On February 19, 2011, the House passed H.R. 1 , the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011. As amended and passed, Division B of H.R. 1 would have provided adjusted funding levels through the end of FY2011 for 11 of the 12 regular appropriations bills, including the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill which funds the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). On March 9, 2011, the Senate did not pass the House-passed version of H.R. 1 and did not agree to a subsequent substitute amendment to the bill ( S.Amdt. 149 ). Pursuant to the March 8, 2011, order preceding the vote, H.R. 1 was returned to the Senate Calendar. H.R. 1 , as passed by the House, would generally have continued funding for many of the federal departments and agencies at the levels provided in the FY2010 regular appropriations acts. The proposed full-year continuing resolution (CR) also included numerous funding modifications and restrictions for many accounts, including several EPA accounts and program activities. Several recent and pending EPA regulatory actions were the focus of considerable attention during the House floor debate and subsequently were included in the form of amendments in the House-passed bill. These provisions generally were omitted from the Senate substitute amendment to the bill ( S.Amdt. 149 ) and the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 ( P.L. 112-10 ; H.R. 1473 ), enacted April 15, 2011. In response to congressional interest in the level of appropriations and several of the provisions affecting EPA program activities in House-passed H.R. 1 , this report highlights a number of these provisions and provides a summary of funding levels for EPA accounts and program activities specified in House-passed H.R. 1 . Only those provisions affecting EPA programs that are clearly identifiable by specific language or references as in the bill are included in this report. The information primarily is a compilation of excerpts of the bill language for purposes of reference and is not intended to provide a complete listing and analysis of all provisions contained in H.R. 1 that may otherwise directly or indirectly affect EPA programs. Congress and the President did not complete action on any of the 12 regular appropriations bills for FY2011, including the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill that provides funding for EPA, prior to the end of FY2010. Beginning October 1, 2010 (the start of FY2011), EPA and other federal departments and agencies were funded under a series of interim CRs. Prior to the enactment of P.L. 112-10 on April 15, 2011, P.L. 112-8 , the Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Amendments, 2011, enacted April 9, 2011, continued funding through April 15, 2011, for federal departments and agencies typically covered under the 12 regular appropriations bills. P.L. 112-8 had extended funding for EPA and other federal agencies included within the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill generally below the FY2010 enacted levels, but under the terms and conditions contained in the FY2010 appropriations law, P.L. 111-88 , with some exceptions. Since FY1996, EPA's appropriations have been requested by the Administration and appropriated by Congress within eight statutory appropriations accounts. Brief descriptions of the accounts are provided in Table 1 in the following section of this report. During the term of a CR, EPA (and other agencies) generally must determine how to allocate a fractional portion of the FY2010 funding levels, and make other adjustments to program activities and priorities. This incremental funding can affect programs in different ways, depending on various factors such as size and duration of specific activities. In contrast to regular and supplemental appropriations acts, CRs generally do not provide specific amounts for each account. Most CRs, instead, extend appropriations at the same levels as in prior year appropriations acts, unless otherwise specified, including funding adjustments for specific accounts or activities. As amended and passed by the House on February 19, 2011, Title VII of Division B in H.R. 1 specified funding levels of certain EPA accounts for the full fiscal year instead of a temporary period as in earlier CRs, as well as several provisions restricting or prohibiting the use of appropriated funds to implement certain regulatory activities under the agency's jurisdiction. Additional provisions relevant to EPA were included in Division D of the House-passed H.R. 1 . A number of recent and pending regulatory actions were the focus of considerable debate during floor consideration of H.R. 1 in the House. These EPA regulatory actions cut across the various environmental pollution control statutes' programs and initiatives, such as those that address greenhouse gas emissions, hazardous air pollutants (including mercury), mountaintop mining regulation, management of coal ash, particulate matter emissions, and water quality management including geographical ecosystems (notably Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes). Title VII of Division B in the Senate substitute amendment ( S.Amdt. 149 ) would have provided funding levels different from those in the House-passed bill, and omitted the House provisions related to EPA regulatory activities. The following section of this report provides an overview of funding levels as specified in House-passed H.R. 1 and the subsequent Senate substitute amendment that was not agreed to, compared to enacted amounts for FY2011 in P.L. 112-10 and FY2010 in P.L. 111-88 , and as requested by the President for FY2011. As discussed in this section, FY2011 funding amounts were specified for only five of the eight EPA appropriations accounts in the House-passed full-year CR, and four of the eight accounts in S.Amdt. 149 . Unless affected by certain broadly applicable general provisions in House-passed H.R. 1 and S.Amdt. 149 , the remaining three accounts in House-passed H.R. 1 and the remaining four accounts in S.Amdt. 149 would have otherwise be funded at FY2010 enacted levels per the terms and conditions contained in P.L. 111-88 . The funding in the two proposals is compared to the FY2011 (not including the 0.2% across-the-board rescission ) and FY2010 enacted appropriations, and as proposed in the President's FY2011 request. ( Table A-1 in the Appendix of this report shows EPA appropriations by account for FY2008 through FY2011 enacted (including the 0.2% across-the-board rescission) and the FY2011 President's Budget Request.) The overview of funding levels is followed by a series of tables that present a compilation of excerpts of provisions in House-passed H.R. 1 and one provision in S.Amdt. 149 for selected EPA programs and activities that have received prominent attention in floor debate. The amounts presented below for P.L. 112-10 (not including the 0.2% across the board rescission), H.R. 1 , and S.Amdt. 149 are specified for EPA accounts (and certain program activities specified in those accounts) as per provisions in the act, the bill as passed by the House on February 19, 2011, and in the Senate amendment ( S.Amdt. 149 ) considered on March 9, 2011. For purposes of further comparison, Table 1 presents the FY2010 enacted amounts for these accounts and the