APE | Documents

EDGI and Toxic Docs are collecting thousands of internal government documents on the environment obtained by public interest groups through the Freedom of Information Act. Search the repository at the link below.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/foia-environmental-repository-at-toxic-docs

SOURCE

FOIA Environmental Repository

CITATION

https://edgifoia.toxicdocs.org/

Federal Organization for Environmental Protection

UPLOADED 02 December 2020

This memo from the President's Advisory Council on Executive Organization (PACEO), better known as the "Ash Council',” recommended that "key anti-pollution programs be merged into an Environmental Protection Administration, a new independent agency of the Executive Branch." This new agency would be the "principal instrument" for fulfilling the president’s pledge to "repair the damage already done, and to establish new criteria to guide us in the future."

The memo claimed that the "environmental crisis" was the result of "vastly increased per capita consumption, intensified by population growth, urbanization, and changing industrial processes." The rationale presented for an independent EPA was that: 1) There was a need to consider environmental protection in a unified way; 2) There should be a separate agency for setting key standards for other agencies so that the interests of those other agencies would not affect the standards. Consolidating these functions in a single agency would also have the benefit of simplifying intergovernmental and business relationships.

The Ash Council proposed that the key functions of the agency should be: scientific research, standard-setting, monitoring, and enforcement. It also proposed reorganizing the agency around those functions as opposed to organizing offices by the source, media, location, or effects of pollution. Doing the latter would mean not recognizing the interrelated aspects of pollution and environmental problems. The memo outlined why it rejected alternative organizational plans: A combined Department of Natural Resources and Environment would, the memo said, subject standard-setting to pressures of resource development. Putting the agency in any existing department would result in one department regulating others, which would not be ideal. Nor would creating a small, strictly standard-setting agency. This would leave monitoring and enforcement fragmented across departments.

Follow the link below to read the full text.

This memo from the President's Advisory Council on Executive Organization (PACEO), better known as the "Ash Council',” recommended that "key anti-pollution programs be merged into an Environmental Protection Administration, a new independent agency of the Executive Branch." This new agency would be the "principal instrument" for fulfilling the president’s pledge to "repair the damage already done, and to establish new criteria to guide us in the future."

The memo claimed that the "environmental crisis" was the result of "vastly increased per capita consumption, intensified by population growth, urbanization, and changing industrial processes." The rationale presented for an independent EPA was that: 1) There was a need to consider environmental protection in a unified way; 2) There should be a separate agency for setting key standards for other agencies so that the interests of those other agencies would not affect the standards. Consolidating these functions in a single agency would also have the benefit of simplifying intergovernmental and business relationships.

The Ash Council proposed that the key functions of the agency should be: scientific research, standard-setting, monitoring, and enforcement. It also proposed reorganizing the agency around those functions as opposed to organizing offices by the source, media, location, or effects of pollution. Doing the latter would mean not recognizing the interrelated aspects of pollution and environmental problems. The memo outlined why it rejected alternative organizational plans: A combined Department of Natural Resources and Environment would, the memo said, subject standard-setting to pressures of resource development. Putting the agency in any existing department would result in one department regulating others, which would not be ideal. Nor would creating a small, strictly standard-setting agency. This would leave monitoring and enforcement fragmented across departments.

Follow the link below to read the full text.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/federal-organization-for-environmental-protection

SOURCE

Environmental Protection Agency

CITATION

Ash Council (PACEO), "Federal Organization for Environmental Protection," [Memo], April 29, 1970

Reorganization Plans To Establish the Environmental Protection Agency

UPLOADED 02 December 2020

President Nixon's message, which drew substantially on the Ash Council memo from April 29, 1970, noted that the government's approach to the environment had grown up piecemeal over the years. It was necessary to reorganize the federal government to effectively ensure environmental protection. To that end, the federal government needed an agency that could take a coordinated approach to pollution. That would mean abandoning anti-pollution approaches that were designed primarily along lines of media (air, water, land) or types of pollutants. The proposed new agency, the EPA, could do this, provided it had sufficient support for research, monitoring, standard-setting, enforcement and aid to states.

In proposing this new agency, the president said he was "making an exception to one of my own principles: ‘new independent agencies normally should not be created.’" There was a compelling reason for doing this for the EPA, according to Nixon however, because putting these functions in a department with other goals could unduly influence the anti-pollution functions. It would require that department to constantly make decisions affecting other departments. Nixon also noted the difference between the EPA and the Council on Environmental Quality: "the Council focuses on what our broad policies in the environmental field should be; the EPA would focus on setting and enforcing pollution control standards."

