ENVIRONMENTAL
NEWS
EPA continues to wrestle with budget cuts, short-term funding
C
ongress tossed EPA a life raft Jan. 26 in the form of a short-term continuing resolution that will keep the agency afloat, but only until the middle of March and only with the barest of funds. The resolution funds EPA at 23% less than the president had sought and draws the beleaguered agency further into an acrimonious, election-year budget-balancing fight that may have long-term effects on how EPA does business. After two federal shutdowns and four continuing resolutions, EPA Administrator Carol Browner told a Senate subcommittee Jan. 26 that EPA faces significant staffing cuts and reduced funds for inspections, enforcement actions, and regulatory development. She also warned that EPA's dedicated young staff are going elsewhere. "The lifeblood of the agency is being drained." The continuing resolution gave EPA $5.71 billion, 14% below the 1995 post-rescission level of $6.6 billion. The resolution's funding is based on the House/Senate Conference Committee appropriation compromise that the president vetoed last December. Despite Browner's complaints, congressional Republicans were quick to note that the amount was greater than the level EPA received in the preceding continuing resolution as well as in the House- and Senate-passed appropriations bills. However, some in the Republican party are rethinking their role in reining in EPA. A Republican poll and report in December revealed that most of the public does not share the party's antagonism toward environmental regulations and warned that "attacking EPA is a nonstarter" (see box). Also in late January, 30 Republican House members wrote
Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga) saying that the party "has taken a beating this year over missteps in environmental policy." It added, "If the party is to resuscitate its reputation in this important area, we cannot be seen as using the budget crisis as an excuse to emasculate environmental protection." The budget stalemate, staff furloughs, and funding cuts have left EPA to drift in a cloud of uncertainty, Browner told the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies. The hearing was called to explore the impact of the budget impasse with Browner and officials from the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators (ASIWPCA). In opening remarks, Subcommittee Chair Christopher S. (Kit)
Bond (R-Mo.) set the stage by telling Browner that the president's most recent proposed package to resolve the VA-HUD appropriation impasse, which included $966 million more for EPA, was simply not possible. "I'm not the tooth fairy," he said. "I must deal with the reality of what it takes to balance the budget." Browner described an agency in dire straits, saying that to make cuts required by the resolution, all of its 18,000 employees would face forced furloughs of up to 19 days. Browner said the agency began preparing for cuts as soon as the House proposed funding cuts of 33% last July. She said EPA began a hiring freeze, a promotion freeze, and the indefinite postponement of many contracts. The result is an EPA that is 8% smaller with 1500 fewer workers. The cuts and criticism of EPA workers have damaged morale and triggered an exodus of young, skilled EPA workers, the administrator said. "We're losing young people, the ones who want [EPA] to change," Browner said. "One
POLITICS Poll finds environment ranks high with voters Cutting EPA's budget is not making points with American voters, according to Republican pollster Linda DiVall. In a poll released in mid-December, DiVall found that only 35% of the public would vote to re-elect a member of Congress who agrees with the OOP's majority position to cut EPA spending by one-third. Some 46% would vote against a member holding that view. These percentages resulted even though the questionnaire stated that the reductions would stop "imposition of unnecessary regulations and red tape on business, which cost money and jobs." The poll also found that although 59% of Americans believe there is too much government, only 21% believe there are too many environmental laws and regulations, and 36% believe there are not enough. The poll was conducted for the Superfund Reform Coalition, which is made up of insurance companies and other business interests seeking Superfund reform. The poll found that only 38% of the public had heard of Superfund; most support cleaning up all sites equally; and few support giving rebates to companies that agree to clean up polluted sites. DiVall concluded that by a 2:1 margin voters have more confidence in Democrats than Republicans as the party they trust most to protect the environment. "Most disturbing," she said, was that "55% of all Republicans do not trust their party when it comes to protecting the environment, while 72% of Democrats do trust their party." —JEFF JOHNSON
1 0 8 A • VOL. 30, NO. 3, 1996 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS
D013-936X/96/0929-108A$12.00/0 © 1996 American Chemical Society
young woman told me she was tired of reading in the paper that [as a federal worker] she is a stupid bureaucrat." She also warned that the cuts and funding uncertainty are having a major impact on privatesector contractors in several programs, such as Superfund. Under the president's proposed budget, EPA had planned to conduct site assessments at 2000 potential Superfund sites this year, Browner said, but that number has shrunk to 800. A further complication is the $400 million cut in EPA's $1.5 billion cleanup program, which, an EPA budget staffer said, is parceled out on a daily basis over the 45 days the resolution is in effect. Also under the temporary resolution, EPA cannot supplement its Superfund budget by tapping the Superfund Trust Fund, according to EPA staff. Tim Fields, EPA deputy assistant administrator of the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, said long-term implications of the Superfund shutdown include curtailed or halted cleanups at "a minimum of 25% of our projects" with payments to contractors delayed.