FY2011 requested levels. Only five of the eight EPA appropriations accounts were specified in the Housed-passed H.R. 1 : State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG), Environmental Programs and Management (EPM), Science and Technology (S&T), Hazardous Substance Superfund, and Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Trust Fund Program. S.Amdt. 149 specified funding for each of these accounts, with the exception of LUST Trust Fund Program. FY2011 funding levels for three accounts--Office of Inspector General, Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund Program, and Oil Spill Response--were not otherwise expressly specified in P.L. 112-10 . Accordingly, comparison of funding levels is limited to some extent by the specificity of the provisions in the FY2011 appropriations and the two proposals. Based on general provisions contained in Title I of Division B of P.L. 112-10 , those EPA accounts for which funding was not specified in the act are funded at FY2010 levels as provided under the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for FY2010 ( P.L. 111-88 ). Likewise, unless affected by certain broadly applicable general provisions, House-passed H.R. 1 and S.Amdt. 149 generally would have provided FY2011 funding for those accounts not specified, at the FY2010 enacted level specified in P.L. 111-88 . For purposes of comparison, Table 1 denotes the FY2011 funding for these accounts (and relevant transfers) as FY2010 enacted amounts ("FY2010 levels"). However, these FY2010 dollar amounts were not expressly specified as such in P.L. 112-10 , House-passed H.R. 1 , or S.Amdt. 149 . The Appendix at the end of this report presents EPA appropriations by account for FY2008 through FY2011 enacted (including the 0.2% across-the-board rescission) and the FY2011 President's Budget Request. In addition to the funding amounts presented by account below, 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. Section 1745 under Title VII of Division B in House-passed H.R. 1 would have rescinded $300 million from EPA unobligated balances available from within the STAG account. S.Amdt. 149 did not include a comparable provision. P.L. 111-88 specified a rescission of $40.0 million of unobligated balances available from the STAG and the Hazardous Substance Superfund accounts. During the past two years, EPA has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations implementing provisions of the 11 pollution control statutes enacted by Congress. Many stakeholders and 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, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) have also received some attention. A number of these issues were the focus of considerable debate which resulted in provisions included in House-passed H.R. 1 , but not included in S.Amdt. 149 and P.L. 112-10 . The House-passed provisions generally would have restricted or prohibited use of funds as appropriated in the bill for certain specific EPA regulatory actions. Provisions associated with EPA programs were primarily included under Title VII of Division B "Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies," and under Division D "Miscellaneous Provisions - Spending Reduction Account" in House-passed H.R. 1 . The provisions 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 5 . The tables contain information about the provisions including the associated sections of the bill, amendment numbers if applicable, and Congressional Record citations. 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 enacted (including the 0.2% across-the-board rescission ) and the President's request for EPA for FY2011, compared to the appropriations enacted by Congress for FY2010, FY2009, and FY2008 for the eight appropriations accounts. The table identifies transfers of funds between these accounts, and funding levels for several program areas within certain accounts that have received more prominent attention during these fiscal years. The 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.

Summary:
P.L. 112-10, the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (H.R. 1473), enacted April 15, 2011, provided $8.70 billion for EPA for FY2011 prior to a 0.2% across-the-board rescission. None of the 12 regular appropriations bills for FY2011, including the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies bill that includes funding for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), were enacted before the start of the fiscal year on October 1, 2010. Prior to the enactment of P.L. 112-10, a series of temporary continuing resolutions (CRs) were enacted that sequentially extended funding from October 1, 2010, through April 15, 2011 (P.L. 112-8). Passed by the House on February 19, 2011, Division B of H.R. 1 would have funded 11 of the 12 regular FY2011 appropriations bills in the form of a full-year continuing resolution (CR) (Division A separately would have provided FY2011 appropriations for the Department of Defense, the 12th bill). Several recent and pending EPA regulatory actions were the focus of considerable attention during committee hearings and floor debate on EPA FY2011 appropriations, and were reflected in a number of provisions and amendments included in House-passed H.R. 1. These EPA actions cut across the various environmental pollution control statutes' programs and initiatives, such as those that address greenhouse gas emissions, hazardous air pollutants (including mercury), mountaintop mining regulation, management of coal ash, particulate matter emissions, and water quality management including geographical ecosystems (notably Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes). Although Congress did not include the provisions in P.L. 112-10, these environmental regulatory issues remain a prominent topic of debate as Congress deliberates on the FY2012 appropriations and other proposed legislation regarding EPA's authorities. Title VII of Division B in H.R. 1, as passed by the House, included specified funding levels for certain EPA accounts. Title VII of Division B, as well as Division D of the House-passed bill, combined contained more than 20 provisions that would have restricted or prohibited the use of appropriated funds to implement various regulatory activities under the EPA's jurisdiction. On March 9, 2011, the Senate did not pass the House version of H.R. 1 and did not agree to a subsequent Senate substitute amendment (S.Amdt. 149) containing different funding levels and generally omitting the EPA provisions included in the House-passed H.R. 1. This report provides a summary of funding levels for EPA accounts and program activities specified in P.L. 112-10, H.R. 1 as passed by the House and as proposed in the Senate amendment, compared to the President's FY2011 Budget Request and the FY2010 enacted levels in P.L. 111-88. The report also briefly highlights a number of the provisions regarding EPA program activities as presented in H.R. 1, as passed by the House. Only those provisions that are clearly identifiable by specific language or references contained in the bill are included. Nearly all of these EPA provisions were omitted from the Senate amendment (S.Amdt. 149) and P.L. 112-10 as enacted. 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. 1 that may have directly or indirectly affected EPA programs.