0
n
TRENDS LIKE!'.' TO AFFECT EPA
IN THE NEXT FIVE TO TEN YEARS
V
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
»rv. *•-,/>:,, 0.-Q4 PM-211-A
'
, ..
Washington, DC 30460
Program Evaluation Division
Office of Management Systems
: and Evaluation
September, 1983
-------
-7 00 W
TRENDS LIKELY TO AFFECT EPA
IN THE NEXT FIVE TO TEN YEARS*
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The purpose of this part of the Delegation II Study is to
identify broad external trends that are likely to affect the
mission, methods, size, or structure of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency over the next five or ten years. It is
designed to set the context for the study, given the fact that
the administration, delegation, and oversight of EPA programs
is a dynamic process which takes place over an extended period
of time.
This "module" is not intended to provide original informa-
tion on future environmental trends. Instead it is an attempt
to assemble and analyze the existing work that has been done
in this area. The focus is on patterns of demographic, economic,
energy, environmental, technological, and government resource
trends which are most likely to affect the Agency and its inter-
actions with the States over the next decade.
APPROACH - .
This examination of significant trends has been conducted
in three distinct steps: a search of the available literature
on future trends in the above-mentioned subject areas; review
of the "Environmental Management Reports" recently completed
by the Regional Offices; and personal interviews with 28 know- ,
ledgable individuals in industry, public interest groups, trade
associations, and State and local government. This effort was
supplemented with questionnaires returned by approximately 40
professionals within the Agency, and .a series of surveys con-
ducted on future environmental problems by a consultant to the
Agency.
The literature search yielded a number of recent documents
wh'ich address assorted strategic planning and trend analysis
questions in the environmental area. Most notable among these
are the works commissioned for this purpose by the Agency's
Office of Strategic Assessments and Special Studies in the
Office of Research and Development. Other recent work of value
has been conducted by the Advisory Commission on Intergovern-
mental Relations, the Council on Environmental Quality, EPA's
Office of Policy Analysis, and the Population Reference Bureau.
Prepared by Charles- Kent and Irv Auerbach in the Program
Evaluation Division, U.S. EPA.
-1-
-------
-2-
The "Environmental Management Reports", recently produced
by EPA's Regional Offices under the guidance of the Environ-
mental Results Branch of the Office of Management Systems and
Evaluation {OMSE) proved to be a unique source, of information
on the principal environmental problems found in each of the
Regions. Summaries of these reports have been prepared by
OMSE and are available under separate cover.
The interviews were carried out as a part of the external
interviews conducted under Module 2 of the Delegation II Study.
A subset of questions was asked of each interviewee on the
environmental problems he or she felt were decreasing or
increasing in importance, and whether States or the Federal
government should play the primary role in addressing each
problem. These interviews are not intended to represent a
scientific sample, but reflect the opinions of individuals who
are knowledgable about the Agency's work and its interaction
with other levels of government in carrying out environmental
laws. These interview results closely paralleled the results
of similar surveys conducted by J.F. Coates, Inc. of members
of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
the Washington Association of Environmental Professionals, and
members of the The World Futures Society.
No attempt is made to differentiate between near-term or
long-te^rm trends in this report. The effort concentrates on
only the broadest patterns which are most likely to affect the
Agency over the next five to ten years. The principal objective
of this approach is to highlight those trends which may call for
action now to prepare us to deal with their effects on the
Agency.
BROAD TRENDS IMPORTANT TO EPA
KNOWLEDGABLE OBSERVERS THINK THAT MANY ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
ARE GROWING IN IMPORTANCE
There is a Clear Consensus on the Top Problems
There is strong consensus among knowledgable individuals
as to the ton environmental problems .which are increasing 'in
importance. The problems most frequently mentioned in trie 28
external interviews we conducted wera:
Problem Frequency
Hazardous Wastes 19
Groundwater Contamination 19
Acid Rain 15
* Toxic Air Pollutants 11
Non-Point Sources in.Water " 7
i
-------
-3-
When asked for problems of decreasing importance (i.e.,
problems which are perceived to be "under control"), interviewees
tend to agree on the following:
Conventional Air Pollutants
Sewage Treatment
17
5
The List of Growing Problemsis a Long One
In a separate exercise, interviewees were asked to record
their agreement or disagreement with a list of environmental
problems divided into the three categories of "declining",
"increasing or-growing", and "new". These'individuals were
also asked their opinion on which.level of government
should play the primary role. .
