EPA 910/9-92-015
&EFA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Management Division
Policy Planning & Evaluation Branch
June 1992
Region 10's
Strategic Profile
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile
This Strategic Profile, a compilation of data from several sources,
provides some background information for use in Region 10's long-term
planning process. The Profile is the first edition of an evolving
document. Because of resource and time constraints, we were only
able to review a portion of the most widely available data. We tried
to rely upon sources generally perceived as "neutral" and which
presented broad-based views.
The Profile will be updated and expanded as new data become
available. It will be expanded to reflect what is being reported on
the state of the environment and economy in the Pacific Northwest. He
welcome other data or sources for use in revisions of this document.
Inclusion of the data is not an endorsement of any of the references;
EPA makes no representation as to the underlying validity or
reliability of the data reported.
The Profile was prepared by members of the Region 10 Policy, Planning and Evaluation Branch. We thank those who
contributed to this document and Julie Hagensen, Assistant Regional Administrator for Washington Operations, Barbara
McAllister, Acting Assistant Regional Administrator for Policy and Management, and Gary O'Neal, Director of Environmental
Sustainability, for their participation on the Strategic Planning Team. We especially thank Gary O'Neal for his particular
contribution.
-------
Region Ws Strategic Profile
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ,
Agency-wide Direction and Issues.
Economic Outlook 4
The Region 10 Workforce and Resources 11
National Public Opinion 16
Environment 19
Region 10' a Geographic Initiatives 31
State and Local Government Trends in Region 10 34
Emerging Issues 36
References 40
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile
ExecutivaSu
|rv
This Strategic Profile covers the Region 10 states:
Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. The Profile
examines regional issues from six major perspectives:
economic outlook, workforce, public viewpoint,
environment, geographic initiatives, and emerging
issues. These perspectives canno.t be examined in
isolation; each overlaps the others and all must be
considered together to best understand environmental
issues affecting the Pacific Northwest.
Economic Outlook
The economic forecast for Region 10 is not as promising
as one would hope. Much of the region's anticipated
loss of economic strength has an environmental
connection. The major regulatory impacts on the
Northwest economy do not trace to legislation
administered by EPA. Rather, it is the Endangered
Species Act, the Native American Lands Act and the
Forest Management Act that may affect environmental
issues for the foreseeable future. Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), Columbia and Snake River salmon
runs, the spotted owl, closures of marginally situated
factories that do not justify investments for toxic
emissions all may lead to a climate of opinion over
the next decade that is less favorably disposed to many
aspects of official environmentalism.
The Public Viewpoint
The focus of environmental programs is increasingly
shifting from large point sources to the effects of
individual sources and behavior. Private pj-^perty
rights, what some consider regulatory burdens, and
decreasing economic power have the potential to
increase anti-environment sentiments.
Region 10 Workforce
Region 10' a workforce is not only experienced but
highly trained. About an eighth of regional employees
are eligible for retirement, a proportion that will
grow in the next four years. This suggests impending
attrition in aggregate experience and a need for
prudence in recruiting and promoting replacements.
The Environmental Outlook
According to the 1991-1992 Green Index, two Region 10
states, Oregon and Washington, rank in the top 10 as
far as positive overall environmental actions and
policies. This success is not universal. Washington
has one of the most significant regional problems in
the areas of water violating Safe Drinking Water Act
requirements and total toxics released to surface
water.
A common thread in all media programs is the focus on
pollution prevention. Geographic targeting, public-
private partnerships, and the development of state and
local capacities are additional recurring themes.
Enforcement programs, regionally and nationally, are
getting stronger and more sophisticated in order to use
resources most efficiently and wisely for maximum
effect.
Emerging Issues
A number of emerging issues are not directly under
EPA's jurisdiction: property rights, endangered
species protection, global climate change, natural
resource conservation and management, and urbanization
and growth management. These issues directly influence
how well environmental protection works in the
Northwest. Region 10's role on these emerging issues
is still evolving.
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Agency-Wide Directions and Issues
Agency-Wide Directions and Issues
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Agency-Wide Directions and Issues
Aoencv-vide Direction and Issues
EPA'a Mission:
The people who work at the Environmental Protection
Agency are dedicated to improving and preserving the
quality of the environment, both national and global.
He work to protect human health and the productivity of
natural resources on which all human activity depends.
Highly skilled and culturally diverse, we are committed
to using quality management processes that encourage
teamwork and promote innovative and effective solutions
to environmental problems. In particular, we are
committed to ensuring that:
Federal environmental lavs are implemented and
enforced effectively.
US policy/ both foreign and domestic, fosters the
integration of economic development and
environmental protection so that economic growth
can be sustained over the long term.
Public and private decisions affecting energy,
transportation, agriculture, industry,
international trade, and natural resources fully
integrate considerations of environmental
quality.
National efforts to reduce environmental risk are
based on the beat available scientific
information communicated clearly to the public.
Everyone in our society recognizes the value of
preventing pollution before it is created.
People have the information and incentives they
need to make environmentally responsible choices
in their daily lives.
Schools and community institutions promote
environmental stewardship as a national ethic.
To accomplish the Agency mission, EPA has developed
national goals and strategies. Primary goala are to:
1. Provide leadership to the Nation's environmental
science, research, and assessment efforts.
2. Make sound regulatory and program decisions.
3. Effectively carry out our programs and policies.
4. Improve the global environment
The Ten Themes - Strategies for the Future
EPA has developed 10 themes which define the Agency's
main areas of focus. These themes include building
better partnerships with our customers, improving our
knowledge base, effective outreach, and better
management. The themes or strategies for the future
are:
1. Strategic implementation of statutory mandates
2. Improving the science and knowledge base
3. Pollution Prevention
4. Geographic targeting on an ecosystem basis
5. Greater reliance on market and economic
incentives
6. Improving cross-media program^ integration and
multi-media enforcement
7. Building state and local capacity
8. International cooperation
9. Education and outreach
10. Better management and infrastructure
In a variety of ways, Region 10 is addressing the 10
themes in current and planned activities and strategic
plans.
The Recommendations from The Science Advisory Board
The Science Advisory Board's report. Reducing Risk:
Setting Priorities for Environmental Protection, cites
steps that the Environmental Protection Agency should
take to improve its efforts, and to involve Congress
and the rest of the country in a collective effort, to
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Agency-Wide Directions and Issues
reduce environmental risks. Those steps are identified
below.
1. EPA should target its environmental protection
efforts on the basis of opportunity for the
greatest risk reduction.
2. EPA should attach as much importance to reducing
ecological risk as it does to reducing human
health risk.
3. EPA should improve the data and analytical
methodologies that support the assessment,
comparison, and reduction of different
environmental risks.
4. EPA should reflect risk-based priorities in its
strategic planning process.
5. EPA should reflect risk-based priorities in its
budget process.
6. EPA and the nation as a whole - should make
greater use of all the tools available to reduce
risk.
7 EPA should emphasize pollution prevention as the
preferred option for reducing risk.
8. EPA should increase its efforts to integrate
environmental considerations into broader aspects
of public policy in as fundamental a manner as
are economic concerns.
9. EPA should work to improve public understanding
of environmental risks and train a professional
workforce to help reduce them.
10. EPA should develop improved analytical methods to
value natural resources and to account for long-
term environmental effects in its economic
analyses.
Environmental Equity
Environmental equity issues are frequently in the news.
Although these issues may be new to some of us, the
March/April 1992 EPA Journal reports that information
about, environmental inequities has been available for
some time. Information about inequities in the
distribution of environmental hazards was first
published in 1971.
