Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) FY2012 Appropriations: Overview of Provisions in H.R. 2584 as Reported
Released: 2011-12-05T00:00:00

Introduction

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was established in 1970 to consolidate federal pollution control responsibilities that had been divided among several federal agencies. EPA's responsibilities grew significantly as Congress enacted an increasing number of environmental laws as well as major amendments to these statutes. Among the agency's primary responsibilities are the regulation of air quality, water quality, pesticides, and toxic substances; the management and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes; and the cleanup of environmental contamination. EPA also awards grants to assist states and local governments in complying with federal requirements to control pollution, and to assist those states with the delegated authority to administer certain federal pollution control programs. Since FY2006, Congress has funded EPA programs and activities within the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill.

On July 19, 2011, the House Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 2584 ( H.Rept. 112-151 ) which included $27.52 billion in appropriations for FY2012 for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. Title II of H.R. 2584 as reported would provide a total of $7.15 billion for the EPA, $1.82 billion (20%) less than the President's FY2012 request of $8.97 billion submitted to Congress on February 14, 2011, and $1.53 billion (18%) less than the FY2011 enacted appropriation of $8.68 billion. H.R. 2584 as reported reflected a decrease for each of the EPA's eight regular appropriations accounts compared to the President's FY2012 request, and all except the Building and Facilities and the Inland Oil Spill Program accounts (the House committee-reported bill included the same level as FY2011 enacted) when compared to FY2011 enacted appropriations.

Many of the federal departments and agencies included in H.R. 2584 , as reported by the House committee, generally would be funded at levels below the FY2010 and FY2011 enacted appropriations, as well as those included in the President's FY2012 request. The House-reported bill also included numerous funding modifications and restrictions for many accounts across the various departments and agencies, including several EPA accounts and program activities. Several recent and pending EPA regulatory actions have been the focus of considerable attention in Congress during hearings and markup of EPA's FY2012 appropriations, and authorizing committees have been addressing EPA regulatory actions through hearings and legislation.

As reported, H.R. 2584 contained more than 30 provisions that would restrict or preclude the use of FY2012 funds by EPA for implementing or proceeding with a number of regulatory actions. Theses provisions include more than 20 provisions proposed by the subcommittee (primarily in Title IV Administrative Provisions), and eight amendments added during full committee markup. From July 25, 2011, to July 28, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2584 but did not complete debate on the bill. Concerns regarding these EPA actions continued to be raised during House floor debate and were among roughly 250 amendments considered and pending prior to suspension of floor debate on July 28, 2011.

No bill to fund Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies for FY2012 has been formally introduced in the Senate. However, on October 14, 2011, the bipartisan leadership of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies released a draft bill for FY2012 to serve as a starting point of discussions for markup. The Senate subcommittee draft recommended a total appropriation of $29.55 billion for FY2012 for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, including $8.62 billion for EPA under Title II of the draft. The Senate subcommittee draft did not include provisions similar to the House committee-reported bill that would restrict or preclude EPA from using FY2012 funds for implementing or proceeding with a number of regulatory actions.

At the time this report was updated, EPA and other departments and agencies funded within the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill were operating under a third continuing resolution, the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 ( P.L. 112-55 ), which provides funding through December 16, 2011. No regular appropriations bill was enacted before October 1, 2011, the start of FY2012. As with other federal agencies funded under the 12 appropriations bills, since the beginning of FY2012 EPA had operated under continuing resolutions ( P.L. 112-33 and P.L. 112-36 ) sequentially extending funding from October 1, 2011, through November 18, 2011.

If the House committee bill were enacted as reported, the provisions and amendments in Title IV would impact ongoing and anticipated EPA activities including those addressing greenhouse gas emissions, hazardous air pollutants, particulate matter emissions, permitting of new source air emissions, water quality impacts of mountaintop mining operations, management of coal ash, lead-based paint removal, environmental impacts associated with livestock operations, financial responsibility with respect to Superfund cleanup, and stormwater discharge. Further, Title V of the committee-reported bill, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, included amendments to the Clean Water Act and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) in response to EPA's consideration of requiring permits under the Clean Water Act for point source discharges of pesticides in or near U.S. waters.