The responses were then ranked by level of agreement with
the categories provided. A simple ranking index was obtained by
subtracting the number of disagreements from the number of agree-
ments. For example, 20 respondents agreed that auto emissions
are a declining problem while 7 saw auto emissions as a continuing
or growing problem, yielding an "agreement index" of 13. The
results are as follows: , . •.
Results of 28 External Interviews
on Selected Environmental Issues
Problems of Declining Importance
Automobile Emissions
Air Particulates (TSP)
Municipal Sewage
Toxic Water Pollutants
Agreement
Index
13
5
. -'2
-12
Primary^
Role
F/S
F/S
S .
S/F
Problems of Growing Importance
Acid Rain 27
Groundwater Contamination 26
SOX and :NOX from. Coal Combustion 26
Hazardous Waste"Disposal ' 25
Radioactive Wastes 25
Toxics in Air 23
Non-Point Sources of Water Pollution 23
Municipal Waste Landfills 23
Municipal Sewage Sludge 21
Mining Wastes . 20
Indoor Air Quality 18
Pesticides " 16
Fertilizers 10
Asbestos 9
Dredge Spoil 6
Non-Ionizing Radiation . 4
Chlorofluorocarbons and Ozone Depletion 3
F
S/F
F/S
S/F
F/S
F
S/F
S
S
S/F
F/S
J
S/F
J
J
F/S
F
-------
—4 —
Ranking of Environmental Problems (cont'd.)
Agreement Primary
"New" Problems Index
Global CO2 and Climatic Change 18 F
Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants 18 F
Biotechnology 13 F
Disposal of Batteries and Electronic
Equipment 6 J
Oil Shale and Synfuels Development 1 F/S
Notes;
*Rankings are based on agreement or disagreement among 28
representatives from industry, public interest groups, and
State and local government. "Agreement Index" is defined
as number of agreements minus number of disagreements.
Primary Role is defined as predominant implementation
role of State or Federal levels of government. F = Federal,
S = State, J = Joint, S/F = Joint with, emphasis on State,
F/S = Joint with emphasis on Federal.
.. . The negative "Agreement index" of -2 and -12 for Municipal
Sewage and Toxic Water Pollutants, respectively, ind.icate that
the interviewees disagreed strongly with the assertion that • /-^-
these are "Problems of Declining Importance". ~?
Although the list of problems shown to interviewees was
quite long, the same five issues suggested by the interviewees
appear among the top seven problems on this list when they are
ranked by level of agreement. This high level of agreement on
the major problems of growing importance is confirmed when
these results are compared with the outcome of similar surveys
conducted by J.F. Coates, Inc. for EPA. The groups surveyed
included the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
the World. Futures Society, the Washington Association of Environ-
mental Professionals, and several groups of career federal
employees. In each.of these surveys, the same five issues
consistently appear at or near the top of the list of environ-
mental problems of growing importance.