The "Toxic Waste and Race" study by the United Church
of Christ states that communities with hazardous waste
facilities have twice the proportion of minorities as
other communities.
The same study found that about half the nation's
population live in cities with uncontrolled hazardous
waste sites. People of color may face a higher risk of
health problems related to the environment. Waste
facilities are more often located in their
neighborhoods, yet they often lack the economic power
to move or the political clout to force a site cleanup.
EPA has found that a significantly higher percentage of
African American children (compared to Caucasian
children) have unacceptable blood lead levels. The
EPA Journal reports "that in nearly every case, the
distribution of pollution has been found to be
inequitable by income. And, with only one exception, it
has been found to be inequitable by race."
The environmental equity issues are a major concern
across the nation. The EPA's Environmental Equity
Workgroup made eight recommendations to the Agency:
1.
2.
3.
4.
EPA should increase the priority that it gives to
issues of environmental equity.
EPA should establish and maintain information
which provides an objective basis for assessing
risks by income and race, commencing with
developing a research and data collection plan.
EPA should incorporate considerations of
environmental equity into the risk assessment
process. The Agency should revise its risk
assessment procedures to ensure, where practical
and relevant, better characterization of risk
across populations, communities, or geographic
areas.
EPA should identify and target opportunities to
reduce high concentrations to risk to different
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Agency-Wide Directions and Issues
population groups, employing approaches developed
for geographic targeting.
5. Where appropriate, EPA should selectively assess
and consider the distribution of projected risk
reduction in major rule makings and Agency
initiatives.
6. EPA should selectively review and revise its
permit, grant, monitoring, and enforcement
procedures to address high concentrations of risk
in racial minority and lou income communities.
Since states and local governments have primary
authority for many environmental programs, EPA
should emphasize its concerns about environmental
equity to them.
7. The Agency should expand and Improve its
communications with racial minority and low
income communities and should increase efforts to
involve them in environmental policy making.
8. EPA should establish mechanisms to ensure that
environmental equity concerns are incorporated in
its longterm planning and operations.
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Economic Outlook
Economic Outlook
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Economic Outlook
Economic Outlook
Conditions that govern economic performance of the
Pacific Northwest and Alaska have become, with few
exceptions, less favorable over the last decade.
The strongest element of the region's economy in the
last decade has been aircraft production. Reduction in
military procurement, overacquisition and indebtedness
by airlines and aircraft leasing firms, development of
international competition in airframe production,
decentralization of Boeing purchasing practices and
decline of international air travel all indicate that
the industry will contribute substantially less to the
region in the next ten years.
The basic underpin of the regional economy is the
forest products industry. Alteration of federal forest
management practices, overcutting of private forests,
withdrawal of major firms may be expected to reduce
output of lumber products by a third, paper products by
as much as a half, and result in an oversupply of
skilled labor.
Depletion of Alaska's proven petroleum reserves and
inhibition of exploration are expected to extend the
Alaska's downward slope of personal income and state
government revenues that began with falling crude oil
prices in the mid 'eighties.
Saturation of electricity generating capacity may be
expected to reduce revenues from power export and drive
up rates. Competition for water between hydro-
generation and salmon species protection is expected.
Agriculture (which currently produces 2.5% of regional
personal income) and food processing are the only
segments of the Pacific Northwest economy that appear
to present a superior situation. That strength,
combined with the attractive lower average wages east
of the Cascades, may produce a more vigorous and
resilient set of economic changes in Idaho and eastern
Washington than in western Oregon and Washington.
Much of the region's anticipated loss of economic vigor
has an environmental association. Programs and
regulations administered by the EPA, such as Superfund,
the Clean Air Act, and wetland issues, have negative
economic impacts. Legislation not administered by EPA
is also related to the anticipated loss of economic
vigor. The Endangered Species Act, the Native American
Lands Act, the Forest Management Act, and matters
falling within the purview of the Departments of
Energy, Defense and Interior involve, major resource
utilization issues. ANWR, Columbia and Snake River
salmon runs, the spotted owl, closures of marginally
situated factories that do not justify investments for
toxic emissions all could cause a climate of opinion
in Region 10 over the next decade that is less
favorably disposed to many aspects of official
environmentalism.
-------
Region W's Strategic Profile - Economic Outlook
Population Density and Concentration
Region 10, largest in land area of the Agency's
regions, is also the most thinly populated.
Washington, smallest and most populous of the four
states, has a population density virtually identical to
the U.S.: 73 persons per square mile versus 71. But
Oregon shelters only 29 persons per square mile, Idaho
12; and Alaska's has just under 1, giving the region an
overall population density of less than 11 per square
mile. See Figure 1.
The region's population is concentrated in the
Willamette Puget Trough, an area little more than fifty
miles wide at its broadest, that lies between the Coast
and Cascade Mountain Ranges. Almost 60% of the 9.3
million inhabitants of the four state region^live in 16
western Oregon and western Washington counties
that lie partially or entirely within the trough.
Urbanization
Population is highly urbanized. Forty-three percent of
the region's inhabitants live in the Seattle-Tacoma and
Portland metropolitan areas. Another 10 percent are
found in the Spokane, Salem and Eugene Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA). Counties that
composed the Medford, Boise, Anchorage, Olympia,
Yakima, Bellingham, Tri-Cities and a portion of the
Seattle metropolitan areas (prior to the 1985
redefinition of "standard metropolitan statistical
area") include another 17%.
Population Density and Concentration 1990
^
^...,
Legend
L
1-15
>15-35 k\\\\\l
>35-70 KXXXX"Xl
>70-150
>150-300
>300-600
>600
Figure 1
Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Census, "Population Estimate, 1990"
-------
Region Ws Strategic Profile Economic Outlook
Distribution of Population
PWOMII ol Region 10 Population
by Location ol R»sld«nco
1990
274 »
Prior SMSA-i
All oUMT ML* «,
Figure 2
Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of
Census, "Population Estimate, 1990"
Increase in population in the region's five SMSA's
during the 'eighties exceeded by over 150,000 people
the total amount of increase of the region's
population, advancing processes of urbanization and
population concentration that have been in force since
World War II. See Figure 2.
Comparative Population Growth
Population increase during the 'eighties, sustaining a
trend unbroken since the depression, occurred in Region
10 at rates well in excess of the national rate.
Census Bureau projections show a distinct drop in rate
of population increase in the current decade, with
particularly marked reductions for Alaska and
Washington. Nonetheless, rate of increase in both
Oregon and Washington is expected to continue to be
sufficiently greater than average to sustain the
region's long-term pattern of above normal population
growth. See Figure 3.
Figure 3
Source:
Population Estimates
and Annual Rate of Population Increase
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
Population Estimates. Mid-Year 1991.
US. Bureau of Census
570,300
1,039,300
2,922.000
5,017.800
US AK ID OR WAReglonIO
| Actual 1980-90 0 Projected 1990-2000
U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Census,
Census of Population 1990; Series A
Projection
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Economic Outlook
Economic Specialization
Economic specialization is measured by the degree in
which a subset of an economy varies from the whole in
terms of fundamental measures such as employment
distribution, income source, output, consumption
pattern or capital deployment. Examination of the
broadest of such measures, distribution of income
sources, in Region 10 and the nation in 1980, indicates
that the Region produces a disproportionate share of
U.S. income from forest products, manufacture of
transportation equipment other than autos, farm output
and food processing, and output of forestry, fisheries
and agricultural services. Further, both construction-
-because of the sustained process of superior growth in
the regionand federal governmentbecause it owns
more than half of the land area of the regionhave
produced gross incomes above national standards. An
intermediate group of income sourcesmiscellaneous
services, trade, transportation, and utilitiesalso
generates above average income for the region, but it
is doubtful that these can be considered examples of
regional specialization; rather, they are indications
of scale diseconomies produced by low population
density.
