Bureau of Land Management

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bureau of Land Management

Bureau of Land Management Triangle
Flag of the Bureau of Land Management
Agency overview
Formed	1946
Preceding agencies	U.S. Grazing Service General Land Office
Jurisdiction	United States federal government
Headquarters	Main Interior Building 1849 C Street NW Room 5665, Washington, D.C., U.S. 20240
Employees	11,621 Permanent and 30,860 Volunteer (FY 2012)
Annual budget	$1,162,000,000 (FY 2014 operating)
Agency executive	Michael Nedd, Director (Acting)
Parent agency	U.S. Department of the Interior
Website	blm.gov

Horses crossing a plain near the Simpson Park Wilderness Study Area in central Nevada, managed by the Battle Mountain BLM Field Office

 

Snow-covered cliffs of Snake River Canyon, Idaho, managed by the Boise District of the BLM

 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is an agency within the United States Department of the Interior that administers more than 247.3 million acres (1,001,000 km²) of public lands in the United States which constitutes one eighth of the landmass of the country. President Harry S. Truman created the BLM in 1946 by combining two existing agencies: the General Land Office and the Grazing Service. The agency manages the federal government's nearly 700 million acres (2,800,000 km²) of subsurface mineral estate located beneath federal, state and private lands severed from their surface rights by the Homestead Act of 1862. Most BLM public lands are located in these 12 western states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming.

This map shows land owned by different federal government agencies. The yellow represents the Bureau of Land Management's holdings.

 

The mission of the BLM is "to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations." Originally BLM holdings were described as "land nobody wanted" because homesteaders had passed them by. All the same, ranchers hold nearly 18,000 permits and leases for livestock grazing on 155 million acres (630,000 km²) of BLM public lands. The agency manages 221 wilderness areas, 27 national monuments and some 636 other protected areas as part of the National Conservation Lands (formerly known as the National Landscape Conservation System), totaling about 36 million acres (150,000 km²). In addition the National Conservation Lands include nearly 2,400 miles of Wild and Scenic Rivers, and nearly 6,000 miles of National Scenic and Historic Trails. There are more than 63,000 oil and gas wells on BLM public lands. Total energy leases generated approximately $5.4 billion in 2013, an amount divided among the Treasury, the states, and Native American groups.

History

The BLM's roots go back to the Land Ordinance of 1785 and the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. These laws provided for the survey and settlement of the lands that the original 13 colonies ceded to the federal government after the American Revolution. As additional lands were acquired by the United States from Spain, France and other countries, the United States Congress directed that they be explored, surveyed, and made available for settlement. During the Revolutionary War, military bounty land was promised to soldiers who fought for the colonies. After the war, the Treaty of Paris of 1783, signed by the United States, England, France, and Spain, ceded territory to the United States. In the 1780s, other states relinquished their own claims to land in modern-day Ohio. By this time, the United States needed revenue to function. Land was sold so that the government would have money to survive. In order to sell the land, surveys needed to be conducted. The Land Ordinance of 1785 instructed a geographer to oversee this work as undertaken by a group of surveyors. The first years of surveying were completed by trial and error; once the territory of Ohio had been surveyed, a modern public land survey system had been developed. In 1812, Congress established the General Land Office as part of the Department of the Treasury to oversee the disposition of these federal lands. By the early 1800s, promised bounty land claims were finally fulfilled.

Over the years, other bounty land and homestead laws were enacted to dispose of federal land. Several different types of patents existed. These include cash entry, credit, homestead, Indian, military warrants, mineral certificates, private land claims, railroads, state selections, swamps, town sites, and town lots. A system of local land offices spread throughout the territories, patenting land that was surveyed via the corresponding Office of the Surveyor General of a particular territory. This pattern gradually spread across the entire United States. The laws that spurred this system with the exception of the General Mining Law of 1872 and the Desert Land Act of 1877 have since been repealed or superseded.

In the early 20th century, Congress took additional steps toward recognizing the value of the assets on public lands and directed the Executive Branch to manage activities on the remaining public lands. The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 allowed leasing, exploration, and production of selected commodities, such as coal, oil, gas, and sodium to take place on public lands. The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 established the United States Grazing Service to manage the public rangelands by establishment of advisory boards that set grazing fees. The Oregon and California Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act of 1937, commonly referred as the O&C Act, required sustained yield management of the timberlands in western Oregon.

In 1946, the Grazing Service was merged with the General Land Office to form the Bureau of Land Management within the Department of the Interior. It took several years for this new agency to integrate and reorganize. In the end, the Bureau of Land Management became less focused on land disposal and more focused on the long term management and preservation of the land. The agency achieved its current form by combining offices in the western states and creating a corresponding office for lands both east of and alongside the Mississippi River. As a matter of course, the BLM's emphasis fell on activities in the western states as most of the mining, land sales, and federally owned areas are located west of the Mississippi.