Most Problems are Seen as Joint Federal/State Responsibility
One unique feature of this questionnaire was the request that j
the interviewee indicate which level of government should assume
the primary role in addressing the problem. Respondents were
given the choice of a Federal, State, or Joint Federal/State
role. As the ranking table indicates, a significant majority of
the respondents selected a Federal role for Acid Rain and Toxics
in ?*ir, and preferred a joint Federal/State approach to the
problems of Croundwater contamination, SOx and NOx from Coal
Combustion, Hazardous Waste Disposal, Radioactive Wastes, and
Non-Point Sources of Water Pollution. There is, however, an
-------
-5-
undercurrent of concern among interviewees that the Agency may
not have the mandate or the ability to respond effectively to
most of these increasing problems. •
DESPITE STRUCTURAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGES IN THE ECONOMY
SOME MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS CONTINUE TO GROW
Air Pollution from Electrical Utilities will Increase
Utilities contribute about 80% of the total SOx and NOx
emissions. Projections of increased use of coal for electrical
generation, as well as slower replacement of older plants suggests
that these pollutants may increase by 10% in"the next ten years
unless major new control measures are instituted. The Environ-
mental Management Reports from Regions 3 and 5 reported SOX as
being "still a major problem", and Regions 5 and 9 cited NOX as
a "major problem".
SULFUR OXIDE EMISSIONS
INTERINDUSTRY COMPARISON
1980
(18.276 10* KG)
1990
(20,719 10* KS)
«.! I •* <•«•) •ml
' »TS»
•>• 1 I «*
Source: OPA, Smokestack Industries Study, 1983
-------
-6-
Hazardous wastes Will Increase in Volume
The chemical industry is responsible for 80% of the hazardous
wastes generated by the eight major industries, and over 60%
of the total. (These figures do not include mining wastes, which
are ten times the volume of industrial wastes, but are not included
in RCRA's current definition of hazardous wastes.) Projected growth
of the chemical industry implies that this sector will continue
to be a source of concern for EPA. This is in addition to the
likely regulatory complexity anticipated from the growing trend
towards specialty chemicals and the advent of biotechnology.
The recent Environmental Management Reports show that in
some areas, regional officials believe that small generators, as
now defined, dump hazardous wastes primarily in municipal land-
fills. Twenty percent of Superfund sites in New York and 15% in
New Jersey were municipal landfills.
There is growing concern that reliance on land disposal is
not a sound approach in the long run, i.e., sooner or later the
landfills will leak. In some areas, illegal dumping is or may
be a serious problem. The Regional reports attribute it largely
to the escalating costs and decreasing availability of environ-
mentally sound facilities.
HAZARDOUS HASTE VOLUME
INTER-INDUSTRY COMPARISON
1980
(29,172 10* KG)
1990 •
(36,502 10s KG)
•Ih. _u Illi
Source: OPA, Smokestack Industries Study, 1983
-------
-7-
Groundwater Contamination is a Serious and Growing Problem
Approximately one half of the U.S. population depends on
groundwater as a principal source of drinking water. In rural
areas, this figure is 95 percent. Our degree of dependence on
groundwater, especially in the highest growth regions of the
U.S. suggests that incidents of groundwater contamination in
those areas would have serious implications.
Because there has been relatively little systematic
monitoring of groundwater, it is difficult to make any definitive
statements about the current or probable future extent and
magnitude of contamination. Uncontrolled hazardous waste
sites are one of the principal sources of concern. As many as
95 percent of the sites on the National Priority List are
actual or potential sources of groundwater contamination.
Other sources cited in the Environmental Management Reports as
significant are: agricultural activities, gasoline storage
tanks, salt water intrusion, oil and gas development, septic
tanks, and municipal landfills, while EPA and State agencies . .
currently deal with some sources, there is little or no effective
control of. pesticide and fertilizer application and storage,
underground fuel storage at gasoline stations, and road salting.