Substandard development is to be found in all forms of
manufacturing other than transportation equipment.
Mining, financial services, professional services and
portfolio income are also below national norms for
income production. Substandard level of income from
transfers in 1980 may be viewed as an indication of
relative economic vigor: the Region's population
included a less than average proportion of pensioners,
persons subsisting on social insurance and farm income
leveraged by agricultural subsidies. See Figure 4.
Income Effects of Regional
Economic Specialization 1980
Lumber
Transporatlon Equip.
State & Local Govt
Construction
Farming
Trade
Federal Govt
Transport. & Utll.
Pulp & Paper
Fisheries, Resource
Food Processing
Mies. Services
Instruments
Finance
Mining
Net Transfers
Investment Income
ProtesslonalServlces
All Other Mfg
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5
Billions of Dollars of Personal Income
1.5
2.5
Figure 4
Source:
U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of
Economic Analysis, "Personal Income for
Regions and States"
-------
Region W's Strategic Profile Economic Outlook
Economic Trends
Region 10 economic specialization was not configured to
benefit from evolution of the national economy during
the 'eighties. None of its basic industries except
instrument manufacture produced income growth at an
above average rate; and in that instance, the region's
share of the industry declined.
Fanning, food processing and manufacture of
transportation equipment all were stronger performers
in Region 10 than in the rest of the nation; and
military installations in Alaska and Puget Sound
produced slightly greater than average increase in
income from federal government. But critical forest
products and construction industries were weak
contributors to regional income in both relative and
absolute terms.
One consequence of the region's uneven economic sojourn
through the 'eighties was an above average rise in
transfer income as early retirements, unemployment
compensation and welfare stipends partially substituted
for loss of wage income. Another was a relative rise
in income from manufacturing other than basic
industries. The latter was, to a degree, a statistical
freak; its absence of automotive manufacture spared the
region from participation in that huge industry's
decline. But positive factors were also at play, as
growth in chemicals production and some electronic
specialties made up a portion of losses suffered by
basic industries. A large relative increase in income
from mining traced entirely to initiation of oil
production on the North Slope. See Figure 5.
Migration
Region 10 contained 3.58% of the nation's population in
1980. During the next decade, population increased at
a steady rate of 110,000 persons per year, accounting
for 4.85% of the nation's population increase and
bringing the region's share of the national population
to 3.74% at the collection of the 1990 census. The
Census Bureau expects the region to account for 4.5% of
total population growth through the year 2000, adding
700,00 persons to the four states and raising total
population above 10 million by the end of the decade.
Change in Income From Source 1980-1990
Figure 5
Source:
U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
Economic Analysis
Bureau of
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Economic Outlook
Relative Well-Beincr
Region 10's population increased more rapidly than that
of the nation in the 1980's. Its gross personal income
increased more slowly than the nation's. Per-capita
income and thus the relative well being of its
inhabitants was below the national average. By
three of the four states and the region as a whole
produced below average for inhabitants. (The judgment
depends on an adjustment for Alaska price levels.
Nominal per-capita income in Alaska remains highest
among the fifty states.) See Figures 6, 7, and 8.
Per-Capita Income as Percent of U.S.
130
120
110
*. 100
3
s
E
90
eo
\AK
AK 10 OR WA
Soura*: U.S. Dipt erf Cemiwa, Burnti t* Economic AiurmH -
tar (toglona and Slak»' and U.S. Dapt
740
US.
Idaho Oregon Alaska Washington
Source: U.S. DepL of Commerce, Bureau of
Economic Analysis, April, 1992
Figure 8
10
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Work Force and Resources
[Region 10 Work Force and Resources
=========^^=^^================^=======^=^========^====
11
-------
Region 10'a Strategic Profile Work Force and Resources
Region 10 Workforce
Region 10'3 work force is highly trained and balanced
in terms of skills, experience/ and gender. Ethnic
composition corresponds with regional distributions.
The work force is divided equally between male (50.6%)
and female employees (49.4%). Modal grade is 12,
median grade 11, below'over all agency grades of 13 and
12, respectively, but well above all federal service.
Females make up more than half of the work force in
grades 1 through 4 and over 70% of the work force in
grades 5 through 10. The average grade of female
employees is less than 9.5, as compared to 10.2 for
male employees. See Figure 9.
Distribution of Work Force by Grade and Sex
As of AprlM992
V «..
Figure 9
Source: U.S. EPA Personnel Database Records
Composition of Work Force by Function
More than a third of Region 10 employees are engaged in
administrative duties. A somewhat smaller segment of
the work force is composed of scientists and engineers.
Legal staff, at 5% of the total, match the agency-wide
allocation for this function. Technical and clerical
support composes less than 30% of the regional work
force. See Figure 10.
Region 10 April 1992
Composition of Work Force by Function
Figure 10
Source: U.S. EPA Personnel Database Records
12
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Work Force and Resources
Distribution of Work Force Experience
Half of the Region's employees have accumulated more
than eight years of federal service. Average length of
service is 11 years. Roughly an eighth of all regional
employees have sufficient time in service to qualify
for retirement, and a somewhat larger portion of the
work force will reach that mark over the next four
years. See Figure 11.
Distribution of Work Force Experience
3-9 t-11 13-K 17-M 21-24
Figure 11
Source: U.S. EPA Personnel Database Records
Educational Composition of Work force
The regional work force is experienced and highly
trained. Three-quarters are college graduates, a third
have advanced degrees. Another forty percent, cutting
across levels of formal educational attainment, have
specialized training. See Figure 12.
Educational Composition of Workforce
As of April 1992
15
Pwcwit of Total
Figure 12
Source: U.S. EPA Personnel Database Records
13
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Work Force and Resources
Resources
Between fiscal years 90 and 92, EPA Region 10 full-time
equivalents (FTEs) rose from 513.3 to 577.4, a 12.5%
increase. Total number of employees is approximately
680. Total resource dollars gained 8.5% during the
same period. The increases lag behind trends in
government spending. Total federal spending rose 17.9%
from FY 90 to FY 92, while transfer payments increased
even more steeply, by 23.6%. Nationally, state and
local government spending went-up 16.6% (for the years
1989-91) .
The Air programs experienced a 23.4% gain in FTEs and
53.8% in total resources. This buildup reflected the
impact of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments on
resources and workload.
Superfund, fell in total resources, from $39,160,900 to
$34,398,000, a 13.6% reduction. This was balanced by
a 12.5% increase in FTE. The falloff in total
resources is mainly explained by a 26% decline in
extramural resources, which in the Superfund program
means contract dollars. In this regard, Superfund has
been a victim of its own success. With "enforcement
first" as a prevailing attitude, Superfund has achieved
more cleanups and removals by Potentially Responsible
Parties. This has meant that funds appropriated by
Congress in specific budget categories for enforcement
are not being spent. Congress has interpreted these
unspent funds as evidence of inactivity in the
Superfund program, and has taken them away from the
Agency.
A major increase in resources was evident in the
Interdisciplinary budget category, which includes
Environmental Impact Statement review, federal
facilities enforcement, and Office of Regional Counsel
policy and operations. The latter is the major
contributor to the increase, as the number of attorneys
has risen from 23 in FY 90 to 34 in FY 92, a 48%
increase.