In response to congressional interest in the level of appropriations and several of the provisions affecting EPA program activities in H.R. 2584 as reported by the House Appropriations Committee, this report highlights a number of these provisions. The information presented throughout this report is primarily an extraction of the bill language for purposes of reference and is not intended to provide a comprehensive analysis of all provisions in H.R. 2584 as reported that may directly or indirectly affect EPA programs if enacted. Only those provisions affecting EPA programs that are clearly identifiable by specific language or references in the House committee-reported bill are included in this report. The report also provides a brief summary of funding levels for EPA accounts and program activities specified in the House committee-reported bill and as recommended in the Senate subcommittee draft.

The following section of this report provides an overview of funding levels for FY2012 as specified in H.R. 2584 as reported and as recommended in the Senate subcommittee draft, compared to the amounts proposed in the President's FY2012 request, and the enacted amounts for FY2010 in P.L. 111-88 and FY2011 in P.L. 112-10 . For purposes of historical comparison, Table A-1 in the Appendix of this report shows EPA enacted appropriations by account for FY2008 through FY2011. The overview of funding levels is followed by a series of tables that present a compilation of excerpts of provisions in H.R. 2584 as reported for selected EPA programs and activities that have received prominent attention during deliberations on the FY2012 appropriations. Amendments that were agreed to or failed during floor debate, as well as proposed amendments pending actions, are not included in the tables, as House floor debate was not completed.

Comparison of EPA FY2012 Funding Proposals9

Concerns regarding EPA's FY2012 funding have generally focused on federal financial assistance for environmental cleanup of Superfund sites, wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects, grants to assist states in implementing air pollution control requirements, and climate change research and related activities. There also has been interest in funding for geographic-specific water quality initiatives (e.g., the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, and efforts to restore the Chesapeake Bay and Puget Sound).

Since FY1996, EPA's funding has been requested by the Administration and appropriated by Congress under eight statutory accounts. Table 1 presents the FY2012 amounts as approved for EPA by the House Appropriations Committee in H.R. 2584 and those recommended in the Senate subcommittee draft, compared to the President's FY2012 budget request, and the appropriations enacted in FY2011 and FY2010 for the eight accounts that fund the agency. The table includes a brief description of the programs and activities funded within each of the EPA accounts. Note that the former name of the "Oil Spill Response" account was changed in the President's FY2012 request to "Inland Oil Spill Program" to more clearly reflect the agency's jurisdiction for oil spill response only in the inland zone.

As indicated in the table, the House Appropriations Committee approved a decrease from the President's FY2012 request and the FY2011 and FY2010 enacted levels for each of the eight accounts (except the Building and Facilities account which is the same as FY2011), with most of the decrease in two accounts: Environmental Programs and Management, and State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG). The more than 30% reduction below the FY2011 enacted amount for the STAG account is reflected primarily in the roughly 55% reduction below FY2011 enacted appropriations (to the FY2008 level) for grants to aid states to capitalize their Clean Water State Revolving Funds (SRFs). The Drinking Water SRF also was reduced to the FY2008 level, although the magnitude of the decreases below the FY2011 enacted and FY2012 requested levels was smaller than the decreases for the Clean Water SRF. Although the House committee proposed mostly decreases for individual programs and activities funded within each of the eight appropriations accounts, there are a few examples where funding levels were maintained or increased compared to FY2011 levels.

The Senate subcommittee draft proposed overall funding for EPA would also be below FY2012 requested, and the FY2011 and FY2010 enacted levels, but the decrease would not be as large as that proposed in the House committee-reported bill. The higher funding level for EPA in the Senate subcommittee draft as compared to H.R. 2584 as reported is primarily attributed to maintaining funding for the Clean Water and Drinking Water SRFs at the same level as enacted for FY2011. As indicated in the table, proposed funding for each of the EPA accounts under Title II in the Senate subcommittee draft is above the levels recommended in Title II of H.R. 2584 , with the exception of the base appropriations prior to transfers for the Hazardous Substance Superfund, the Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Trust Fund, and the Buildings and Facilities accounts. With the exception of these two accounts, funding recommended for each of the other EPA accounts would be similar to, albeit generally slightly below, FY2011 levels under the Senate subcommittee draft.

House committee-reported H.R. 2584 and the Senate subcommittee draft include both increases and decreases for programs and activities below the account level for EPA, as reflected in the funding tables accompanying each proposal. In addition to the funding amounts presented by account in the table below, the "Administrative Provisions" for EPA in Title II of H.R. 2584 included a rescission of $140.0 million from unobligated balances funded through the STAG and the Hazardous Substance Superfund account. The Senate subcommittee draft included a comparable rescission of $34.0 million. Similar rescissions of unobligated balances have been included in EPA appropriations since FY2006. For FY2011, Section 1740 in Title VII of Division B in P.L. 112-10 included a rescission of $140.0 million from unobligated balances available within the STAG account only; for FY2010, P.L. 111-88 included a $40.0 million rescission of unobligated balances available from the STAG and the Hazardous Substance Superfund accounts.