Explanation
Am
I I Significant ground-watar pollution ii occurring
^J Silt-water intrusion or ground watar n naturally salty
'////// High Iral of minarats or otlw dinolwd solids in ground watar
I I Unthidad «u miy not be problwn-frM. but problMTl WM not coraidirid
mijor
Spaciflc MMircH of pollution
• Muninpil md industrial wtttn including vnrni from oil Mid gas findj
• Toxic indunrikl wmm
* Lindfill Itichin
• Irrigation rttum wtttri
* Wasm from wall drilling, harbor drtdaing. and axeavation for dratnaga lyitam
* Wall injection ol industrial waita liouidi
Source: U.S. Water Resources Council, 1978
-------
-8-
THE LIST OF TOP PROBLEMS TENDS TO CHANGE OVER TIME
SPA Has Already Seen Dramatic Shifts
Over uhe short history of the Environmental Protection
Agency the set of "roost critical environmental problems" has
changed substantially. A review of news headlines and
publications on environmental- issues in samples ten years apart
might well yield the following categories of concern:
1965 Air, Water, Solid Wastes, Pesticides
1975 Oil Spills, Hazardous Wastes, Toxic Chemicals
1985 Abandoned Sites, Groundwater Contamination, Acid Rain
Ten years from now, the set of issues most in the public
eye may be entirely different classes of problems—like indoor
air quality, neurotoxological and behavior effects of chemicals,
and global climate effects from human activity. Regardless of
the .exact problems, we can predict with a fair degree of certainty
that the issues EPA will be expected to face are likely to
continue to shift over time. . .
Passage of New Legislation in the 1970's Set the Pace
The Agency's growth patterns between 1977 and 1979 correspond
directly to the passage of major new environmental legislation
during that period. The Clean Air Act of 1970 (CAA), the Federal
water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (FWPCA), and the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act of 1972 (FIFRA)
were the major statutes which influenced the structure and
mission of EPA in the first half of the decade. The passage
of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
and the addition of resource intensive amendments to the Clean
Water Act, Clean Air Act, and FIFRA were-focused mainly on
redirecting the Agency's efforts toward the control of chemicals
and toxic wastes. This second wave of legislation resulted in
a major infusion of resources into EPA between 1977 and 1979.
Major Environmental Laws and Amendments Affecting EPA
FWPCA
SDWA.
RCRA
TSCA
CWAA
CAAA
FIFRA
CERCLA
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
-------
Changes in Priority Often Pull Resources from Existing Programs
One of the consequences of such change is the redirection
of Agency talent, funds, and management attention away from
"old" problems towards the latest focus of public concern.
This pattern can be seen in the Agency's appropriations h-istory
as illustrated in the chart below.
FUNDING HISTORY OF EPA OPERATING PROGRAMS
BY CLASS OF PROBLEM
ttOO
CHEMICALS AND
TOMC WASTES
200
73 74 75 76 77 78 79
Source: EPA Budgot Authority By Madia 1972-1964
80
81
83
84
For the sake of this analysis, the air and water program ."
budgets (excluding construction grants) were grouped to illustrate.
the response to "conventional pollutants", the toxic substances,
pesticides, drinking water and hazardous waste budgets were
combined to portray the level of EPA activity on "chemicals and
toxic wastes", and the Superfund Program is shown alone as "aban-
doned sites". In many cases, new programs tended to be constructed
by borrowing expertise and resources from existing programs,
whether or not the original problem was "under control".
To the extent that continued shifts in priority are a"
virtual certainty, the Agency's managers face a special challenge
to develop and operate cost-effective programs which are resilient
enough to withstand the predictable shifts in personnel, resources,
and management attention.
-------
-10-
THE DEMOGRAPHIC STRUCTURE OF THE U.S. IS IN TRANSITION
The Overall Population is Aging
The U.S. population is growing at a rate of 0.7% per year,
but this rate has been declining over the past two decades.
As a result, there is a growing proportion of older people in
the population. The nature of this transition is illustrated
in the following sequence of age/sex .pyramids developed by
Leon Bouvxer. It shows the progress of the depression, baby
boom, and baby bust cohorts over the years 1960 to 2050.
There are at least two reasons why this changing structure
of our population is of interest to EPA. First, older people
are physically more sensitive to pollution than younger people.
This raises questions of whether health based standards should
be set or revised to specifically accomodate this growing sector
of the population.
Secondly, the different age-sex structure may change societal
attitudes towards personal, social, and intergenerational risk.