FY 90: Total FTE'* by Media
kWlM 21.IX
SoUwuU 9.5%
SufMffund
LUST 1.0%
FY 91: Total FTE'a by Madia
SolUwaite 10.4%
Interdisciplinary 5.5%
Management 14.2%
LUST 0.9%~
1. W«t«r Include, drinking water
2. Source: EPA Region 10 Budget CKflce
Supertund27.Z%
FY 92: Total FTTa by Media
14
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Work Force and Resources
Region 10 FTE's by Media: FY 90-92
Air
Water
Drinking Water
Solid Watte
Fu- ctnt rdUcI* thmoft
Pesticides |
i
Toxics
Radiation
Interdisciplinary
(Management
LUST
Superlund
13.1%
t.1%
Tout:
FYtO SI3.3
FYtt 544.1
FY«2 577.4
100 200
0FY90 i
300
FY91
400
FV92
soo
600
700
Region 10 Total Resources by Media: FY 90-92
(dollars In thousands)
40.000
Figure 16
Source: EPA Region 10 Budget Office
Figure 17
Source: EPA Region 10 Budget Office
15
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - The National Public Opinion
National Public Opinion
16
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - The National Public Opinion
Environment - Versus - Economy
«, but economy I* mora
14%
Bdinn, but mlronnunt
to mora Important
51%
Figure 18
The Adult of Today
Concern about pollution is increasing. Environmental
equity matters show an increased level of attention in
certain populations. The national Green Gauge polling
data show that in 1982 7% of those polled had
environmental concerns. The 1992 data show that 21%
now have environmental concerns. When asked whether
certain lifestyle changes were worth the inconvenience
or cost, 58% of those polled said "no."
Results from polls in Region 10 are different. In 1992
polling data approximately 8% of those polled placed
the environment as a concern. The economy was number
one at 35%. The 8% reflected a one percent drop in six
months.
The Green Gauge data lists the leading environmental
problems as vehicle exhaust, litter, industrial and
solid waste disposal and household garbage disposal
costs.
Future Generations
From Saturday morning cartoons to classrooms, kids are
bombarded with warnings about acid rain, rain forests
destroyed, global wanning, spotted owls pushed to the
brink of extinction, and dolphins killed by fishermen
netting tuna. The kids are responding. There are at
least 15 student environmental groups claiming a
minimum of 1 million members.
A recent article in The Seattle Times states that
parents listen to their children when it comes to the
environment. A survey of 1,000 adults found a third of
all parents made a purchase decision based on something
their children had said about the environment. In
addition, 70 percent of adults surveyed said their
environmental concern had increased in the past two
years. Sixty-seven percent said their environmental
activities had risen.
Several published sources predict that the needs of the
environment will remain a concern for future
generations. The support for environmental protection
is greater today than 15 years ago. Given the impact of
the mass media and global focus, it is very likely th-v
the level of interest in environmental protection -
17
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - The National Public Opinion
perhaps most likely in times of a prosperous economy -
will increase. See Figure 19 for attitudes of adults
and children.
Environment
Drugs
Education
Homelessness
Economy
Concerns of Children Age 11 to 18
Most Important Issue the U.S. Must Deal With
10
Children
Source: The Seattle Times. Sunday, April 12,1992
Results of survey of 880 children and parents In
November, 1991
Figure 19
18
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Environment
Environment
19
-------
Region Ws Strategic Profile Environment
Water
Information from the National Wildlife Federation,
U.S. Departments of Interior and Commerce, the Green
Index, the Washington Department of Ecology and/or
the U.S. EPA states that:
79% of the water systems in Alaska violate Safe
Drinking Water Act requirements. Washington
follows Alaska with 67% of water systems in
violation. See Figure 20.
Oregon has the lowest percentage of population
(10%) exposed to water systems in significant
noncompliance. Alaska and Washington have the
highest percentages (48% and 45% respectively)
of population exposed. See Figure 20.
Since 1987, Region 10 has had a steady increase
of Safe Drinking Water Act and wetlands
enforcement actions.
Approximately 42% of the Region's miles of
rivers and streams partially or completely fail
to meet their designated use for drinking,
recreation, or fishing.
Alaska, Oregon and Washington face expensive
costs to provide adequate sewage treatment to
the year 2008.
Idaho has the highest groundwater use of Region
10 states.
One-third of the nation's shellfish beds are
closed due to pollution or lack of monitoring,
resulting in millions of dollars of lost
revenues. Sixth-five percent of Oregon's
shellfish productive waters are restricted from
fishing due to levels of pollution.
Wetlands, estuaries, forest and other
ecological habitats are disappearing in
Washington State at a rate of 30,000 acres a
year.
Coastal fisheries, wildlife, and waterfowl
populations have declined. As many as two
million seabirds and 100,000 marine mammals die
every year after eating or becoming entangled
in plastics or marine debris.
The traditional approach for addressing water
pollution has relied heavily on regulatory solutions
at point sources. To effectively address the wide
spectrum of sources that pose serious threats to
surface water, ground water, and wetlands approaches
which combine the traditional means with new
solutions are being considered.
For the past two decades, EPA and the states have
focused their efforts on controlling major industrial
and municipal dischargers. These controls have
typically been "technology based," rather than "water
quality based."
The Region's loss of aquatic resources is escalating.
For example, several Columbia River salmon runs were
recently designated as "endangered species"; well
over half of Washington's shellfish beds have been
permanently decertified due to bacterial
contamination; and portions of the Snake River have
become extremely clogged with aquatic weeds. Many of
these problems are attributable to a combination of
habitat destruction and the cumulative effect of
pollutant loading from many sources.
To more effectively protect such resources, federal,
state and local agencies and tribal governments are
adopting a more holistic "watershed approach" that
emphasizes ecosystem protection and improved program
coordination. Key challenges are 1) to integrate
state and federal efforts into a compatible, mutually
supportive partnership; and 2) to bring into that
partnership the multitude of other agencies and
interest groups that have a stake in each watershed.
Please see the following pages for Figures 19, 20,
and 21.
20
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Environment
Water
Toxic Chemicals Released to Surface Water
and rank among states
Public Sewage Systems Violating EPA Standards
and rank among states
47th
under 5 pounds
5 to 42 pounds
130 to 3,294 pounds
Pounds per square mile of toxic
chemicals discharged by manufacturers
into rivers and other surface water.
43rd
under 8 percent
8 to 15 percent
17 to 40 percent
Percent of publicly-owned wastewater
treatment systems in chronic violation
of EPA standards for effluent limits.
Figure 20
Source:
Green Index, "Toxics in the Community: The 1988 Toxic Release Inventory National Report," Sept.
1990. Published by the Office of Toxic Substances, USEPA, Wa. and Office of Water Enforcement
and Permits, USEPA, Wa.
21
-------
Water
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Environment
Figure 21
100
Water Systems Violating SDWA \tyflter Systems in Significant Noncompliance
80
60
40 -
20 -
40
20
Alaska Idaho Oregon Washington
Alaska Idaho Oregon Washington
Source: Norman L. Dean, "Danger on Tap: The Government's
Failure to Enforce the Federal Safe Drinking Water
Act," Published by the National Wildlife Federation
22
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Environment
Water
Major Program Objectives
Efforts of the Agency's water programs center around
geographic targeting and rely on grass-roots and
consensus building approaches that empower state,
local, and tribal governments. A main goal is to
mobilize support for stewardship and conservation of
water resources with the EPA and state government
offering technical, scientific, and educational
assistance to support and reinforce grass-roots
efforts.
