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 ------- |