House Committee-Reported H.R. 2584: Selected Provisions Regarding EPA Actions

During the past two years, EPA has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations implementing provisions of the 12 primary federal pollution control statutes enacted by Congress. Many stakeholders and some Members of Congress have expressed concerns that the agency has been reaching beyond the authority given it by Congress and ignoring or underestimating the costs and economic impacts of proposed and promulgated rules. EPA and others counter that these actions are consistent with statutory mandates and in some cases compelled by court ruling, the pace in many ways is slower than a decade ago, and that cost and benefits are appropriately evaluated.

Recently promulgated and pending actions under the Clean Air Act, in particular EPA controls on emissions of greenhouse gases and efforts to address conventional pollutants from a number of industries, have received much of the attention. Several actions under the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and the Toxics Substance Control Act (TSCA), have also received some attention. A number of these issues were the focus of considerable debate which resulted in nearly 30 provisions included in H.R. 2584 as reported by the House Appropriations Committee. The House-reported provisions, if enacted, generally would restrict or prohibit use of funds as appropriated in the bill for certain EPA regulatory actions. As not all the terms and activities contained within the provisions are explicitly defined in H.R. 2584 , the scope of the effects of many of the provisions are subject to interpretation and therefore neither definitions or potential impacts are inferred in this report.

Both House committee-reported H.R. 2584 and the Senate subcommittee draft contain five similar administrative provisions setting terms and conditions for certain EPA activities under the "Environmental Protection Agency Administrative Provisions" following the proposed funding for each of the appropriations accounts in Title II of each of the proposals. The Senate subcommittee draft included one additional administrative provision that would authorize EPA to transfer funding from any of its eight accounts to fund emergency response actions for oil spills, if the Inland Oil Spill Response account is insufficient to finance these costs. The funds transferred from other accounts would be reimbursed by payments administered by the U.S. Coast Guard from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.

The more controversial provisions regarding several EPA programs and regulations were contained in the "General Provisions" in Title IV of H.R. 2584 . Additionally, Title V of the House committee-reported bill, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, included amendments to the Clean Water Act and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act in response to EPA's consideration of requiring permits under the Clean Water Act for point source discharges of pesticides in or near U.S. waters. Title V of H.R. 2584 is identical to provisions contained in H.R. 872 as passed by the House March 31, 2011. The Senate subcommittee draft did not include those provisions that would restrict or preclude the use of FY2012 funds for certain EPA actions, as were contained in Title IV and Title V of House committee-reported H.R. 2584 . Tables 2 through 8, which follow, identify those provisions in the House committee-reported bill that the Senate subcommittee did not include in its draft.

The provisions included in H.R. 2584 presented in the following tables are categorized in this report by general program areas, that is, air quality and climate change, water quality, and waste management. Related provisions that are under the jurisdiction of agencies other than EPA are listed separately in Table 8 . The tables contain information about the provisions including the associated sections of the bill, and those that were amendments adopted during full-committee markup if applicable.

H.R. 1 , the FY2011 Full-Year Continuing resolution passed by the House February 19, 2011, included more than 20 provisions that would have similarly restricted and prohibited the use of FY2011 funds to implement EPA regulatory activities. These provisions were not included in the final FY2011 appropriations law ( P.L. 112-10 ) enacted April 15, 2011. Those provisions contained in H.R. 2584 as reported that are similar or the same as provisions included in H.R. 1 as passed by the House February 19, 2011, are denoted in the first column of each of the following tables.

Appendix. EPA Enacted Appropriations, FY2008-FY2011

Since FY1996, EPA's appropriations have been requested by the Administration and appropriated by Congress within eight statutory appropriations accounts. Table A-1 identifies the amounts for the appropriations enacted by Congress for FY2008 through FY2011 for these accounts. The table identifies transfers of funds between these accounts, and funding levels for several grant program areas within the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) account that have received more prominent attention during these fiscal years. The enacted amounts presented in Table A-1 are based on most recent information available from House, Senate, or conference committee reports accompanying the annual appropriations bills that fund EPA.