The Agency-wide Water Program Strategic Plan calls for
a shared responsibility in managing water resources and
discusses the changes necessary to our institutional
framework in order to achieve environmental goals and
objectives. The changes are:
Implement geographic targeting
Develop a more holistic approach to ecological
resource management
Institutionalize pollution prevention and multi-
media approaches
Promote integrated water quality management
Improve state and local capability to fund and
operate water programs
Educate and empower the public
Exercise federal leadership and enlarge
partnerships with other federal agencies
Enlarge our international partnership
Non-Hazardous and Hazardous Waste
Information from the U.S. EPA, the United Nations'
United States of America National Report, and/or the
Green Index states that:
Region 10, as of February 1992, has 68 Superfund
sites on the National Priority List (NPL).
Washington has the most Superfund sites with 45;
Oregon has 8; Idaho 9; and Alaska 6. See Figure
22.
Alaska has 4 Superfund federal facility sites;
Idaho has 2; Oregon 1; and Washington has 15.
Many military bases have multiple hazardous waste
sites. See Figure 22.
Region 10, under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) Program, has approximately 4%
of the nation's large quantity waste generators,
transporters and treatment, storage and disposal
facilities.
Penalty amounts for RCRA enforcement complaints
in Region 10 have increased from an average of
$14,818 in 1989 to an average of over $53,000.
Idaho, Oregon and Washington are authorized to
implement the RCRA base program. Alaska is
expected to receive final RCRA authorization
around June 1994.
The RCRA corrective action (cleanup) program has
been delegated to the state of Idaho.
Washington is doing one of the best jobs
nationally of recycling municipal solid waste
Alaska, Oregon and Washington are ranked in the
high top 10' for per-capita state spending to
monitor, manage and regulate solid and hazardous
waste.
The United States produces approximately three
billion tons of hazardous and nonhazardous waste
per year.
23
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Environment
Non-Hazardous and Hazardous Waste
Superfund NPL Sites and
Non Superfund Waste Sites
80 | c 1 800
ft B_B^^^I^HHIHHMHttlkSl^M^«>^K^«II^^^^^I^^^^^Hi*MMKMiL^^^^^^^.«J ft
Superfund NPL Sites Non-Superfund Waste Sites
I Alaska! IdahoH OregonN Washington
Military Hazardous Waste Sites
and Rank Among States
600
300 -
200 -
100 -
0 ^"""^^^^""^'0
Alaska Idaho Oregon Washington
Figure 22
Source: Superfund Sites in the Pacific Northwest, EPA Region 10, 2/7/92 and Green Index, "Department of Defense
Environmental Restoration Report to Congress for Fiscal Year 1989," U.S. Depart, of Defense, Washington
24
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Environment
Non-Hazardous and Hazardous Waste
During 1989 and 1990, the EPA Headquarters Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) completed
two intensive self examinations. Congress,
environmental groups, and the public at large
frequently examine and question the success of the
Superfund program.
One of the main conclusions from the self examinations
is that neither EPA nor the states have the resources
to address all of the nation's waste disposal problems.
Partnerships between EPA, state and local agencies,
tribal governments, and the private sector must be'
cultivated and strengthened if the nation is to
successfully address disposal problems.
In Region 10, representatives from state, tribal
governments, local, and Canadian environmental agencies
along with EPA and private sector representatives
signed a Memorandum of Agreement to help address the
Northwest's waste disposal issues and to increase
intergovernmental cooperation among the Region 10
states and British Columbia. Figure 22 on the following
page presents data on the status of waste in Region 10.
Major Challenges
The Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
identified six major cross-program goals in their
Strategic Plan for FY 1993 - 1996. These goals
represent change in focus and direction for the future.
The goals are to:
1. Integrate pollution prevention into all sectors
of society.
2. Create a national consensus on waste management
goals.
3. Develop an integrated waste cleanup program.
4. Create a national understanding that "it's my
problem too."
5. Define the state role in waste management.
6. Use environmental risks as the criteria for
making choices and setting priorities.
Major Program Objectives
OSWER also identified four main program objectives:
1. WASTE MINIMIZATION: Minimize the quantity and
toxicity of waste created by commercial,
industrial, and governmental activities.
2. ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT: Ensure the
environmentally sound management of solid and
hazardous wastes.
3. PREVENT HARMFUL RELEASES: Prevent the harmful
releases of oil and hazardous substances into the
environment.
4. PREPARE FOR AND RESPOND TO HAZARDOUS RELEASES:
Prepare for and respond in a timely and effective
manner to releases of hazardous substances into
the environment.
25
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Environment
Toxics local governments, and the private sector are EPA's
more traditional partners. See figure 23.
Information from the U.S. EPA, the United Nations'
United States of America National Report, and/or the
Green Index states that:
Of the four states in Region 10, Idaho releases
the fewest pounds of. toxic chemicals to the
environment. Washington produces the most with
nearly three times as much as Idaho. See Figure
23.
Oregon has the highest rank among Region 10's
four states for releasing to the environment the
most toxins that cause serious health problems
such as birth defects and nerve damage. See
Figure 23.
Oregon and Washington have implemented programs
to encourage farmers to move toward sustainable
farming systems. Actions include implementing
alternative farming practices and techniques to
control pests instead of a reliance on
traditional pesticides.
In the 1960s and 1970s, pesticide use reached an
all-time high. Recent total use appears to be
remaining steady at slightly lower levels than
those of the mid-1980's.
In the conventional pesticide market, agriculture
accounts for over two-thirds of the pesticide
user expenditures and about three-quarters of the
total amount used annually.
Herbicides are the leading type of conventional
pesticide, accounting for over 50 percent of
domestic sales and of the total amount of
pesticide used.
EPA's Toxic Substances Program is responsible for
protecting the public and the environment from risks
associated with the manufacture, use, and disposal of
toxic chemicals. A major aspect of the program is
strong enforcement of the laws under its purview.
As in other EPA programs, pollution prevention and
education are critical aspects of a successful toxics
program. Other federal agencies, states, tribal and
26
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Environment
Toxics
Total Toxic Chemical Release to Environment Rank on Release of Toxins
Total Pounds and Rank Among States Posing Serious Health Hazards
60,000,000 -i 150 Chemicals Causing Cancer, Birth Defects, or Nerve Damage
50,000,000 -
40,000,000 -
w
3?
O 3
30,000,000 -
20,000,000 -
10,000,000-
8th
19th--
6t
14th
33
u
3
O
(Q
on f>
30 g
o
(0
10
Percentage Rank Among States
(Alaska Hldaho D Oregon GD Washington
Source: Green Index, 'Toxics In the Community:
The 1988 Toxic Release Inventory
National Report, September 1990, USEPA
Lowest score is the
best rating.
Source: Green Index, 1991-1992
The 1988 Toxic Release Inventory
National Report, September 1990, USEPA
Figure 23
27
-------
Region Ws Strategic Profile - Environment
Toxics
Major Challenges
Nationwide, and in Region 10, new approaches focusing
on pollution prevention and education are being
undertaken in order to achieve effective change. Focus
areas include:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Improving public access to
information, such as TRI data,
toxic chemical
Encouraging voluntary industry response, such as
those in of the National Pollution Prevention
Strategy,
Revitalizing government toxic substance programs,
at all levels of government, that emphasize
substitution of toxic products with less toxic
substances or non-toxic alternatives, and
Focusing additional consumer information on
potential hazards from exposure to toxic
substances.
National Toxic Substances Program Goals
The National Toxic Substances strategic plan is a
result of a major reassessment of the goals and
direction to be taken under TSCA and related mandates.
The program strategy establishes four major goals:
1)
Prevent or eliminate unreasonable risk
2) Reduce unnecessary exposure
3) Encourage safer substitutes
4) Maximize program productivity
Air
Information from the U.S. EPA, the United Nations'
United States of America National Report, and/or the
Green Index states that:
Washington ranks among the 10 worst states for
carbon monoxide violations because of air
pollution in metropolitan areas. See Figure 24.