In other words, an older population may demonstrate a different
willingness to accept risk than is currently the case. Little
empirical research has been done on the. effects of age on risk
perception. But, since the Agency must deal with the perception
of risk as well as estimated and actual risk, we should- anticipate
the risk acceptance climate in which risk management decisions
will be made and evaluated.
«« C.i.r, Tkr*
IMO-20SO
It ZOOO —
TI. torn „
Vr ZOIQ „
I »2
A }l
.
:: (
. 2O'O _
' :£ r
-•( ?
1 :i:
' T
f
•
•" r* 11! S "
r1 :c '
•t*
•Ml
Source: Leon F. lomler. 'katrtci'i H6r too*
G«Aer«tlon: The FftLeful lulgc/ PapuUtion
lullellB. lol. IS, Da.-I (PoDulilidB IrfirtACt
y. IK., Hiihlottan. D.C.. 1980), ft. \t-\t.
-------
-11-
Current Demographic Trends Point to Continued Diffusion of
Environmental Impacts.
In the most basic terms, environmental impacts from human
activity are most directly linked to waste disposal, water use,
energy production, industrial activity, transportation, new
urbanization, and encroachment on wetlands and agricultural
lands. Since these impacts result mostly from human settlements
it is appropriate to look at demographic trends to help anticipate
impending environmental problems.
As the major point sources of air and water pollution
gradually come under control in the U.S., the more diffuse
sources will assume relatively greater importance. This is
especially true of non-point sources of water pollution, which
already represent about 80% of the overall water pollution
burden. The consequence of this is that the sources of the
environmental problems of concern are becoming increasingly
diffuse. While this makes these problems less intense for any
given area, it also makes them more.difficult to treat. Perhaps
more importantly, it raises concerns about the potential deterio-
ration of previously clean areas.
Strong .Movement to- the Suburbs Continues ' ".. .
••^^^.^^^•^^^^^^^••^•••••——^^—•^-^^^^^^•^•••^^^•••^^i . • t,
'..•'.-.-• : • f
The diffusion of population pressure is most evident in
the surprisingly strong continued movement to the suburbs.
Despite the expectations of a turnaround in the- late 7Q-!s,
Population migration, 1070-1978
(in millions)
Nonmmropolilan count** Metropolitan counins
Source: CEQ, Environmental Trends, 1981
-------
-12-
Americans continue to move from the cities to surburban and
small-town surroundings. Also, many are moving to nonmetropolitan
counties. For the first time in U.S. history, nonmetropolitan
counties are growing faster than metropolitan counties.
Suburban and small town infrastructure will continue
to suffer growing pains, while big city infrastructure threatens
to deteriorate. This means pressure on State and local government
to provide adequate sewage, water supply, and waste disposal
facilities where growth is occurring and maintain these capital
intensive lacilities where the economic vitality of certain urban
areas is threatened.
Americans Are Moving to the South and West
The geographic center of population in the U.S. moved from
St. Clair County, Illinois in 1970 across the Mississippi River
for the first time to Jefferson County, Missouri in 1980.
The map below shows the location of the metropolitan areas
with population increases of 20* or more between 1970 and 1977.
kicranM at 20* or man, 1
Source: CEO, Environmental Trends, 1981
This map illustrate?; the growing pressure on arid and semi-
arid ecosystems of the West and Southwest and the wetlands of
the South—both of which are more sensitive to change than
thos*e of the olains, forests, and croplands of the East and
North. These are all factors which create different work for
the Agency's regional offices, as we will see below.
-------
-13-
EPA REGIONAL OFFICES FACE SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT PROBLEMS
DifferentPopulation Size and Growth Rates are Important Factors
The geographical, cultural, and economic diversity of
the U.S. creates a special problem mix for each of our
Regional offices. The distribution of the U.S. population
by EPA region provides an example of the differences among
the ten regions.
DETRBUTION OF POPULATION
BY
EPA REGIONS
111 IV V VI VII VIII IX X
EPA REGIONS
Source: Census Bureau, Statistical Abstracts, 1980-81
Historically, the Agency's western regions have focused
on prevention of new environmental problems while the eastern
regions have had to concentrate on dealing with existing problems.