BLM personnel on the ground have typically been oriented toward local interests, while bureau management in Washington are led by presidential guidance. By means of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Congress created a more unified bureau mission and recognized the value of the remaining public lands by declaring that these lands would remain in public ownership. The law directed that these lands be managed with a view toward "multiple use" defined as "management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people."

Since the Reagan years of the 1980s, Republicans have often given priority to local control and to grazing, mining and petroleum production, while Democrats have more often emphasized environmental concerns even when granting mining and drilling leases. In September 1996, then President Bill Clinton used his authority under the Antiquities Act to establish the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in southern Utah, the first of now 20 national monuments established on BLM lands and managed by the agency. The establishment of Grand Staircase-Escalante foreshadowed later creation of the BLM's National Landscape Conservation System in 2000. Use of the Antiquities Act authority, to the extent it effectively scuttled a coal mine to have been operated by Andalex Resources, delighted recreation and conservation enthusiasts but set up larger confrontations with state and local authorities.

BLM programs

Most of the public lands held by the Bureau of Land Management are located in the western states.

• Grazing. The BLM manages livestock grazing on nearly 155 million acres (630,000 km²) million acres under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934. The agency has granted more than 18,000 permits and leases to ranchers who graze their livestock, mostly cattle and sheep, at least part of the year on BLM public lands. Permits and leases generally cover a 10-year period and are renewable if the BLM determines that the terms and conditions of the expiring permit or lease are being met. The federal grazing fee is adjusted annually and is calculated using a formula originally set by Congress in the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978. Under this formula, the grazing fee cannot fall below $1.35 per animal unit month (AUM), nor can any fee increase or decrease exceed 25 percent of the previous year's level. The grazing fee for 2014 was set at $1.35 per AUM, the same level as for 2013. Over time there has been a gradual decrease in the amount of grazing that takes place on BLM-managed land. Grazing on public lands has declined from 18.2 million AUMs in 1954 to 7.9 million AUMs in 2013.
• Mining. Domestic production from over 63,000 Federal "onshore" oil and gas wells on BLM lands accounts for 11 percent of the natural gas supply and five percent of the oil supply in the United States. BLM has on record a total of 290,000 mining claims under the General Mining Law of 1872. The BLM supports an all of the above energy approach, which includes oil and gas, coal, strategic minerals, and renewable energy resources such as wind, geothermal and solar—all of which may be developed on public lands and subject to free markets. This approach strengthens American energy security, supports job creation, and strengthens America's energy infrastructure. The BLM is also taking steps to make energy development on public lands easier by reviewing and streamlining it's business processes to serve industry and the American public. Even under the current administration's America first and energy independence the total mining claims on lands owned by the BLM has decreased while also the amount of rejected claims has increased. too put some context on this, the BLM oversees over 3.8 million mining claims. However, approximately 89% are closed mines with just over 10% of claims still being active. Of these active claims Nevada currently has the most at 203,705. The next closest state is California with 49,259.
• Coal leases. The BLM holds the coal mineral estate to more than 570 million acres (2,300,000 km²) where the owner of the surface is the federal government, a state or local government, or a private entity. As of 2013, the BLM had competitively granted 309 leases for coal mining to 474,252 acres (191,923 ha), an increase of 13,487 acres (5,458 ha) or nearly 3% increase in land subject to coal production over ten years' time.
• Recreation. The BLM administers 205,498 miles (330,717 km) of fishable streams, 2.2 million acres (8,900 km²) of lakes and reservoirs, 6,600 miles (10,600 km) of floatable rivers, over 500 boating access points, 69 National Back Country Byways, and 300 Watchable Wildlife sites. The agency also manages 4,500 miles (7,200 km) of National Scenic, National Historic and National Recreation Trails, as well as thousands of miles of multiple use trails used by motorcyclists, hikers, equestrians, and mountain bikers. In 2013, BLM lands received an estimated 61.7 million recreational visitors. Over 99% of BLM-managed lands are open to hunting, recreational shooting opportunities, and fishing.
• California Desert Conservation Area. The California Desert Conservation Area covers 25 million acres (100,000 km²) of land in southern California designated by Congress in 1976 by means of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. BLM is charged with administering about 10 million acres (40,000 km²) of this fragile area with its potential for multiple uses in mind.
• Timberlands. The Bureau manages 55 million acres (220,000 km²) of forests and woodlands, including 11 million acres (45,000 km²) of commercial forest and 44 million acres (180,000 km²) of woodlands in 11 western states and Alaska.53 million acres (210,000 km²) are productive forests and woodlands on public domain lands and 2.4 million acres (9,700 km²) are on O&C lands in western Oregon.