Follow the link below to read the full text.

President Nixon's message, which drew substantially on the Ash Council memo from April 29, 1970, noted that the government's approach to the environment had grown up piecemeal over the years. It was necessary to reorganize the federal government to effectively ensure environmental protection. To that end, the federal government needed an agency that could take a coordinated approach to pollution. That would mean abandoning anti-pollution approaches that were designed primarily along lines of media (air, water, land) or types of pollutants. The proposed new agency, the EPA, could do this, provided it had sufficient support for research, monitoring, standard-setting, enforcement and aid to states.

In proposing this new agency, the president said he was "making an exception to one of my own principles: ‘new independent agencies normally should not be created.’" There was a compelling reason for doing this for the EPA, according to Nixon however, because putting these functions in a department with other goals could unduly influence the anti-pollution functions. It would require that department to constantly make decisions affecting other departments. Nixon also noted the difference between the EPA and the Council on Environmental Quality: "the Council focuses on what our broad policies in the environmental field should be; the EPA would focus on setting and enforcing pollution control standards."

Follow the link below to read the full text.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/reorganization-plans

SOURCE

American Presidency Project, University of California Santa Barbara

CITATION

Richard Nixon, "Special Message to the Congress About Reorganization Plans To Establish the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration," July 9, 1970

Special Message to the Congress on Environmental Quality

UPLOADED 02 December 2020

In this speech to Congress, President Nixon argued that abuse of the natural environment had gone on too long. He called for, among other things, "stricter regulations," "expanded government action," "greater citizen involvement," and "new programs to ensure that government, industry and individuals" do their jobs and pay their share of costs. He laid out a 37-point program that would comprehensively consider pollution, waste and recreation, rather than treating these in isolation. Under the subject of "Organizing for Action," he argued that deep, widespread environmental problems could only be solved through a "full national effort embracing not only sound, coordinated planning, but also an effective follow-through that reaches into every community." He announced he had directed the Ash Council to study how best to organize the executive to deal with environmental issues.

Follow the link below to read the full text.

In this speech to Congress, President Nixon argued that abuse of the natural environment had gone on too long. He called for, among other things, "stricter regulations," "expanded government action," "greater citizen involvement," and "new programs to ensure that government, industry and individuals" do their jobs and pay their share of costs. He laid out a 37-point program that would comprehensively consider pollution, waste and recreation, rather than treating these in isolation. Under the subject of "Organizing for Action," he argued that deep, widespread environmental problems could only be solved through a "full national effort embracing not only sound, coordinated planning, but also an effective follow-through that reaches into every community." He announced he had directed the Ash Council to study how best to organize the executive to deal with environmental issues.

Follow the link below to read the full text.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/special-message-environmental-quality

SOURCE

American Presidency Project, University of California Santa Barbara

CITATION

Richard Nixon, "Special Message to the Congress on Environmental Quality," February 10, 1970

February 2021 Newsfeed

UPLOADED 30 April 2021

A People's EPA (APE)

February Newsfeed

-

February 22, 2021

EPA Changes Stand, Sides with Ethanol Industry in Court Cases (Iowa AP, February 22, 2021)

-

February 16, 2021

EPA Awards $220M Contracts for Uranium Mine Cleanup (Albuquerque Journal, February 16, 2021)

-

February 12, 2021

Biden EPA Asks D.C. Circuit to Freeze Mandate on Clean Power Plan (Bloomberg Law, February 12, 2021)

-

February 9, 2021

Biden won't Revive Obama's Clean Power Plan. So Now What? (E&E News, February 9, 2021)

EPA Alleges Political Interference by Trump Officials over Toxic Chemical (The Hill, February 9, 2021)

Mary Nichols was the Early Favorite to Run Biden’s EPA, Before She Became a ‘Casualty’(Inside Climate News, February 9, 2021)

-

February 8, 2021

EPA Nominee Regan Touts Collaboration during Senate Confirmation Hearing (The Great Lakes Now, February 8, 2021)

-

February 5, 2021

Biden’s EPA Ends Appeal, Cementing DTE Energy-Sierra Club Settlement (The Detroit News, February 5, 2021)

-

February 3, 2021

Biden’s EPA Nominee Vows ‘Urgency’ on Climate Change (Washington Post, February 3, 2021)