The rapid growth rates in the West and South, with all the
accompanying demands" on infrastructure, will probably intensify
the environmental problems in these areas. However, many of
the growth industries moving into these areas (high technology
and service industries) will bring entirely different problems •
than those typical of the industrial parks of the Mid-West and
Northeast. At the same time, the regions with the older indus-
tries (I, II, III, and V) still face many of the same problems
but with reduced government resources and slower turnover of
the pollution intensive facilities.
-------
-14-
Other examples of variation among regional problems are
the pressures on coastal resources on the West and Gulf Coasts,
wetlands in the South and Southeast, arid and semi-arid lands
in the Southwest and West, groundwater overdraft in the West,
SOx in Regions III and V, NOx in Regions V and IX, and acid
deposition in the Northeast.
Energy Growth Will Challenge Regions IV, V, J7I, and VIII
Hie variations in electrical generating capacity—current
and projected—reflect population distribution and patterns of
industrial concentration. The projected growth as a percent of
existing capacity in Regions VI and VIII is especially significant
for the Agency—both in terms of potential environmental impacts
and in terms of the regulatory workload.
Despite its small population and the reduced interest
in synfuels development, Region VIII stands to bear a dispro-
portionate share of the environmental impacts of energy growth
in the next decades. The primary impacts on environmental programs
will be water supply, air quality, reclamation, mining wastes
and nonpoint sources. The secondary impacts of in-migration and
urban growth may be significant as well.
ELECTRICAL GENERATING CAPACITY
BY
EPA REGIONS
Legend
EZ3 EXISTING
• PROJECTED
I II III
IV V VI VII VIII IX
EPA REGIONS
Source: DOE, Electrical Power Supply and Demand, 1981
-------
-15-
Hazardous Waste Management Burden is Greatestin IV, V, and VI
The map on generation of hazardous wastes highlights an
important workload for Regions IV, V, and VI. This figure
implies a heavier concentration of permitting, monitoring, and
enforcement resources in these regions for the hazardous waste,
superfund, and other program areas which are affected by the.
presence of higher levels of .toxic wastes.
1980 Industrial HavtarJous Wusta (lent rat ion Within E^ch ui'A Kugion
(Thousand WMT and Percent of Total Nationwide)
1 PERCENTAGES MAT NOT TOTA1 TC 100%
DUE TO ROUKDKG
Source: EPA, Hazardous Waste Generation, 1980
This does not mean that generation and disposal problem's •
are not also significant in the other regions—merely that
the problems' are more predictable in areas like Houston,
Chicago and Philadelphia. The current examples of multiple
hazardous waste sites in Missouri illustrate that disposal and
abandoned sites can be a serious problem even in a region
which generates only 3% of the total volume.
-------
-16-
GOVERNMENT RESOURCES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS MAY DECLINE
S^tate and Local Purchasing Power is Declining
Most economists foresee only modest economic growth (3-4%)
in the U.S. for the next five years. Most State and local
governments are having trouble making ends meet, and these
problems are likely to continue. The figure below shows how
purchasing power across all State and local programs has been
declining since the mid-1970's.
The Deeiii.e In "Rear State-Local Spending
(Decline in Local Spending Commencing 1975, State Spending 1977,
Federal Aid Flow* 1979)
Fw C*»
hiC«M
(1HT>
Ocllan
300
200
100
0
11
*«c«e
kiCwiri
(1MT)
Dettwi
300
200
100
0.
u Local Expenditure (from own funds)
*i-— * """
*—"*"'
_, u, \
••
^m
mm*
mm
••
—
i^
•
54 19S9 1864 1969 1974 1979 19S1 *st
^, State Expenditure (from own funds)
•"
— — — "
^m
„— -*"
^—•~*~~'~"
M>«
>l
u_
mm
«•
•»•
•*«
1954 19S9 1964 1969 1974 1979 1981 e*t.