As of 1988, 66% of Washington's and 53% of
Oregon's populations were in air violating
standards for carbon monoxide. See Figure 24.
Alaska is among five states with the worst rates
for end-of-pipe air pollution control devices
(based on TRI data).
In 1990, amendments to the Clean Air Act
strengthened criminal sanctions by increasing
fines and jail terms for knowing violations.
States have established control programs
addressing 708 different compounds in the ambient
Scientific evidence indicates that air within
homes and other buildings can have higher levels
of air pollution and greater health impacts than
outdoor air.
Air pollution ranks high in the relative magnitude of
public health problems. In a majority of polls and
studies, air pollution is among the highest
environmental concern of the public.
The environmental equity issue is an aspect of air
pollution problems. Studies show that the risks
associated with exposure to air toxics are not spread
evenly over the whole population. People who live near
major emission sources are invariably exposed to higher
levels of the emitted pollutant than those more
distant. See Figure 25 for data on regional air
quality.
28
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Environment
Toxic Chemical Releases by Industry To Air
Amounts and Rank Among States
30,000,000
25,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
|total pounds
9th
9th
8th
>3rd
Population in Air Violating Standards for
on Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
oil
60-
40'
20-
percentage [I rank among states 66%
Alaska Idaho Oregon Washington
Ozone CO Ozone CO Ozone CO Ozone CO
Alaska Idaho Oregon Washington
Source: 1991-1992 Green index, 'Toxics In the Community:
The 1988 Toxic Release Inventory National Report," USEPA
The United States of America National Report, United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development, 1992
[Figure 24
29
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile Environment
Air
Strategic Objectives
Particulate matter (PM-10), one of six criteria
pollutants addressed under national air quality
standards, is a pollutant of major concern in the
Pacific Northwest. The basic goals of the PM-10 program
are attainment and maintenance of compliance with the
PM-10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
nationwide. To achieve this goal, strategic objectives
of the PM-10 Program include:
1) getting State Implementation Plans in place,
2) defining long-term nonattainment policies,
3) preventing episodes where PM-10 concentrations
exceed significant harm levels, and
4. reducing the number of days of violations of the
NAAQS and the magnitude of the violations.
Planned activities of the national PM-10 program focus
on the sources of PM-10 emissions that are the most
serious obstacles to achieving attainment. These
sources are:
1. residential wood combustion,
2) urban fugitive dust,
3) industrial sources, and
4) other combustion sources, such as agricultural
burning.
Compliance
A 1989 review of trends in the air toxics program
raised concerns in the enforcement and compliance areas
of the air program. Concerns related to reduced
efficiency in state enforcement activities as
characterized by variant interpretation of regulations,
uneven enforcement, inconsistent training programs for
state inspectors, and diminished capacity to perform
quality inspections.
In recognition of these problems, a shift of emphasis
is taking place at both the state and federal level to
strengthen air toxics' enforcement programs. In 1990,
amendments to the Clean Air Act strengthened criminal
sanctions by increasing fines and jail terms for
knowing violations.
Enforcement
Data in the Region 10 Enforcement Report shows that:
In the last four years, Washington State,
followed by Oregon, issued the most
administrative orders of Region 10 states.
Since 1987, Region 10 has had a steady increase
in the number of administrative orders. An
administrative order is issued to collect
penalties or prescribe an action for violating
environmental laws.
Region 10 is examining the efficiency of its
enforcement programs. EPA enforcement will look
increasingly toward:
targeting or focusing compliance monitoring
and enforcement resources to achieve
environmental results in a manner both
consistent with national priorities and
sensitive to Regional and State needs
screening for enforcement response and
realizing the full potential of enforcement
authorities in addressing environmental
problems, and
gaining the maximum leverage from each
individual enforcement action, both in
terms of general and specific deterrence
and incentives for the regulated community
to prevent pollution and minimize waste.
According to the February 1992 issue of Business and
the Environment, EPA plans to increase the number of
criminal investigators from 38 to 200 in the next three
years.
30
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Geographic Initiatives Overview
Region 10's Geographic Initiatives
31
-------
Region 10's Strategic Promo - Geographic Initiatives Overview
Geographic Initiatives Overview
EPA Region 10 has refined its method of doing business
through the use of geographic initiatives - discrete
areas of focus for a coordinated, comprehensive
campaign for a better environment. Geographic
initiatives allow areas of heavy industrial activity
and, often, population concentration, to be identified
and resources channeled.
Region 10 has identified four geographic areas, one in
each state in the Region, for this integrated approach.
The selected geographic areas are:
Southeast Alaska
Coeur d'Alene Area (Idaho Panhandle)
Portland/Willamette Basin (Oregon)
Puget Sound/I-5 Corridor (Washington)
The environmental status and outlook for each of these
geographic initiatives is discussed below.
Southeast Alaska
Southeast Alaska is a heavily forested and mountainous
land, with an extensive coastline cut by fjords. It is
the size of New York State, and, while sparsely
populated, it is experiencing rapid population growth.
Its principal industries include timber, mining,
commercial fishing, and tourism.
The major environmental issues of Southeast Alaska,
naturally enough, revolve around these industries. Old
mine sites must be cleaned up while new mines must
avoid the problems of hazardous and solid waste, air
emissions, and water quality degradation.
Logging may have serious effects on fisheries, as well
as reducing habitat for the area's wildlife population.
Pollution from cruise ships must be controlled, and the
area's pristine natural beauty and wildlife must be
preserved to maintain Southeast Alaska as a vacation
destination. The extensive coastline and rainy climate
mean that wetlands are ubiquitous - and they are
threatened by all of the commercial activities detailed
above.
EPA's initiatives will emphasize pollution prevention
and education/outreach. These approaches will be
directed at individual industries and communities.
Coeur d'Alene Area (Idaho Panhandle)
The Idaho Panhandle is one of the fastest growing parts
of the state. Newcomers and long-time residents alike
are discovering that water quality is the foremost
environmental concern of the Coeur d'Alene Basin.
Degraded rivers and contaminated lake sediments are the
legacy of mining operations and agriculture.
The geographic initiative for Coeur d'Alene addresses:
Metals source reduction through the establishment
of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the
South Fork Coeur d'Alene River.
Superfund remediation through removal and
monitoring at the Bunker Hill site, and by
analyzing other sites for possible inclusion on
the National Priority List (NPL).
Among the challenges posed by this initiative are the
need for coordination among a variety of federal,
state, and local agencies and jurisdictions along with
numerous private interests. The initiative provides
for these concerns through the formation of an
Interagency Group that will oversee development of a
management plan. Extensive citizen involvement and
public communication will be essential to the success
of the initiative.
Puget Sound/I-5 Corridor
Unlike some of the other geographic initiatives, Puget
Sound and the 1-5 Corridor present a truly
"metropolitan" mix of environmental issues. Pollution
is not solely attributable to a few isolated industries
or sources; the entire spectrum of environmental
"players" is involved.
The area has a high population density, enhanced by
recent explosive growth. By the year 2010, the
population is expected to double from the 2 million
residents in 1960. Among the issues that need to be
addressed are ozone non-attainment, numerous Superfund
sites and federal facilities, decreasing solid waste
32
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Geographic Initiatives Overview
landfill acreage, the nonpoint source water pollution
inherent in a large developed area that ultimately
drains into a single water body Puget Sound, and the
need to upgrade sewage treatment.
Area governments are wrestling with state-imposed
growth management restrictions and there is a growing
awareness of the need for regional governance that
transcends traditional political boundaries.
