Overview
EPA comprises 17,000 people in headquarters program offices, 10 regional offices, and 27 laboratories across the country. More than half of its staff are engineers, scientists, and environmental protection specialists; other groups include legal, public affairs, financial, and computer specialists.
The agency conducts environmental assessment, research, and education. It has the primary responsibility for setting and enforcing national standards under a variety of environmental laws, in consultation with state, tribal, and local governments. It delegates some permitting, monitoring, and enforcement responsibility to
U.S. states and
Native American tribes. EPA enforcement powers include fines,
sanctions, and other measures.
The agency also works with industries and all levels of government in a wide variety of voluntary pollution prevention programs and energy conservation efforts.
History
On July 9,
1970,
Richard Nixon transmitted
Reorganization Plan No. 3 to the
United States Congress by
executive order, creating the EPA as a single agency from a number of smaller arms of different federal agencies. Prior to the establishment of the EPA, the federal government was not structured to make a coordinated attack on the pollutants which harm human health and degrade the environment. The EPA was assigned the task of repairing the damage already done to the natural environment and to establish new criteria to guide Americans in making a cleaner, safer America.
Programs
Energy Star
In 1992 the EPA launched the Energy Star program, a voluntary program that fosters energy efficiency; in 2006 EPA launched WaterSense to similarly foster water efficiency. EPA also administers the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (which is much older than the agency) and registers all pesticides legally sold in the United States. It is also responsible for reviewing projects of other federal agencies' Environmental Impact Statements under NEPA.
Fuel economy testing and results
American
automobile manufacturers are required to use EPA
fuel economy test results to advertise the gas mileage of their vehicles, and the manufacturers are disallowed from providing results from alternate sources. The fuel economy is calculated using the emissions data collected during two of the vehicle's
Clean Air Act certification tests, by measuring the total volume of carbon captured from the exhaust during the test. This calculated fuel economy is then adjusted downward by 10% city and 22% highway to compensate for changes in driving conditions since 1972.
The current testing system was developed in 1972, and is a simulation of rush-hour
Los Angeles of that era. Prior to 1984, the EPA did not adjust the fuel economy downward, and instead used the exact fuel economy figures calculated from the test. In December 2006, the EPA finalized new test methods to improve fuel economy and emission estimates, which would take effect with model year 2008 vehicles
http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420f06069.htm, setting the precedent of a 12 year review cycle on the test procedures.
As of the 2000s, most motor vehicle users report significantly lower real-world fuel economy than the EPA rating; this problem is most evident in
hybrid vehicles. This is mainly because of drastic changes in typical driving habits and conditions which have occurred in the decades since the tests were implemented. For example, the average speed of the 1972 "highway" test is a mere 48 mph, with a top speed of 60 mph. It is expected that when the 2008 test methods are implemented, city estimates for non-hybrid cars will drop by 10-20%, city estimates for hybrid cars will drop by 20-30%, and highway estimates for all cars will drop by 5-15%
http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420f06009.htm#fuelestimates. The new methods include factors such as high speeds, aggressive accelerations, air conditioning use and driving in cold temperatures.
In February 2005, the organization launched a program called "
Your MPG " that allows drivers to add real-world fuel economy statistics into a database on the EPA's fuel economy website and compare them with others and the original EPA test results.
Air quality and air pollution
The Air Quality Modeling Group (AQMG) is in the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) and provides leadership and direction on the full range of
air quality models,
air pollution dispersion models[www.crcpress.com ][www.air-dispersion.com ] and other mathematical simulation techniques used in assessing pollution control strategies and the impacts of air pollution sources.
The AQMG serves as the focal point on
air pollution modeling techniques for other EPA headquarters staff, EPA regional Offices, and State and local environmental agencies. It coordinates with the EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) on the development of new models and techniques, as well as wider issues of atmospheric research. Finally, the AQMG conducts modeling analyses to support the policy and regulatory decisions of the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS).
The AQMG is located in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Libraries
In 2004, the Agency began a strategic planning exercise to develop plans for a more virtual approach to library services. The effort was curtailed in July 2005 when the Agency proposed a $2.5 million cut in its 2007 budget for libraries. Based on the proposed 2007 budget, the EPA posted a notice to the
Federal Register, September 20, 2006 that EPA Headquarters Library would close its doors to walk-in patrons and visitors on October 1, 2006.
[Notification of Closure of the EPA Headquarters Library (pdf) , September 20, 2006]
The EPA has also closed three of its regional libraries and reduced hours in others,
[Letter to Appropriations Committee, Interior and Related Agencies Subcommittee, June 29, 2006 (pdf) , from leaders of 16 local EPA unions] using the same FY 2007 proposed budget numbers.