P*rCi»
tlCOMt
(WT)
DoUn
300
200
100
0
IB
£, Federal Aid
-
.•— *— ' "—
—— — •• '"" '"
^^
»•'
«•
-
—
^
t,
•••
"*
54 1959 1964 1969 1974 1B7I 1981 e*t
CALENDAR VEAM8
• High points.
1
Source: Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental
Relations, 1981
-------
-17-
EnvironmentalPrograms Will Have to Compete for .Scarce Resources
The proportion of the Federal budget available for non-
defense discretionary programs is decreasing by comparison
to entitlements, defense, and interest payments. Whether or
not the scenario projected below is correct in its exact pro-
portions, the non-defense discretionary part of the Federal
Budget is likely to come under severe pressure from the nation's
growing 'obligations to defense and non-discretionary expenditures,
Even though a major Federal role is envisioned for many
environmental programs, especially new ones, Federal resources
are likely to be severely limited. Environmental programs
will be competing with other important social programs for
increasingly scarce resources. This is likely to be the case
at both the Federal and the State levels.
PROJECTED CHANGE IN FEDERAL BUDGET STRUCTURE: 1980-1985
Non-Defense
Discretionary
Entitlements
Defense
Interest
2«
TOM
1980
1985*
IMS*
Source: Congressional Budgii Office, 9/BZ
* Projection!
-------
-18-
CONCLUSIONS
EPA Can Look Forward to Major Investments in Hazardous Wastes,
and Acid Rain
Knowledgable individuals agree that these issues plus
toxic air pollutants and perhaps non-point sources will
dominate the Agency's agenda over the next few years.
Agency Managers Will be Challenged with a Barrage of "New
Problems Before "Old" Programs are even in Place
Prudent managers will emphasize flexibility and resilience
in the skill mix and.program design they choose. It will be
important to move the most versatile employees into .the program-
matic hotspots while leaving organizations and processes in
place .which can succeed without an "all-star".staff. .
Changing Expectations are Likely to Contribute LO New Shifts.
in the Problem Set
In addition to the effects of the economic transition
brought on by automation, electronics, high-technology steel,
and specialty chemicals; society's standards of environmental
quality and our attitudes toward risk may change due to better
information, the changing age/sex structure, ar.d immigration
patterns. Understanding these perceptions is as, important for
setting the Agency's agenda as understanding cause and effect
in the environment.
dii-*-.,!.*..:,*
Some.Amount of Problem Anticipation is Possible
Existing information en trends is plentiful, but is not
generally made available to EPA 'decision makers in a form
which they can use. Many o.f the "new" problems EPA faces
(acid rain, groundwater contamination) are the result of policy
choices on "old" problems (tall stacks, land disposal) which
might have been different with better information and fore-
sight.
-------
-19-
Differences Among the Regions Will Challenge the Versatility
and ^Flexibility of EPA.Managers
Different growth rates, migration patterns, cultural
preferences, geography, economic structures, and infrastructure
requirements will assure different levels of emphasis on environ-
'mental problems among the regions. EPA's challenge, is to tailor
the work to the problem and to the capabilities of the States
while maintaining a meaningful level of consistency and program
efficiency.
Limited Government^ Resources Will Force More Difficult Choices
and Require BeTter" S^taTteyFederal Coordination
All levels of government are facing declining revenues and
purchasing power at the same time that the demands on these
resources are increasing. Intense resource competition with
other social programs for resources suggests that we should
take maximum care in setting priorities for environmental
programs. Not only do we need efficient use of available
resources, but improved planning and cooperation between Federal,
State, and local governments in apportioning and funding the
work. . - • .' ' '' . •
-------
-20-
SOURCES
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, "Significant
Features of Fiscal Federalism: 1980-81," Washington, D.C. ,
December 1981.
Leon F. Bouvier, "America's Baby Boom Generation: The Fateful
Bulge," Population Bulletin, Vol. 35 No. 1, Population
Bureau, Inc. Washington, D.C., 1980, pp. 18-19.
