<
33
\
^t0SrX
&
V PRO^4-0
o
2
Lll
o
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
At a Glance
2006-P-00029
August 16, 2006
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Why We Did This Review
Based on the interest of the Senate
Committee on Environment and
Public Works, we initiated a project
to research studies, articles,
publications, and reports that
address the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA's)
organizational structure. This
project is a collection of
information, not an audit, and the
information provided is strictly the
viewpoint of the authors of the
studies and not those of the Office
of Inspector General (OIG).
Background
EPA was established in 1970 to
merge key anti-pollution programs
into an environmental protection
administration as a new
independent agency of the
Executive Branch. EPA was
initially intended to be organized
around its major functions, such as
research, monitoring, and
enforcement. However, EPA was
organized along media lines, such
as air, land, and water.
Consequently, some scholars and
practitioners have called for major
reform of the Agency's fragmented
media program structure and
environmental statutes.
For further information, contact our
Office of Congressional and Public
Liaison at (202) 566-2391.
To view the full report,
click on the following link:
www.epa.aov/oia/reports/2006/
20060816-2006-P-00029.pdf
Studies Addressing EPA's Organizational Structure
What the Studies Found
The 13 studies, articles, publications, and reports we reviewed identified issues
with cross-media management, regional offices, reliable information, and
reliable science. We included reliable information and reliable science because
some authors stated that changes to EPA's organizational structure were
necessary to improve these areas.
•	Cross-Media Management. Seven studies stated that EPA might be
missing an opportunity to be more effective because EPA bases its
organizational structure on disparate environmental laws that do not
consider that problems with the various media are interrelated.
•	Regional Offices. Two studies stated that EPA's regional offices do not
adequately consider the geographic connectivity of environmental issues
that cross EPA's identified regions. Thus, the regions may not adequately
address their environmental problems.
•	Reliable Information. Ten studies stated that EPA does not always have
reliable data to support its positions on the state of the environment or to
measure effectively the success of its programs in improving the
environment.
•	Reliable Science. Two studies stated that EPA does not always utilize
reliable science to support its rules and regulations. Consequently, the
authors believe that EPA may pass regulations that may not fully address
environmental problems.
What the Studies Recommended
The authors of 9 of the 13 studies made the following recommendations:
•	EPA should seek congressional assistance in drafting a single cross-media
environmental statute, and should change its organizational structure to
address environmental issues from a cross-media approach.
•	EPA should develop a regional management system that addresses cross-
media issues over the affected regions.
•	Congress should form and fund an independent bureau of environmental
information or statistics (an addition external to EPA) to assess the state of
the environment and the success of EPA media programs.
•	EPA should evaluate its current policies governing the use of science and
consider the appointment of a science "czar" (an addition to the EPA
organizational structure) to improve the credibility of its science.

-------