• The program should focus on acknowledging and rewarding environmental leaders that take actions that go beyond those required by environmental laws, rules and regulations, to reduce their impacts on the environment. "Special" incentives should be reserved for these leaders.

• The program should assist regulated entities to become environmental leaders. In addition to the free technical assistance presently offered, the OTCA should continue efforts, after completion of the Performance Track grant period, to compile and coordinate state and federal programs and incentives that target better environmental performance. Sector-specific summaries of available program and tax incentives offered by the DEM, EPA, Narragansett Bay Commission, the state Tax Division, EDC and business assistance programs would be able to promote improved environmental performance through a "package" of incentives which will likely be more effective than the status quo of numerous dispersed incentives.

• Staff time and other resources required to develop a program can be minimized by following the tiered and menu-based structure of the EPA's Performance Track program, and adopting its requirements for participation. In the near term (1 to 2 years), a significant goal of a RI program should be to assist businesses in qualifying for Performance Track by providing templates for sector-specific EMSs that meet entry requirements, compliance assistance, and technical assistance for beyond-compliance projects.

• In the mid-term (1 to 5 years) I recommend that the DEM pursue a pilot phase program that uses a three-level menu-based structure formed around the requirements and incentives offered in Performance Track. In addition, new enabling state legislation could offer additional financial incentives for participation at Level 2 which requires co-participation in Performance Track. Consideration of state legislation that enables significant regulatory flexibility should be postponed until the program has a chance to prove itself. Regulatory flexibility is presently available through Performance Track, programs such as the NBCs Metal Finishers 2000 and Project XL Pretreatment Program Reinvention and the inherent discretion afforded a state agency administering federal environmental programs.

• In the long-term (5 to 10 years) federal legislation may be passed that enables the EPA to be more aggressive in promoting and testing alternative regulatory systems. If the pilot project proposed above demonstrates that significant environmental gains can be achieved through an ELP with a reasonable investment of resources, then the DEM may wish to propose state legislation that authorizes variances or exemptions to environmental statutes and regulations for participants in the program. However, I recommend that any special regulatory relief be granted only to those regulated entities that have demonstrated a sustained commitment to environmental leadership, and only when the relief will result in significant, and readily measurable, gains in environmental protection.

Navigation/ Overview

Background provides further discussion of ELP structure, composition, rational for implementation and examples of ELP's being planned or implemented by the EPA and other states. Included is a discussion of the methodology followed in this work. In addition a bibliography of information sources used in development of this project and acknowledgments are contained in this section.

The Case for an ELP in RI discusses the potential benefits of developing a program specifically with regard to advancing the Department of Environmental Management's strategic goals of promoting nonregulatory, incentive-based, and partnership approaches, emphasizing pollution prevention, and promoting sustainable economic activity. An underlying assumption in this project, based on reported experience with other state and federal programs, is that a RI ELP program should be designed with long-term environmental and economic goals in mind. Absent substantial and diverse support for a long term agenda it is unlikely that a program can deliver on its full potential.

Program Structure and Elements proposes a framework for elements of voluntary programs and incentives already available in RI, and additional incentives for further program development.

In Building Support For a More Substantial Program suggestions for program extension and growth are provided. Of particular concern is the ability of small businesses to participate in a program. Of 228 charter members in Performance Track, the EPAs new environmental leadership program, only five were small businesses with less than 50 employees. As coordination with and enhancement of Performance Track is a key element of the ELP proposed here, helping small businesses to meet the program requirements is a key issue. Further, to build and maintain multi-stakeholder support, careful consideration of how to ensure accountability in program results is another critical concern.

Strategies for Implementation include allowing for a one to two year development phase in which to coordinate the incentives presently available in RI for beyond-compliance environmental performance, development and promotion of program goals and incorporation of stakeholder input into the program, and legislation that would enable the DEM to offer financial incentives for participation in a pilot phase.

Epilogue briefly provides results from the stakeholder meetings held May 2nd, 2001 and suggests avenues for further research.

(1) For more information contact Beverly Migliore at the DEM OTCA.