The regulatory network needed to deal with these issues
is perhaps further advanced for Puget Sound than for
the other geographic initiatives. The present network
is the product of the alliances and working
arrangements that heightened interest in Puget Sound in
the 1980's and led to its designation as an estuary of
national significance.
Portland/Willamette Basin
This Basin has been described as the most productive
and threatened resource in Oregon. The primary
environmental concerns relate to agriculture, forest
products and practices, and urban/commercial/industrial
development. Total maximum daily load (TMDL) standards
in the Tualatin River have been a major issue. EPA is
also developing pilot projects for Pesticide Ecological
Monitoring and a watershed demonstration program for
wetlands planning.
The key to the success of this initiative lies in the
maturing partnership between EPA and the Department of
Environmental Quality. EPA has identified the
development of state and local capacity as the
essential strategic factor in the Portland/Willamette
Basin.
33
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - State and Local Government Trends In Region 10
State and Local Government Trends In Region 10
34
-------
Region Ws Strategic Profile - State and Local Government Trends In Region 10
State and Local Government Trends Within Region 10
Alaska
The single overwhelming influence on Alaska's political
(and economic, and social) future is oil. The price of
oil is now low and production is declining by 7% per
year. Insufficient revenues to meet state needs will
be supplemented by the reserve fund this year.
However, this will eliminate the reserve fund as a
future revenue source. It is predicted that state
government will be trimmed, including the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
Idaho
The most immediate influence on Idaho's fortunes is the
drought. This year has had the lowest precipitation on
record, following five years of low rain. The mountain
snowpack is low, which means less water for irrigation.
Reduced water flows and high concentrations of
nutrients in the water can produce lower dissolved
oxygen levels, leading to fish kills. Recreational
uses of waterbodies, such as boating on reservoirs, may
be curtailed due to lower water levels. The fate of
anadromous fisheries may become a major issue.
Over the long term, the principal issue in Idaho is a
shifting population. Over the last decade, about one-
half of Idaho's 44 counties lost population or grew
more slowly than the state as a whole. One-third of
Idaho's population now lives in a narrow band from
Boise to Ontario, Oregon.
Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) had
what can be considered a productive legislative session
in 1992. IDEQ received 35 new positions and a
groundwater quality plan was approved. In return for
the staffing increase, IDEQ has committed to developing
a plan for an environmental trust fund. This would be
a revolving fund for capital improvements. Its
adoption would eliminate the competition among
different environmental interests for general fund
money.
Oregon
In the fall of 1990, Oregon voters passed Ballot
Measure 5 to impose limits on property taxes. The new
law has led to budget reductions of 4-5% in the current
biennium. Cuts of 15-20% are forecast for the FY 93-95
biennium in light of an expected deficit of SI billion.
A recent poll places the budget deficit in context. On
April 12, 1992 The Sunday Oreqonian reported that the
biggest issues facing Oregon residents were the economy
(36%) and unemployment (29%) . Environment placed
seventh on the list, chosen by only 4% of those polled.
Other issues include the spotted owl and the salmon.
The salmon may become a bigger issue than declining
timber harvests because of its greater effects on the
economy.
Washington
At the time the Legislature convened in January,
Washington faced a budget deficit of $900 million in a
$15.7 billion budget. Executive agencies faced even
worse financial prospects because budget cuts could not
be taken from basic education or entitlement programs.
An overall general fund cut of 11.7% was imposed on
state agencies. Because the Washington Department of
Ecology (WDOE) receives its budget from 31 different
funds, the general fund cut fell disproportionately on
certain programs.
Water resources, Puget Sound, the State Environmental
Policy Act, and shorelines all heavily dependent on
the general fund saw their funding slashed. The
hazardous waste program, air quality, and oil spills,
with alternative funding sources, fared better. WDOE
has suffered a staff reduction of 29, along with cuts
in non-personnel resources.
For FY 93-95 the state faces a deficit of about $500
million (although on a bigger budget base than in
1992).
The major state-wide environmental issue may be growth
management. The Legislature has already passed a major
statute on the subject. The law requires localities to
engage in comprehensive planning, which brings them
face-to-face with responsibility for the environmental
effects of growth.
35
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Emerging Issues
Emerging Issues
36
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Emerging Issues
Emerging Issues - Problems or Opportunities?
A commonly used phrase in EPA is "our plate is full (or
over-flowing)." The burden of work required to
implement the myriad laws and regulations EPA is
charged with is sometimes overwhelming.
At the same time, however, there are many issues and
factors outside our program lines that directly
influence how well environmental protection works or
does not work in the Northwest. 'The environmental
management framework within which we operate is very
dynamic. As Region 10 works through our strategic
planning process, we need to think about and understand
our relationship with these cross-cutting issues and
opportunities.
Eight issues of change, with significant implications
for EPA, are highlighted below. Each issue is
addressed by a short paragraph to present the essence
of the issue and a few questions to think about. The
topics were selected using the following criteria:
The topic or issue has a major known or potential
impact in the Northwest over the next 5-10 years.
The issue is cross-cutting and any response by
EPA involves more than one program.
There is a potential for significant involvement
of or impact on EPA programs.
The eight issues are:
1. Endangered Species Protection;
2. Global Climate Change;
3. Natural Resource Conservation and Management;
4. Urbanization and Growth Management;
5. The Public Good vs Private Rights Debate;
6. Regulatory Burden;
7. Geographic Priorities; and
8. Sustainable Development.
1. Endangered Species Protection
This is both a current and an emerging issue.
aspects are discussed below:
Two
Salmon - How to prevent further losses and restore
depleted runs is clearly a front-page issue today.
Currently, the focus is on Snake River sockeye and some
of the Columbia River runs. Salmon runs on the Oregon
coast and in Puget Sound may well be listed in the near
future. Programs to address this issue will impact a
wide variety of economic sectors and federal and state
agency programs throughout the region. This will
likely be a "front-burner" issue in the region for at
least the next decade.
Where does this fit (or should it fit) in EPA's
strategic priorities?
Will our approach to/participation in this issue
be reactive, or targeted and anticipatory?
What role(s) for EPA will add the most value to
the overall salmon protection effort?
Other Species -There are a number of other plant and
animal species in the Northwest which are either
already listed as endangered species or are nearing
that point. While the public may not relate to them as
they do salmon, potential protection programs will
likely also have significant impacts in the region.
2. Global Climate Change
There is a strong likelihood that the emphasis on
global climate change and its implications will
increase significantly over the next 5-10 years. While
there is still no consensus on the potential directions
of change in the Northwest (warmer/cooler,
dryer/wetter, large vs small sea level rise), the
potential implications of some of. these changes are
becoming more apparent. For example, trends toward a
warmer and dryer climate would have profound impacts on
instream water quality and quantity, habitat,
agricultural practices, needs for more domestic water
supplies, etc. Any significant sea level rise will
have major impacts on coastal facilities and estuarine
systems. It is not unreasonable to anticipate
37
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile - Emerging Issues
legislation during this period requiring carbon dioxide
emission reductions. Within the region, some states
and cities are already developing programs to address
some or all of these potential impacts.
Are there things that Region 10 should be doing
to understand better the basic issues and
implications for our programs?
Where can EPA add the most value in preparing to
address this issue?
3. Natural Resource Conservation and Management
There is a growing ferment and debate within the region
about how best to conserve and manage key natural
resources (water, soil, timber, etc.). Some of this
debate is driven by issues like preserving old growth
timber and threatened salmon species. Another issue is
how to maintain the availability of these resources
over the long-term to minimize the economic disruption
associated with their over use. The conservation and
management choices for these resources will have
profound implications for ecosystem integrity and
environmental quality.
