Senate Rakes EPA Chief Over the Coals

Senate Rakes EPA Chief Over the Coals



Feb 2007 - U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Administrator Stephen Johnson rejected 
allegations Tuesday that his agency has relaxed environmental 
safeguards and favored corporate interests over those of the 
public. 
Johnson told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee 
that the Bush administration is "accelerating the pace of 
environmental protection," but his comments did little to 
satisfy Democrats who contend recent EPA decisions have 
undermined regulations that protect public health and the 
environment. 
"These EPA rollbacks have common themes," said committee Chair 
Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat. "They benefit polluters' 
bottom line and hurt our communities by allowing more 
pollution and reducing the amount of information about 
pollution available to the public." 
Boxer said EPA has gone "too long without meaningful 
oversight." 
Senator Barbara Boxer chairs the Senate Environment and Public 
Works Committee. 
"I want to send a clear signal to EPA and to this 
administration," Boxer warned. "No longer will EPA rollbacks 
quietly escape scrutiny." 
The hearing focused on six specific decisions made by the 
agency last year, including a new rule that relaxes the 
reporting requirements for companies who release toxic 
chemicals into the environment, a decision to limit the role 
of agency scientists in setting air pollution standards, and a 
controversial plan to close several EPA libraries 
Johnson told the committee that each of the topics "has been 
the subject of misinformation." 
Stephen Johnson was sworn in as the 11th Administrator of the 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on May 2, 2005. 
"Regardless of rhetoric, our environmental record is clear," 
Johnson said. "Each of the six actions or decisions that I 
have described will provide the American people with 
beneficial environmental results through efficiency, 
transparency, innovation, collaboration and the use of the 
best available science." 
But other witnesses at the hearing disagreed with the EPA 
chief, including head of natural resources division of the 
Government Accountability Office, GAO, the investigative arm 
of the U.S. Congress. 
The EPA "did not adhere to its own rulemaking guidelines" when 
it changed the reporting requirements of the Toxics Release 
Inventory, TRI, program, according to a new GAO report. 
The TRI program provides the public information about toxic 
substances released in their neighborhoods - the changes allow 
some companies to avoid reporting releases of toxic chemicals. 

"EPA may not have conducted a proper final agency review - 
this is one that seeks input from EPA's internal program and 
regional offices," said John Stephenson, GAO director of 
natural resources and the environment. 
EPA crew probes drums to determine what type of hazardous 
waste they contain. 
The EPA also failed to fully consider the "serious impacts on 
states" that rely on the information from the TRI program, 
Stephenson said. 
More than 20 states filed comments opposing the changes to the 
program. 
"This new rule will only result in denying some very important 
information to states and communities," said Senator Tom 
Carper, a Delaware Democrat. "The most troubling aspect of 
these rule changes is EPA's apparent unwillingness to listen." 