"I'm not the tooth fairy. I must deal with what it takes to balance the budget." — Sen. Kit Bond "We will not be able to initiate construction at a minimum of 50 new construction projects that are ready to go with all permits approved," Fields told ES&T. "We will curtail the level of activities in our Emergency Response Program by at least half." That effect, he said, will be to make more brownfields at some sites because EPA will only be able to "stabilize, put up a fence, and delay the ultimate cleanup." Browner also complained that the shutdowns and the uncertainty of permanent funding had stymied agency efforts to streamline its regulations to help businesses and to give states more authority to find solutions suitable to their problems. State wa-
"The lifeblood of the agency is being drained," EPA Administrator Carol Browner told the Senate.
ter regulators at the hearing said reduced federal support for state revolving funds and water program management has jeopardized state programs. These trickle-down cuts have hurt watersheds, stormwater, and a host of other programs, including the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, according to ASIWPCA officials. In other areas, Browner said enforcement inspections will drop from a planned 9000 to 7000 in 1996, and development of a host of regulations has been stalled. For instance, she said, an agency goal of developing standards for 42 air pollutants will be delayed because of the shutdown and funding cuts. Also, federalstate partnerships will be reduced, blocking progress on many projects, such as the Florida Everglades, the San Francisco Bay, as well as the Chesapeake Bay Program—which Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), a subcommittee member and former chair, called a "model for the nation." However, Mikulski told Browner that a $240 million increase offered late last year by Bond was about the most that could come out of the subcommittee, despite her support for EPA. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (DN.J.), another long-time EPA supporter, predicted long-term problems, based on his experience in 1985, when the Superfund program was in jeopardy. "I've been here long enough to see what happened when we told people throughout 1985 that we didn't know whether we would be operating [Superfund]," he said
during the hearing. "We apologized because we didn't have the funding." But, he warned, when Superfund started up again, the skilled contractors had left for other work. The budget impasse between President Clinton and Congress appears to be far from resolvable, according to congressional staff. A staff member with Rep. Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y), a leader of moderate Republicans and environmental supporters, noted that although Boehlert's stance has become increasingly popular in the House, there are many variables other than the environment affecting this issue. "EPA's situation is tough, but remember it's not just EPA. There are a half-dozen agencies out there without funding that are caught in this complex debate." —JEFF JOHNSON, VIKI REATH
Enforcement cuts hit by corporate attorney The need for strong federal enforcement of environmental laws found an unusual ally at a recent legal symposium in Washington on the budget's impact on federal enforcement. Judson Starr, a corporate environmental attorney whose clients include some of the largest companies in America, warned that low EPA funding levels in congressional appropriations for enforcement will undermine corporate willingness to comply with environmental laws. In particular, he said, the cutbacks will diminish the authority of a company's environmental health and safety officer. Speaking at a Jan. 23 symposium of the Environmental Law Institute, Starr emphasized the growing importance of corporate environmental health and safety officials and their ability to avoid environmental problems and minimize harm to the environment and the company. Without the threat of a strong federal hand in enforcement, Starr said, the official's role would return to a lowly part of the corporate hierarchy and be staffed by a person "close to retirement, with no real power base in the organization, and no staff—just
VOL. 30, NO. 3, 1996 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS • 1 0 9 A
