Chapter 10: Environment and Natural Resources
Increase Coordination with the US Environmental Protection Agency and Related
National Associations
Summary
To protect its natural resources and environment as effectively as possible,
Texas needs greater flexibility in implementating federal regulations. Most
environmental directives are handed down from the federal government to the
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission with little room for
interpretation. Congress has requested a two-year assessment of federal
Environmental Protection Agency regulations, with particular emphasis on its
core programs and its relationship with state agencies. Texas should take
immediate steps to make its position known to federal authorities and to become
a national leader in the battle for greater regulatory flexibility.
Background
In the 1960s, leaders of the environmental movement lobbied for vigorous
federal action because they were frustrated with the lax responses by state and
local governments to industrial pollution. The initial wave of federal
environmental legislation was based on the “command-and-control”
approach, which relies on permits and regulations not only to set limits on
pollution, but to tell business and industry precisely how to go about limiting
it. While this approach achieved some undeniable successes at the time, in the
long run it also led to numerous, costly regulations that proved to be a poor
solution for the many different environmental problems faced by state and local
governments, industry, agriculture, and private
citizens.[1]http://www.rppi.org/ps253.html
A more flexible, goal-based approach to pollution control would allow states
like Texas to redirect their attention from permitting, which tells a company
how to eliminate pollution, to results—whether or not the company actually
reduces or eliminates pollution. This change would allow states, for instance,
to focus inspection efforts on companies believed to be breaking pollution laws,
rather than conducting regular inspections of large numbers of companies,
regardless of whether they have shown any signs of trouble.
In Texas, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) enforces
most environmental regulations. (The federal government can delegate most
environmental authority to a state if it establishes environmental laws and
regulations at least as strict as the federal rules.) These regulations have
almost all been handed down from the federal level, and thus TNRCC has little
flexibility in the way it must monitor and enforce them.
Recognizing the need for change, Congress has funded a two-year, $2 million
study to assess the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulations
and potential changes in its core programs and its relationship with state
agencies. The Center for the Economy and the Environment at the National Academy
of Public Administration began this study in 1998 and completed the effort in
Summer 2000.
The Academy had written two previous reports on the EPA. Setting
Priorities, Getting Results, published in 1995, reviewed EPA’s
mission, structure, and internal management systems; its relationships with
states and local governments; its use of risk analysis; and its regulatory
activities. The report’s major recommendation was that Congress, EPA, and
the states should focus on environmental results rather than procedural details.
A 1997 report, Resolving the Paradox of Environmental Protection,
evaluated EPA’s implementation of the Academy’s 1995
recommendations. It found that EPA’s efforts to change its regulatory
approach had been marginal at best and were unlikely to improve unless the
agency and Congress changed some core practices and
policies.[2]
As part of its most recent study, the Academy has found that one of the key
issues in the federal-state relationship relates to states’ limited
ability to modify the permitting processes outlined in federal guidelines. State
regulators told the Academy that they feel they must run every proposed change
by the EPA to ensure its compliance with federal requirements. Their biggest
concern is that innovative state programs will fail without clear, consistent
direction and leadership from top administrators at EPA to their agents in
program and regional offices.[3]
Texas could become nationally known in the field of environmental protection
by increasing its ability to affect federal decision-making. The Texas
Legislature could play a leadership role in this issue by asking the EPA to give
states greater flexibility in environmental regulation enforcement. Texas also
can seek more flexibility through involvement in national associations such as
the
Environmental Council of the States
(ECOS), a national nonprofit, nonpartisan association of state and territorial
environmental commissioners. ECOS’ mission is to improve the United
States’ environment by championing the role of states in environmental
management; providing for the exchange of ideas, views and experiences among
states; fostering cooperation and coordination in environmental management; and
articulating state positions on environmental issues to Congress, federal
agencies, and the public. While TNRCC is already a member of ECOS, it should
become more involved with the organization’s leadership and
committees.
Other national associations include the Association of State Drinking Water
Administrators, Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control
Administrators, Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management
Officials, and State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators.
Recommendations
A. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
should be requested, by a resolution from the Texas Legislature, to provide
maximum flexibility to the states in dealing with federal environmental programs
and testing regulatory innovations.
Such a resolution would emphasize to Congress and the EPA that Texas is in a
better position to determine how to protect its environment than the federal
government, and that the state wishes to become a leader in environmental
protection and innovation.
B. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission should expand its coordination efforts with the Environmental Council
of the States and other national associations to increase the flexibility of
federal regulation delegated to the states by the EPA.
Texas should take a leadership role in these organizations to monitor events
and legislation that could affect Texas’ environmental protection
programs, so that it can be prepared to participate in any future
discussions.
Fiscal Impact
A resolution asking the EPA to provide greater flexibility to states in
dealing with federal regulations and testing environmental regulatory
innovations would have no fiscal impact. If the EPA provides such flexibility to
the states, Texas may be able to reallocate resources to higher-priority
areas.
TNRCC’s coordination efforts with national associations could be
expanded with existing resources.
[1] Reason Public Policy
Institute, Simplify, Simplify: Alternate Permitting at the State Level,
by Christopher A. Hurtle (Los Angeles, California, January 1999), p. 1.
(). (Internet document.)
[2 ] National Academy of Public
Administration, Learning from Innovations in Environmental
Protection—Project Update: June 2000, Washington. DC, June 2000
(http://www.napawash.org/NAPA/). (Internet document.)
[3 ] National Academy of Public
Administration, Green Permits and Cooperative Environmental Agreements: A
Report on Regulatory Innovation Programs in Oregon and Washington, by the
Tulane Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (Washington, DC, June 2000),
pp. 42–45.
|