Sen. Duckworth Wants EPA To Install Metal Emission Monitors At Sauget Incinerator (St. Louis Public Radio, February 3, 2021)

-

February 1, 2021

Judge Throws Out Trump Rule Limiting What Science EPA Can Use (Washington Post, February 1, 2021)

A People's EPA (APE)

February Newsfeed

-

February 22, 2021

EPA Changes Stand, Sides with Ethanol Industry in Court Cases (Iowa AP, February 22, 2021)

-

February 16, 2021

EPA Awards $220M Contracts for Uranium Mine Cleanup (Albuquerque Journal, February 16, 2021)

-

February 12, 2021

Biden EPA Asks D.C. Circuit to Freeze Mandate on Clean Power Plan (Bloomberg Law, February 12, 2021)

-

February 9, 2021

Biden won't Revive Obama's Clean Power Plan. So Now What? (E&E News, February 9, 2021)

EPA Alleges Political Interference by Trump Officials over Toxic Chemical (The Hill, February 9, 2021)

Mary Nichols was the Early Favorite to Run Biden’s EPA, Before She Became a ‘Casualty’(Inside Climate News, February 9, 2021)

-

February 8, 2021

EPA Nominee Regan Touts Collaboration during Senate Confirmation Hearing (The Great Lakes Now, February 8, 2021)

-

February 5, 2021

Biden’s EPA Ends Appeal, Cementing DTE Energy-Sierra Club Settlement (The Detroit News, February 5, 2021)

-

February 3, 2021

Biden’s EPA Nominee Vows ‘Urgency’ on Climate Change (Washington Post, February 3, 2021)

Sen. Duckworth Wants EPA To Install Metal Emission Monitors At Sauget Incinerator (St. Louis Public Radio, February 3, 2021)

-

February 1, 2021

Judge Throws Out Trump Rule Limiting What Science EPA Can Use (Washington Post, February 1, 2021)

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/february-news-feed

Environmental Data & Governance Initiative, "10 Ways Biden Should Fix the EPA"

UPLOADED 13 April 2021

This article argues for the need to remake, not just restore, the EPA in order to tackle growing problems with climate exchange, environmental justice, and toxic pollutants, among other things. It offers ten fixes: 1) take quick action on climate by rejoining the Paris Climate agreement and reversing regulatory rollbacks; 2) restore EPA staff and budget; 3) keep industry out of EPA decision-making; 4) make environmental justice a priority; 5) strengthen safeguards for toxic like lead and vulnerable populations like pregnant women and children; 6) reinvigorate science by funding research, attracting scientists, and incorporating more into decision-making; 7) enforce the law vigorously; 8) better collect, integrate and make accessible data on enforcement and monitoring; 9) steward educational information better; 10) partner with the public on citizen science and public communication and education programs.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/environmental-data-governance-initiative-10-ways-biden-should-fix-the-epa

SOURCE

Vox

CITATION

Marianne Sullivan and Christopher Sellers, “10 Ways Biden Should Fix the EPA,” Vox, December 17, 2020.

Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, "Recommendations to Strengthen EPA and its Mission to Protect Public Health"

UPLOADED 05 March 2021

The PRHE collaborated with scientists and chemical policy experts to develop recommendations to improve hazard and risk assessment, and prevent harms from chemicals and pollutants. Its key recommendations were: 1) Assessing hazards and risks of chemicals using more representative definitions of susceptible populations and quantification of risks for all health effects, both cancer and noncancer, at all anticipated levels of exposure. 2) Adoption of a “science-based, validated systemic review” method for evaluation of chemical harms. 3) Ensure outcomes of environmental laws and policies result in equal protection, not environmental disparities. 4) Laws to make science free from financial conflicts of interest from industry. 5) Invest in up-to-date research and data infrastructure to better identify and prioritize harms, risks and interventions.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/recommendations-to-strengthen-epa-and-its-mission-to-protect-public-health

SOURCE

Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, University of California San Francisco

CITATION

Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, "Recommendations to Strengthen EPA and its Mission to Protect Public Health," PRHE Blog, no date.