Johnson said the agency "took into account all public 
comments," adding that the changes will save companies money 
without limiting information available to the public. 
"Our focus was to make a successful program even better, to 
provide incentives to get people to reduce chemical 
emissions," Johnson said. "That is what we are trying to do." 
Senator Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, said he was 
unconvinced and would introduce legislation to reverse EPA's 
changes to the program. 
Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey 
The EPA talks about burden reduction for industry, Lautenberg 
said, "but what about the burden for families and children? We 
cannot allow these changes to stand." 
Boxer questioned why EPA decided in December to change the 
process for how it reviews and sets national clean air 
standards for pollutants like ozone and particulate matter. 
According to the Clean Air Act, the EPA is required to review 
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the 
science behind them every five years. 
Previously, EPA scientists on the Clean Air Science Advisory 
Committee reviewed drafted policy recommendations and provided 
comments prior to its release for public comment. That will no 
longer be the case – a move that Johnson said streamlines the 
process and enhances the agency's ability to meet its 
deadlines for review. 
But the move has drawn the ire of public health advocates, 
including the American Lung Association, who argue it puts 
politics above science. 
"You took the science out of the clean air rule and stuck it 
at the end of the process," Boxer said. "Nobody is fooled by 
that." 
The committee chair also questioned the EPA's reluctance to 
set a health standard for perchlorate as well as a proposal to 
remove lead from the NAAQS list, and a decision to reverse a 
policy on air toxics control. 
The air toxics proposal affects how industrial plants are 
classified for purposes of regulating hazardous pollutants. It 
would reverse a Clinton-era policy, thus allowing sources of 
pollutants formerly classified as "major sources," which are 
beholden to stricter oversight, to be considered lesser 
regulated "area sources." 
Air emissions can contain toxic pollutants. 
Under the current policy, once a facility is a major source, 
it is always to be considered a major source. 
That is unfair, according to Senator Kit Bond, a Missouri 
Republican. 
"It is like the IRS saying a salesman, making $150,000 and 
paying in the top tax bracket, [has] a bad year, making 
$35,000 the next year would have to pay the same tax," Bond 
said. "That is not an incentive to improve the environment." 
Senator James Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican, also defended 
the proposal, telling colleagues there is "much anecdotal 
evidence that suggest many plants would reduce their emissions 
of air pollution to avoid the expensive paperwork and other 
compliance costs of being treated as a major source." 
Democrats said the policy allows facilities classified as 
major sources to increase their emissions, and Lautenberg 
criticized Johnson for pursuing a policy that has drawn 
opposition from seven of the agency's 10 regional offices. 
"It doesn't look like you have much trust in the people in 
your regional offices," Lautenberg said. 
Johnson said he has not made a final decision on the proposal, 
adding that the opinions of regional officials "matter a great 
deal." 
The EPA chief also came in for sharp criticism over the 
agency's plan to modernize its library system. 
As part of its plan, EPA has closed three regional libraries – 
in Dallas, Chicago and Kansas City – as well as its 
headquarters library and another library in Washington, DC 
that focused on chemicals and pesticides. 
Boxer cited a series of internal e-mails from EPA staff 
showing that the plan is chaotic and that EPA employees had 
been ordered to throw away scientific journals. 
Johnson said he was unaware of most of the allegations in the 
emails or the agency's decision to reduce hours at some of the 
libraries, prompting Boxer to say "either you are not getting 
the information or those emails are made up." 
"They are not made up," Boxer said. 
Regarding documents destroyed from the chemical and pesticides 
library, Johnson said the decision was taken because they were 
contaminated by mold caused by a flood. 
"To my knowledge as of today we are not disposing of any 
documents," said Johnson, adding that the agency had destroyed 
some documents that were contaminated by mold caused by a 
flood in Washington, DC and other documents that "were not 
unique." 
Johnson said the goal of the library plan is to digitize the 
agency's collections and make them more available to the 
public, saving money in the process. That view was supported 
by Republicans on the panel. 
Senator James Inhofe is the Ranking Minority Member on the 
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee 
EPA's changes "have been met with some hysterical criticism," 
said Inhofe, despite ample evidence that the need for physical 
EPA libraries is declining. 
At EPA's library in Dallas, "three people walked in per month 
over the past three years," Inhofe said. "At the Region 7 
library in Denver, 20 people walked in during a seven month 
period just last year. At the Region 5 library in Chicago, 
most people who walked in were simply looking for directions. 
At the library here in Washington, EPA's own employee use has 
dropped 71 percent over the past two years. It's no wonder 
these libraries were closed." 
Inhofe also questioned the relevancy of some items in the EPA 
libraries, asking the EPA chief how many copies of Dr. Seuss's 
book "The Lorax" the agency owns. 
"Nine," Johnson replied. 
Inhofe continued along this theme and had Johnson confirm that 
EPA libraries also offer the novel "Memoirs of a Geisha," a 
1983 computer software guide, a book titled ""Fat Chicks Rule: 
How to Survive in a Thin-centric World" and several other 
titles. 
Boxer called the exchange between Inhofe and Johnson "very 
entertaining," but said it did little to relieve her concern 
about the library plan. 
"You're reading those notes very well, but you're unaware of 
what's happening in the agency," Boxer said. 
"I am amazed the administrator of the EPA would know what 
books are in the libraries," Boxer added. "While we now know 
that you can get a Dr. Seuss book, unfortunately, according to 
your own staff in one of the libraries 600 to 700 linear feet 
of the chemical library collection was discarded." 
Leslie Burger, president of the American Library Association, 
told the panel her organization is concerned that the EPA's 
plan can at best be "described as convoluted and complicated." 

Burger said, "We are concerned that years of research and 
study about the environment could be lost forever."

---