^ What are the priority issues EPA would like to
see addressed as these natural resource
management practices change?
How best can Region 10 develop an understanding
of and participate in the processes that affect
the resource management decisions?
Where can EPA add the most value to solving these
problems?
4. Urbanization/Growth Management
Significant increases in the population of the
Northwest have occurred in recent years and the trend
is likely to continue. Much of this growth is focused
in the urban and urbanizing areas (the 1-5 corridor in
Oregon and Washington, the Boise area, Spokane/Coeur
d'Alene, etc.). The list of current and potential
environmental issues associated with this trend is long
and varied. It includes loss of wetlands, increased
difficulty in maintaining air quality, degradation of
habitat and urban watersheds, waste management issues,
etc. State and local officials, operating within a
complex mix of laws and planning requirements, are
striving to find ways to accommodate anticipated
population growth while providing necessary services
and preserving ecological values and the overall
quality of life for residents. As growth continues,
working through these complex issues will be a top
priority for years to come. The results will have
significant impacts on environmental quality in the
Northwest well into the next century.
What are the priority problems that we feel need
to be addressed as part of the growth management
process?
What is the appropriate role for EPA Region 10 in
this area?
What kinds of program priorities, staff
development activities, organizational
arrangements, etc., do we need to plan for and
develop to maximize our effectiveness in working
with these growth management processes?
5. The Public Good vs Private Rights Debate
The focus of national environmental programs is
increasingly shifting from a large point-source
emphasis to addressing the effects of individual
actions and choices. Many of these involve how
individuals use their private property and other
similar vested rights (water rights, for example).
This has highlighted the long-simmering debate of
private rights vs the common good. A major backlash
has developed among those who feel that environmental
constraints on' private property are a violation of
constitutional rights and the result of environmental
extremism.
What are the primary program areas affected by
this debate and how will it likely affect the
strategic choices we make?
How do we want to respond to this debate (ignore
it as much as possible, identify ways to work
38
-------
Region W's Strategic Profile Emerging Issues
with it to find common ground, take a hard-line,
aggressive stance, etc.)?
Nhat do we need to plan for and do to improve our
ability to understand and work with those
involved in this debate?
6. Regulatory Burden
Similar to the property rights debate outlined above,
there is a growing outcry regarding the cumulative
regulatory burden on businesses and communities. From
a community perspective, the cumulative impact of
environmental and other regulatory requirements is
overwhelming the ability of many communities to
effectively address them. Businesses, from large to
small, are increasingly citing the burden of meeting
regulatory requirements as a major reason for job loss,
scaling back business development plans, etc. Anti-
regulatory groups are gaining a wide following and are
claiming the vast number of regulations as one of the
key reasons for the decline of U.S. economic power.
These cries of outrage and pleas for relief are getting
increased attention at both state and national levels.
The comprehensive command and control regulatory
approach is seen by many as having reached (or
exceeded) the limits of its effectiveness.
How can EPA Region 10 improve its ability to
understand and respond to these issues?
Are there key program areas we want to focus on
in terms of finding creative ways to provide
flexibility while still achieving environmental
goals?
If we cannot provide flexibility, how can we
enhance the capability of local governments and
business to understand and respond to our
requ irement s ?
7. Geographic Priorities
As previously stated, EPA is focusing more on
initiatives and programs in specific geographic
priority areas. These range in size from the very
large (the Great Lakes, the Gulf of Mexico) through
mid-size areas (Puget Sound, the Coeur d'Alene Basin,
a large ecosystem, etc.) to the local scale (a single
community, a small watershed). The geographic focus is
in many ways a very effective way to integrate programs
to address priority needs. Most of these geographic
efforts are long-term efforts involving several years
of work. If the trend towards identifying additional
priority areas continues, the region may end up losing
the primary benefit achieved by collective effort in a
few areas.
Strategically, how many major geographic areas do
we want to focus on?
Are there guidelines we should develop to direct
selection of any new priority areas?
How do we best work with the states to identify
and plan for long-term efforts in geographic
priority areas?
8. Sustainable Development
The concept of sustainable development is emerging as
a new paradigm for how to meet long-term environmental
and economic needs. The form that any programs and
actions in this area will take, whether within EPA or
other federal agencies, state or local government, or
business, is not yet clear. What is clear is that the
Northwest will be a national focal point in this area.
There will be a growing debate about the topic and
related issues and many opportunities for action and
leadership. Major elements of many of the topics
highlighted previously are directly related to issues
of sustainability.
From a strategic perspective, how can Region 10
position itself to be most effective in the
evolution of this new paradigm within the region?
How do we incorporate an increased focus on the
concept and what it implies for how we do
business (stronger communications with business
and economic sector, use of market incentives, a
longer range focus on impacts of our decisions,
etc.) into our strategic priorities and plans?
39
-------
Region 10's Strategic Profile
References
Budget (US EPA) Includes More Money for Enforcement,
Business and the Environment (2/92), Volume III,
Number 3
Comments on Draft Office of Enforcement Four Year
Strategic Plan, Barbara J. Lither (4/2/92)
(The) Cost of Regulation, Counted in Jobs by David
Littmann, The Wall Street Journal (4/21/92)
Don't Buy These Environmental Myths by Lynn Scarlett
"A Consumer's Guide to Environmental Myths and
Realities" (4/14/92
Enforcement Four-Year Strategic Plan: Enhanced
Environmental Enforcement for the 1990's
EPA (9/90)
Fish Production Per Drainage Area (Transparency)
EPA (2/1/91)
Green Index (1991-1992), Bob Hall and Mary Lee Kerr
Human Resources Success Stories at EPA
EPA Administration and Resources Management
(3/92)
(A) Management Review of the Superfund Program,
EPA (90 day Study)
National Water Quality Inventory (1990 Report to
Congress), EPA (Office of Water (3/23/92)
National Water Quality Inventory Shows Progress But
Significant Problems Remain (EPA 1990)
EPA Environmental News (Sean McElheny) (3/17/92)
Oregon Benchmarks (Setting Measurable Standards for
Progress), Oregon Progress Board (1/91)
OSWER's 1993-1996 Strategic Plan
EPA Don Clay, Assistant Administrator (11/90)
Overall Vulnerability (Transparency)
EPA (2/19/91)
Pocketbook Remains Issue No. 1 in Poll
The Morning News Tribune by Al Gibbs (5/16/92)
Preserving Our Future Today (EPA) Draft 3A
EPA (2/92)
Private Lands Public Rights (P-I Focus)
Seattle Post Intelligencer
Brian Boyle
Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies
For Environmental Protection, (EPA) Science
Advisory Board (9/90)
Region 10 Enforcement Accomplishments Report (FY90)
EPA Region 10 DRA (6/91)
Resource Guide to State Environmental Management
The Council of State Governments,
Steven Brown & L. Edward Garner (1988)
Seattle Times/Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Close-up (The Environment and Us) 4/12/92
Strategic Plan for Air and Radiation Programs (FY93-
FY96) DRAFT, EPA Office of Air and Radiation
(2/1/91)
Strategic Plan for EPA's Toxic Air Pollutant Program
Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC (11/29/89)
Strategic Plan (Region 10 FY92-95) Water Division
Proposals, EPA Region 10
Strategic Planning Calendar (Region 10's Proposed
FY95-98), EPA Region 10 (4/1/92)
United States of America National Report (1992)
United Nations Conference on Environment &
Development
Up Front (Voodoo Environomics) by Paul Roberts
Seattle Weekly Newspaper April 15, 1992
(The) Watershed Protection Approach (An Overview)
EPA (Office Of Water) (12/91)
40
------- |