Joe Biden for President, “The Biden Plan to Secure Environmental Justice and Equitable Economic Opportunity"

UPLOADED 13 April 2021

Presidential candidate Joe Biden’s campaign laid out a plan for environmental justice that would utilize an “All-of-Government” approach; use data and science to drive decisions; prioritize environmental justice in use of resources; and assess risks to communities from future public health emergencies. Among other things, the plan called for the creation of an Environmental and Climate Justice Division within the Department of Justice to pursue EJ-related cases in concert with the EPA’s Office of Civil Rights. The plan also included an overhaul of the EPA’s External Civil Rights Compliance Office to increase its effectiveness in mitigating impacts for frontline and fenceline communities. Along the same lines, the plan sought public input how the agency should handle Title VI (anti-discrimination) complaints. And it sought to reinstitute a private right of action to sue under Title VI. Regarding the use of data and science, the plan stated that the administration will resuscitate and expand the EPA’s EJSCREEN tool, which would assist government agencies and communities in identifying threats to communities. Expansion of data collection and dissemination would include mandated monitoring of frontline and fenceline communities and requirements that industries directly notify communities, in real time, about releases of hazardous and toxic chemicals. The plan included several other policies and programs, some especially relevant to the EPA such as regulations relating to air pollution in disadvantaged communities and water pollution from PFAS.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/joe-biden-for-president-the-biden-plan-to-secure-environmental-justice-and-equitable-economic-opportunity

SOURCE

Joe Biden for President

CITATION

Joe Biden for President, “The Biden Plan to Secure Environmental Justice and Equitable Economic Opportunity,” Joe Biden for President: Official Campaign Website, 2020.

Joe Biden for President, “The Biden Plan for A Clean Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice"

UPLOADED 13 April 2021

This plan emphasized the transition to a 100% clean energy economy; infrastructure investments to boost the economy and climate resilience; a recommitment to the Paris Agreement; action against fossil fuel polluters, especially in context of environmental justice; and not leaving workers and communities behind in the transition. The EPA’s role in this plan was noted in regard to action against fossil fuel polluters. The Biden plan stated that he would direct the DOJ to pursue criminal cases against violators, including holding corporate executive personally accountable.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/joe-biden-for-president-the-biden-plan-for-a-clean-energy-revolution-and-environmental-justice

SOURCE

Joe Biden for President

CITATION

Joe Biden for President, “The Biden Plan for A Clean Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice,” Joe Biden for President: Official Campaign Website, 2020.

Environmental Defense Fund, "With Biden declared the winner, a window opens for climate, equity and public health"

UPLOADED 05 March 2021

The EDF called not only repairing, but rebuilding the federal government’s approach to the environment. The organization outlined three priorities: 1) Policies that will allow a fast shift toward renewable energy, including making electrical vehicles and their infrastructure more available. 2) Taking responsibility for climate change, including rejoining the Paris climate agreement and rebuilding scientific staff at the EPA. 3) Protecting communities from environmental health threats, including having the EPA “fulfill its commitment” to President Clinton’s executive order on environmental justice (EO 12898). “It’s not enough to make up for four lost years, we have to rebuild an America that’s healthier and more equitable than it has ever been,” the EDF concluded.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/with-biden-declared-the-winner-a-window-opens-for-climate-equity-and-public-health

SOURCE

Environmental Defense Fund

CITATION

Fred Krupp, "With Biden declared the winner, a window opens for climate, equity and public health," EDF Voices Blog, November 8, 2020.

Environmental Protection Network, “Resetting the Course of EPA Report”

UPLOADED 14 April 2021

This extensive report, with several substantial supporting documents, from former EPA staff outlined six priorities for renewing the EPA: 1) a reaffirmation from the agency of its commitment to public health and the environment; 2) scientific and economic analysis free from political interference; 3) the incorporation of environmental justice into all aspects of the agency’s work; 4) a focus on the most significant and pervasive public health and environmental risks; 5) innovation and collaboration with other federal agencies, stakeholders and local, state and tribal governments; 6) re-establishment of public trust in the agency through demonstrated action and transparency.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/environmental-protection-network-resetting-the-course-of-epa-report

SOURCE

Environmental Protection Network

CITATION

Environmental Protection Network, “Resetting the Course of EPA Report,” Environmental Protection Network, August 2020.

Environment America & U.S. PIRG, “First Things to Fix,”

UPLOADED 14 April 2021

This report suggested five actions the Biden administration could take early on to protect the environment: 1) rejoin the Paris Climate agreement; 2) repeal the “Dirty Water Rule” (the Trump EPA’s CWA rule from 2020); 3) strengthen EPA fuel economy standards and affirm California’s authority to set emissions standards; 4) withdraw Trump draft 5-year plan on offshore drilling; and 5) restore DOE energy efficiency policy for appliances weakened by the Trump administration.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/environment-america-u-s-pirg-first-things-to-fix

SOURCE

Environment America

CITATION

Environment America & U.S. PIRG, “First Things to Fix,” Environment America Research & Policy Center and U.S. PIRG Education Fund, 2021.