Controversies
Mercury emissions
In March 2005, nine states, California, New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maine, Connecticut, New Mexico and Vermont, sued the EPA. The EPA's inspector general had determined that the EPA's regulation of
mercury emissions did not follow the
Clean Air Act, and that the regulations were influenced by top political appointees.
[Proposed Mercury Rules Bear Industry Mark , ''Washington Post'', January 31, 2004][EPA Inspector Finds Mercury Proposal Tainted , ''Washington Post'', February 4, 2005] The EPA had suppressed a study it commissioned by
Harvard University which contradicted its position on mercury controls
[New EPA Mercury Rule Omits Conflicting Data , ''Washington Post'', March 22, 2005]. The suit alleges that the EPA's rule allowing exemption from "maximum available control technology" was illegal, and additionally charged that the EPA's system of pollution credit trading allows power plants to forego reducing mercury emissions.
[States Sue EPA Over Mercury Emissions , ''LA Times'', March 30, 2005] Several states also began to enact their own mercury emission regulations. In one of the most stringent examples, Illinois' proposed rule would reduce mercury emissions from power plants by an average of 90% by 2009, with no trading allowed.
[Governor Blagojevich and Illinois EPA Propose Aggressive Mercury Controls For Illinois Power Plants , ''Environmental Progress'', Spring 2006, page 12]
Climate change
In June 2005, a memo revealed
Philip Cooney, former chief of staff for the White House
Council on Environmental Quality, and former
lobbyist for the
American Petroleum Institute, had personally edited documents, summarizing government research on
climate change, before their release.
[ U.S. Official Edited Warming, Emission Link - Report , ''Reuters'', June 8, 2005]
Cooney resigned two days after the memo was published in ''
The New York Times''. Cooney said he had been planning to resign for over two years, implying the timing of his resignation was just a coincidence. Specifically, he said he had planned to resign to "spend time with his family."
[White House Official Resigns After Climate Documents Flap , ''Agence France Presse'', June 12, 2005] One week after resigning he took a job at
Exxon Mobil in their public affairs department.
[Ex-White House environment official joins Exxon , ''Reuters'', June 15, 2005]
Fuel economy
In July 2005, an EPA report showing that auto companies were using loopholes to produce less fuel-efficient cars was delayed. The report was supposed to be released the day before a controversial energy bill was passed and would have provided backup for those opposed to it, but at the last minute the EPA delayed its release.
[E.P.A. Holds Back Report on Car Fuel Efficiency , ''New York Times'', July 28, 2005]
Very fine airborne particulates
Tiny particles, under 2.5 micrometres, are attributed to health and
mortality concerns so some health advocates want EPA to regulate it. The science may be in its infancy although many conferences have discussed the trails of this airborne matter in the air. Foreign governments like
Australia and most
EU states have addressed this issue.
The EPA first established standards in 1997, and strengthened them in 2006. As with other standards, regulation and enforcement of the PM
2.5 standards is the responsibility of the state governments, through
State Implementation Plans.
http://www.epa.gov/oar/particlepollution/naaqsrev2006.html
Review of air quality standards
Since its inception the EPA has begun to rely less and less on its scientists and more on nonscience personnel. EPA has recently changed their policies regarding limits for ground-level ozone, particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and lead. New policies will minimize scientist interaction in this process and rely more on policy makers who have minimal scientific knowledge. This new policy has been criticized by Democrats.
[News, December 18, 2006, page 15 http://pubs.acs.org/isubscribe/journals/cen/84/i51/html/8451air.html]
EPA offices
Office of Administration and Resources Management
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Office of General Counsel
Office of Inspector General
Office of International Affairs
Office of Environmental Information
Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances
Office of Research and Development
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Water
Each EPA regional office is responsible within its states for implementing the Agency's programs, except those programs that have been specifically delegated to states.
Region 1 - responsible within the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
Region 2 - responsible within the states of New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Region 3 - responsible within the states of Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia.
Region 4 - responsible within the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee.
Region 5 - responsible within the states of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
Region 6 - responsible within the states of Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas.
Region 7 - responsible within the states of Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.
Region 8 - responsible within the states of Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.
Region 9 - responsible within the states of Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, and the territories of Guam and American Samoa.
Region 10 - responsible within the states of Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
Each regional office also implements programs on Indian Tribal lands, except those programs delegated to Tribal authorities.
List of EPA administrators
References
}}}