- Between 1993 and 1997, there was a 50 percent decline in the number of state enforcement actions under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), according to an internal EPA evaluation reported by the group Inside EPA.
- From 1996 to 1998, state inspections declined by about 12 percent across programs, according to another EPA data obtained by Inside EPA, and 50 percent under RCRA. In addition, a number of recent audits by EPA and the General Accounting Office (GAO) found serious deficiencies in state monitoring and inspections.
- Other internal evaluations found dramatic decreases in state enforcement actions across federal environmental programs -- in some cases as much as a 75 to 95 percent drop -- over several years during the 1990s, as pointed out in an article by Clifford Rechtschaffen in the October 2000 Environmental Law Review.
- States have always played a crucial role in enforcing environmental standards, yet during the 1990s this role expanded even more dramatically as “devolution” became the vogue. Today, states are responsible for administering 75 percent of major federal environmental programs compared to 40 percent in 1993. Yet despite this core responsibility, states collected $8 million in criminal penalties during 1998, according to the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), compared to $92.8 million collected by the federal EPA. In 1999, states collected only $275,003 in criminal penalties compared to $61 million for EPA.
- A 1996 state audit found that Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality repeatedly failed to take meaningful enforcement actions against chronic and serious lawbreakers. In separate audits, EPA’s inspector general found that Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Texas repeatedly failed to take timely action against significant violators. And, according to a 1997 audit, California failed to escalate enforcement actions against repeat violators.
- Where inspections do occur, they are frequently of poor quality. According to data submitted to EPA, and reported by the Environmental Working Group, almost 42 percent of all state clean water inspections were labeled “reconnaissance” -- flyovers or drive-bys in which inspectors never even enter the facility. Needless to say, the federal EPA does not consider this type of inspection sufficient to determine compliance with pollution control laws. In some heavily industrialized states almost all clean water inspections were flyovers or drive-bys. In several states the numbers are particularly disturbing: in Delaware, 95 percent of its Clean Water Act inspections fell into this category, in Illinois 89 percent, in Pennsylvania 88 percent, and in Indiana 86 percent.
- The General Accounting Office, the research arm of Congress, advised closer EPA overseeing of state inspection programs for industrial emissions, which it found inadequate.
State Environmental Resource Center
106 East Doty Street, Suite 200 § Madison, Wisconsin 53703
Phone: 608-252-9800 § Fax: 608-252-9828
Email: info@serconline.org
106 East Doty Street, Suite 200 § Madison, Wisconsin 53703
Phone: 608-252-9800 § Fax: 608-252-9828
Email: info@serconline.org