues when updating 

their nonpoint source management plans.
37

 

In the ocean and coastal arena, the water program will continue to promote a sustainable balance between the 

use of soft shorelines, living shorelines and innovative shoreline development, and hardened shorelines. The 

region’s ability to support on-the-ground projects as it has in the past is currently limited. The dredging program 

seeks to work with partners to better anticipate and plan for increased demand for dredged sediments to 

counter the effects of sea level rise and increased erosion. 

As Superstorm Sandy demonstrated, drinking water and wastewater treatment plants in Region 2 are extremely 

vulnerable to sea level rise, storm surge and erosion. The water program supports further collaboration with 

partners to support a watershed management approach to protecting source water. Activities could include 

introducing vegetation for flood control, increasing recharge to aquifers, including source water protection areas 

in local climate adaptation initiatives and identifying climate change threats to drinking water. The region plans 

to work more closely with facility operators and municipalities to provide them with more support and better 

climate change information. Potential activities include training facility operators in the use of local climate 

projections, GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) mapping of flood 

plains. The water program may be able to provide technical support to facilities and municipalities as they 

consider future audits, upgrades or new construction. Many communities in Region 2 rely on on-site systems like 

cesspools and septic systems instead of wastewater treatment plants. To support these communities, the water 

program intends to support state and local partners in conducting an analysis of the susceptibility of septic 

systems and cesspools to climate change as resources permit. To reduce the strain on facilities and on-site 

systems, the region seeks to expand its existing green infrastructure program to better support residential and 

community green infrastructure programs by promoting rain gardens, green roofs, downspouts and other tools. 

Finally, the water program seeks to improve climate readiness of coastal communities by supporting 

vulnerability assessments, hazard mitigation, pre-disasterplanning and (if applicable), recovery efforts. 

These additional actions will help us move toward a climate resilient Region. While Region 2 is not prepared to 

set a schedule for these additional actions, they will be implemented at the appropriate time and in the 

appropriate manner in light of multiple factors such as resources, policy, law, actions of other parties, and 

relationship to other non-adaptation driven work. Some of these actions might be ripe for implementation very 

soon and others might not be appropriate for the foreseeable future. Region 2 will use the adaptive 

management framework to assist us in determining if and when to implement these additional actions. 
38

 

TRACKING PROGRESS OVER TIME: MEASUREMENT & EVALUATION

Adapting to climate change impacts requires an approach that can adjust over time. There is uncertainty related 

to the global inputs of greenhouse gas emissions that we will experience in the future and related to the 

resulting local impacts from the range of emissions that could potentially be anticipated. As the region develops 

strategies to address climate impacts, these actions may need to shift to address changing environmental 

conditions or we may learn from initiatives and adjust them to seek greaterresults. A framework for 

understanding this approach is adaptive management, which calls for developing adaptation strategies based 

on assessments that are monitored, revisited, redesigned and adjusted over time. This adaptive management 

approach, employed by the Dept. of Interior, continually calibrates strategies to respond to shifting conditions 

meanwhile refining and improving the efficacy of strategies over time. 

Adaptive Management Process 

Source: Department of Interior, 2010

EPA’s mission is to protect human health and the environment. In assessing climate hazards, and developing 

strategies to address them, the broad vision is to ensure that EPA persists in protecting human health and the 

environment as we experience and adapt to global climate change. In order to track our progress toward 

meeting the vision of a climate resilient mission for EPA, the following key summary goals have been identified 

for EPA Region 2 to measure and continue to evaluate over time.

Summary Goals

• Strengthen our emergency preparedness for anticipated climate events.

• Integrate climate impacts into public health information.
39

 

• Collaborate with other federal agencies on climate adaptation initiatives.

• Incorporate climate change considerations into appropriate funding activities.

• Conduct outreach on climate impacts and best practices to promote tools and support decision-makers.

• Work with states and Indian nations to integrate climate adaptation into EPA, state and tribal 

environmental programs. 

• Develop assessments of vulnerable infrastructure and sites to increase knowledge of potential climate 

risks and inform responses.

• Integrate climate adaptation as appropriate into regional programs such as permitting, enforcement and 

environmental review.

• Partner with communities and other stakeholders to develop and implement climate adaptation 

strategies that address the climate vulnerabilities of our region. 

As the region implements the adaptation plan, we will measure and evaluate progress toward achieving the 

above goals as part of the adaptive management framework. The region will assess the progress of our 

priority actions under each of these goals. The lessons learned in this process will inform the adjustment and 

development of our future strategies as we apply adaptive management to address the risks of climate 

change to our region. 

CONCLUSION

Getting to resilience will require a coordinated effort by an intergovernmental partnership to leverage all the 

tools we have with our limited program resources. This adaptation plan begins to assess our vulnerabilities and 

define the starting point for addressing these vulnerabilities. Much of the work will be accomplished in a 

sustained effort over time. 
REFERENCES

EPA’s “Northeast Impacts & Adaptation” web page, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impactsadaptation/northeast.html

EPA’s “U.S. Tropical Islands Impacts & Adaptation” web page, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impactsadaptation/islands.html

EPA Region 2, 2011. Keeping Raw Sewage & Contaminated Stormwater Out of the Public’s Water. 

http://www.epa.gov/region2/water/sewer-report-3-2011.pdf

EPA, December 2012. “National Water Program 2012 Strategy: Reponse to Climate Change”. 

http://water.epa.gov/scitech/climatechange/upload/epa_2012_climate_water_strategy_full_report_final.p

df

Industrial Economics, 2012. Review of Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Options on Tribal Lands in 

Northern and Western New York, DRAFT.

IPCC, 2007. Working Group II Report on Small Islands, 

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch16.html

IPCC, 2012. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation.

National Research Council, 2011. Climate Change, the Indoor Environment, and Health. Washington, DC: The 

National Academies Press.

USGCRP (US Global Change Research Program); 2009; Global Climate Change Impacts in the US; pgs 95-96. 

Sussman, et al., 2008; Effects of Global Change on Human Welfare. Product 4.6 USEPA Pgs 111-168 and 39-

87.

New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), 2011. “Response to Climate Change in 

New York State (ClimAID),”http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/Publications/Research-andDevelopment/Environmental/EMEP-Publications/Response-to-Climate-Change-in-New-York.aspx

New York City Panel on Climate Change, 2010. “Climate Observations and Projections” chapter of 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05314.x/pdf

New York City Panel on Climate Change, 2009. “Climate Risk Information” report, 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2009/NPCC_CRI.pdf.

Puerto Rico Climate Change Council. May 2012. “Climate Change in Puerto Rico: Observed Trends and Future 

Projections.” Working Group 1 Report. In press. 

Shope, R. 1991; Global Climate Change and Infectious Diseases; Env Health Perspectives Dec. 96:171-4. Erickson 

et al., 2012; Potential impacts of Climate Change on the Ecology of Dengue & its Mosquito Vector, the Asian 

Tiger Mosquito (Aedes albopictus); Environmental Research Letters, 7 -034003.
41

 

United Nations Environment Program, 2010. “Vital Climate Change Graphics for Latin America and the 

Caribbean”, http://www.grida.no/publications/vg/lac2/ 

U.S. Climate Change Science Program, 

U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), 2008. Analyses of the Effects of Global Change on Human 

Health and Welfare and Human Systems (SAP 4.6).U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), 2009, National Climate Assessment. 

http://www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/us-impacts/regional-climatechange-impacts/northeast

U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), 2013 DRAFT, National Climate Assessment. 

http://www.globalchange.gov/what-we-do/assessment