Environmental Data & Governance Initiative, "Access Denied: Federal Web Governance Under the Trump Administration"

UPLOADED 14 April 2021

This report analyzed the Trump administration’s management of federal websites related to environmental regulation and made recommendations for the Biden administration moving forward. The suggestions included: 1) Creating meaningful resources to expand civic and scientific literacy. This would include building ladders of information on websites, incorporating the scientific basis for regulations on websites, and providing mechanisms for public feedback about web resources. 2) Ensuring that resources are available, discoverable and navigable. And that the public is made aware of opportunities for civic engagement. 3) Preserving public web resources. This would include an accessible archive of web resources, requirements for notice and explanation of content removal, and a database describing changes to websites.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/environmental-data-governance-association-access-denied-federal-web-governance-under-the-trump-administration

SOURCE

Environmental Data & Governance Initiative

CITATION

Gretchen Gehrke, Marcy Beck, Alejandro Paz, Amy Wilson, Eric Nost, Grace Poudrier, EDGI, "Access Denied: Federal Web Governance Under the Trump Administration," Environmental Data & Governance Initiative, February, 2021

World Resources Institute, “7 Ways the Biden Administration Can Reverse Climate Rollbacks"

UPLOADED 14 April 2021

The World Resources Institute argued that it would not be enough to simply reverse the rollbacks of the Trump administration. The lost time for action during the Trump administration and looming threats meant that the administration needs to “roll forward.” The key ways to do this, the WRI, stated were: 1) return science to the center of decision-making and elevate frontline voices; 2) establish the U.S. as a global climate leader; 3) reinstate emission standards and advance zero-emissions vehicle performance standards; 4) rescind the replacement rule for the Clean Power Plan and develop new standards; 5) reinstate and strengthen methane rules for oil and gas; 6) repeal new methane rule for low-carbon steel and cementer and set new standards; 7) set stronger efficiency standards and encourage building electrification. The recommendations noted the role of the EPA in rescinding and developing regulations and the need to better include frontline community members in decision-making processes at the EPA.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/world-resources-institute-7-ways-the-biden-administration-can-reverse-climate-rollbacks

SOURCE

World Resources Institute

CITATION

Tyler Clevenger and Dan Lashof, “7 Ways the Biden Administration Can Reverse Climate Rollbacks,” World Resources Institute, January 19, 2021.

Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, “The First 3 Things Biden’s EPA Must Do to Protect Americans from Toxic Chemicals"

UPLOADED 14 April 2021

Safer Chemicals, Health Families group was encouraged by President Biden’s initial executive orders directing EPA to review actions by the Trump administration related to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). They were also encouraged to see three items on Biden’s “Build Back Better” list that accorded with their priorities: 1) Develop a ban, or stronger protections, for methylene chloride; 2) revisit regulations related to persistent bioaccumulative toxic (PBT) chemicals to comply with TSCA; 3) reconsider chemical risks to include all conditions of use when evaluating chemicals.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/safer-chemicals-healthy-families-the-first-3-things-biden-s-epa-must-do-to-protect-americans-from-toxic-chemicals

SOURCE

Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families

CITATION

Liz Hitchcock, “The First 3 Things Biden’s EPA Must Do to Protect Americans from Toxic Chemicals,” Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families (blog), February 1, 2021.

Moms Clean Air Force, “What President Biden Should Do about Climate Change and Air Pollution"

UPLOADED 14 April 2021

Moms Clean Air Force argued that the “Biden administration must leap into the future with a bold, ambitious plan to cut climate and air pollution.” MCAF was encouraged by the early actions of the Biden administration including rejoining the Paris Climate Accord and issuing executive orders related to the restoration of the role of the federal government in environmental protection. Going forward, MCAF wanted “bold and ambitious action” from the EPA. The top priorities include: 1) restoration of science as the foundation guiding the CAA; 2) fix Trump rollbacks that threaten air quality; 3) cut pollution from cars, trucks and buses; 4) cut pollution from power generators; 5) cut methane emissions from oil and gas development; 6) properly implement the Toxic Substances Control Act; 7) reconsider regulation of the Chlorpyrifos pesticide; 8) tighten and enforce regulations of refiners and cracker plants.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/moms-clean-air-force-what-president-biden-should-do-about-climate-change-and-air-pollution

SOURCE

Moms Clean Air Force

CITATION

Moms Clean Air Force, “What President Biden Should Do about Climate Change and Air Pollution,” Accessed March 3, 2021.

