According to new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data, the Agency appears to be bringing fewer new administrative enforcement cases under the environmental statutes. The release of the data could possibly complicate the Bush administration’s efforts to win Senate confirmation for John Peter Suarez, the nominee to head EPA's enforcement office.

While Agency officials have cautioned that it may be too early to make conclusions about EPA enforcement activities for the current fiscal year, which ends on September 30, the data point to a much lower level of new administrative cases. EPA's data show that the Agency has filed just over 1,000 administrative cases in during fiscal year 2002, which started on October 1, 2001. Based on prior years’ cases, a more “typical” enforcement number might be 30 to 50 percent higher.

If the identified trend continues, it could put a new wrinkle in Bush administration efforts to win Senate confirmation for the Suarez nomination. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) already is blocking Senate Environment and Public Works Committee consideration of the nomination because of EPA's failure to provide documents she is seeking in an ongoing investigation into the slowdown of the Agency’s Superfund cleanups. Other Senators have indicated opposition to his confirmation because of other EPA issues.

At the same time, EPA's enforcement program is under significant scrutiny as congressional Democrats and environmentalists are hammering the Bush administration over its cuts in enforcement funding and the drop-off in enforcement actions. Suarez recently conceded in written responses to Democratic questions that EPA failed to meet congressionally-mandated staffing requirements for the Agency’s enforcement office, falling 170 positions short nationwide despite funding specifically earmarked to fill the positions.

The issue is a thorny one for the Bush administration because EPA has sought to shift away from a system that measures the number of enforcement actions as a gauge for the Agency's effectiveness to a system that emphasizes compliance and uses environmental indicators. At issue are cases filed under a wide range of environmental statutes, including the Clean Air Act; Clean Water Act; Superfund; Emergency Planning & Community Right to Know Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act; Resource Conservation & Recovery Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; and Toxic Substances Control Act.

One Agency official told ILMA that there appears to be a surprisingly low number of administrative complaints being referred to EPA headquarters by the regions. This could be explained as efforts to “pre-settle” cases at the regional level, but it could also reflect an enforcement slowdown.

What's your opinion on the subject? To post a letter in response to this story, click Post Letter.