Pat Choate and Susan Walter, America in Ruins; Beyond the
Public Uorks Pork Barrel, Council of State Planning
Agencies, 1981.
J.F. Coates and Henry H. Hitchcock, , "Trends Affecting Water-
Resources and the Bureau of Reclamation: 1990-2010," a
Seminar Presentation, July 1, 1982.
J.F. Coates et. al., "Environmental- Consequences of Telematics:
Telecommunication, Computation, and Information Technologies,"
EPA-600./8-81, April 1982. . •
f-
Joseph F. Coates, Henry H. Hitchcock, and Lisa Heinz, ""Environ-
mental Consequences of Wood and Other Biomass Sources of
Energy," prepared for OSASS/ORD, April 1982.
Vary T. Coates, J.F. Coates, H.H. Hitchcock, "Clues to the
Domestic Environmental Agenda for the Next Three Decades"
Draft prepared for OSASS/ORD, February 8, 1983.
Council on Environmental Quality, "Environmental Trends",
1981, GPO, Washington, D.C.
Winslow Hayward, Harold Becker, and Lillian Deitch,
"A Pilot Test to Perform Trend Impact
Analysis Projections of Environmental Drivers and
Indicators," EPA Contract #68-02-3758, The Futures Group,
Glastonbury, Connecticut. April 21, 1983.
Environmental Protection Agency, "Environmental Management
Reports: Regions 1-10," Regional Offices in collaboration
with the Office of Management Systems and Evaluation,
May 1983.
Larry H. Long, "Population Redistribution in the U.S.: issues
for the 1980's," Population Trends and Public Policy,
Number 3, March 1983, Population Reference Bureau, Inc.
4
The National Research Council, Long-Range Environmental
Outlook , Proceedings of a Workshop, November 14-16, 1979,
National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. , 1980.
-------
-21-
OPA/OPRM, "Smokestack Industries Study: Phase I," prepared by
Putnam, Hayes & Bartlett, inc., February 1983.
OPA/OPRM, "Briefing on the Smokestack Study: Phase II," prepared
by Putnam, Hayes & Bartlett, Inc., June 20, 1983.
Office of the Comptroller/EPA, "EPA Budget Authority by Media,
1973-1984" ,
Office of Strategic Assessment and Special Studies, "Driving
Forces", an ORD briefing book.
Office of Toxic Substances, EPA, "Trends in New Chemical Intro-
duction into Commerce," paper prepared by Michael Shapiro
in response to Global Issues Questionnaire.
Stanford Research Institute,"Environmental Futures for
Environmental Policy Planning: 1975-2000," prepared for
Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S.E.P.A, October 1975.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, "Environ-
mental Quality Control, Government Finances: Fiscal Year
1980," State and Local Government Special Studies No. 103,
October 1982. '
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, "Statistical
Abstracts for the U.S., 1980-81".
U.S. Department of Energy, "Electrical Power: Supply and Demand
in the Contiguous United States 1981-1990", July 1981.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Hazardous Waste Generation
and.Commercial Hazardous Waste Management Capacity: An
Assessment," prepared by Putnam, Hayes & Bartlet, Inc.. 1980,
U.S. House of Representatives, "Public Issue Early Warning
Systems: Legislative and Institutional Alternatives,"
Hearings and Workshop by the Subcommitee on Oversight
and Investigations and the Subcommittee on Energy Conser-
vation and Power and the. Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, D.C.,.October 1982. . .
U.S. Water Resources Council, "The Nation's Water Resources—
1975-2000, Volume 2: Water Quality, Ouantity, and Related
Land Considerations," December 1978.
Lawrence W. Whitehead, "Assessment of Indoor Air Quality as
an Emerging Environmental Problem," Department of Environ-
mental and Industrial Health, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor,
r"*'V*""™«ntal Protection Agency
..„•./ " °10* PM-211-A
•:-r . ••:=s*t. -s.w.
Washington, DC 20460
* - . . .1 .. ..El
------- |