Union of Concerned Scientists, “Presidential Recommendations for 2020"

UPLOADED 14 April 2021

The Union of Concerned Scientists argued that the next president after Trump needed to show leadership in restoring and strengthening the use of science in government. The UCS outlined four general areas of focus: 1) promoting science-based decision making; 2) strengthening scientific integrity; 3) enforcing transparency in decision making; 4) addressing conflicts of interest; 5) safeguarding government scientists; 6) fostering public participation in decision making; and 7) protecting democratic processes. Within these areas, the UCS identified dozens of specific policy recommendations, many of which targeted the EPA. These included ways to better include frontline communities in decision making; maintaining transparency in science at the EPA without obstructing or sidelining the use of good scientific data; and reducing the influence of industrial interests who undermine scientific decision making.

LINK TO THIS ARTICLE

https://www.apeoplesepa.org/modules/union-of-concerned-scientists-presidential-recommendations-for-2020

SOURCE

Union of Concerned Scientists

CITATION

Jacob Carter, Taryn MacKinney, Genna Reed, and Gretchen Goldman, “Presidential Recommendations for 2020,” Union of Concerned Scientists, January 29, 2020.

Primer: How Enforcement Works at the EPA

UPLOADED 18 June 2021

Part of the reason that enforcement flies under the radar is that it is complex. It is hard for even experienced journalists and policy analysts to understand the complexities of enforcement and the data on enforcement that the agency produces. In this section, we provide a brief primer on how enforcement works at the EPA..

First, it is important to understand that enforcement is the implementation of regulations and laws. When legislators pass laws, they direct administering agencies, like the EPA, to write regulations that flesh out those laws. The agency further shapes the implementation of regulations by writing guidance documents, memos and other documents that give administrators and employees more detailed directives about how to carry out the law.

Further complicating the enforcement process is the U.S. federalist system of environmental laws. Since the 1970s, the national government has passed a series of strong environmental laws, most of which are administered by the EPA, a national agency. But for most laws, the EPA can delegate authority to enforce the law to the states and tribal governments. Most states have the authorized power to enforce federal environmental laws, such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, which is why most environmental enforcement actions are undertaken by state environmental agencies. While most enforcement is, and has been, done by states, the EPA steps in to work on big or complicated cases (with help from the Justice Department), or to step in where states are not adequately enforcing laws.

The details of federally run enforcement practices vary across laws, but generally they happen as follows. The EPA assists regulated entities (businesses, municipalities, and so on) in complying with the law, while also monitoring them for violations. Monitoring may consist of information requests and self-reporting from industries, electronic data collection, and on-site inspections. The EPA also gathers tips from citizens. If it finds a violation, it may initiate an informal enforcement action, such as sending a notice of violation or a warning letter. Or, it may initiate formal enforcement actions. These are of two main types: civil cases (for violations of civil code) and criminal cases (for violations of the criminal code).

For civil violations, the EPA can pursue administrative or judicial cases. The most common enforcement actions are administrative, which entail the agency itself issuing a formal notice of violation or an order requiring compliance. There are many different categories of administrative enforcement actions, reflecting the variety of mechanisms available for compelling compliance.

Civil judicial cases are those cases pursued in court outside the EPA’s administrative apparatus. While less common than administrative cases, judicial cases are usually the most serious civil cases. The Department of Justice (DOJ) takes the lead on these cases, and so when these cases are initiated they are counted as “civil judicial referrals” to the DOJ. These cases typically end in consent decrees, which are a form of court-ordered negotiated settlement (with fines or compliance orders, or both).

Both administrative orders and court orders, including consent decrees, can impose civil penalties on violators and can require them to come into compliance. The EPA tracks the fines (penalties) levied in civil cases and estimates the compliance costs (also called “injunctive relief”) that result from orders and settlements. EPA also tracks the amount of money committed for Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs), another potential outcome of cases. SEPs require violators to fund projects to improve environmental or human health in affected communities.

Finally, in addition to civil actions (administrative and judicial) the EPA may pursue criminal enforcement actions. It undertakes these actions against the most egregious violators of environmental laws. As in civil judicial cases, the DOJ prosecutes these on behalf of the EPA, working closely with EPA criminal investigators. Criminal cases can result not just in monetary penalties but also prison time for those held responsible.