Calm Before the Storm: Fatigued BLM Firefighters taking a break after a fire in Oregon in 2008

• Firefighting. Well in excess of 3,000 full-time equivalent firefighting personnel work for BLM. The agency fought 2,573 fires on BLM-managed lands in fiscal year 2013.
• Mineral rights on Indian lands. As part of its trust responsibilities, the BLM provides technical advice for minerals operations on 56 million acres (230,000 km²) of Indian lands.
• Leasing and Land Management of Split Estates. A split estate is similar to the broad form deeds used, starting in the early 1900s. It is a separation of mineral rights and surface rights on a property. The BLM manages split estates, but only in cases when the "surface rights are privately owned and the rights to the minerals are held by the Federal Government."
• Cadastral surveys. The BLM is the official record keeper for over 200 years' worth of cadastral survey records and plats as part of the Public Land Survey System. In addition, the Bureau still completes numerous new surveys each year, mostly in Alaska, and conducts resurveys to restore obliterated or lost original surveys.
• Abandoned mines. BLM maintains an inventory of known abandoned mines on the lands it manages. As of April 2014, the inventory contained nearly 46,000 sites and 85,000 other features. Approximately 23% of the sites had either been remediated, had reclamation actions planned or underway, or did not require further action. The remaining sites require further investigation. A 2008 Inspector General report alleges that BLM has for decades neglected the dangers represented by these abandoned mines.
• Energy corridors. Approximately 5,000 miles (8,000 km) of energy corridors for pipelines and transmission lines are located on BLM-managed lands.
• Helium. BLM operates the National Helium Reserve near Amarillo, Texas, a program begun in 1925 during the time of the Zeppelin Wars. Though the reserve had been set to be moved to private hands, it remains subject to oversight of the BLM under the provisions of the unanimously-passed Responsible Helium Administration and Stewardship Act of 2013.
• Revenue and fees. The BLM produces significant revenue for the United States budget. In 2009, public lands were expected to generate an estimated $6.2 billion in revenues, mostly from energy development. Nearly 43.5 percent of these funds are provided directly to states and counties to support roads, schools, and other community needs.

National Landscape Conservation System

Established in 2000, the National Landscape Conservation System is overseen by the BLM. The National Landscape Conservation System lands constitute just about 12% of the lands managed by the BLM. Congress passed Title II of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11) to make the system a permanent part of the public lands protection system in the United States. By designating these areas for conservation, the law directed the BLM to ensure these places are protected for future generations, similar to national parks and wildlife refuges.

Category	Unit Type	Number	BLM acres	BLM miles
National Conservation Lands	National Monuments	27	5,590,135 acres (22,622.47 km2)
National Conservation Lands	National Conservation Areas	16	3,671,519 acres (14,858.11 km2)
National Conservation Lands	Areas Similar to National Conservation Areas	5	436,164 acres (1,765.09 km2)
Wilderness	Wilderness Areas	221	8,711,938 acres (35,255.96 km2)
Wilderness	Wilderness Study Areas	528	12,760,472 acres (51,639.80 km2)
National Wild and Scenic Rivers	National Wild and Scenic Rivers	69	1,001,353 acres (4,052.33 km2)	2,423 miles (3,899 km)
National Trails System	National Historic Trails	13		5,078 miles (8,172 km)
National Trails System	National Scenic Trails	5		683 miles (1,099 km)
	Totals	877	About 36 million acres (150,000 km2) (some units overlap)	8,184 miles (13,171 km)

Source: BLM Resources and Statistics

Law enforcement and security

Lightning-sparked wildfires are frequent occurrences on BLM land in Nevada.

 

The BLM, through its Office of Law Enforcement & Security, functions as a federal law enforcement agency of the United States Government. BLM law enforcement rangers and special agents receive their training through Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC). Full-time staffing for these positions approaches 300.

Uniformed rangers enforce laws and regulations governing BLM lands and resources. As part of that mission, these BLM rangers carry firearms, defensive equipment, make arrests, execute search warrants, complete reports and testify in court. They seek to establish a regular and recurring presence on a vast amount of public lands, roads and recreation sites. They focus on the protection of natural and cultural resources, other BLM employees and visitors. Given the many locations of BLM public lands, these rangers use canines, helicopters, snowmobiles, dirt bikes and boats to perform their duties.

By contrast BLM special agents are criminal investigators who plan and conduct investigations concerning possible violations of criminal and administrative provisions of the BLM and other statutes under the United States Code. Special agents are normally plain clothes officers who carry concealed firearms, and other defensive equipment, make arrests, carry out complex criminal investigations, present cases for prosecution to local United States Attorneys and prepare investigative reports. Criminal investigators occasionally conduct internal and civil claim investigations.

Wild horse and burro program

Mustangs run across Tule Valley, Utah

 

The BLM manages free-roaming horses and burros on public lands in ten western states. Though they are feral, the agency is obligated to protect them under the Wild and Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (WFRHBA). As the horses have few natural predators, populations have grown substantially. WFRHBA as enacted provides for the removal of excess animals; the destruction of lame, old, or sick animals; the private placement or adoption of excess animals; and even the destruction of healthy animals if range management required it. In fact, the destruction of healthy or unhealthy horses has almost never occurred. Pursuant to the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978, the BLM has established 179 "herd management areas" (HMAs) covering 31.6 million acres (128,000 km²) acres where feral horses can be found on federal lands.

In 1973, BLM began a pilot project on the Pryor Mountains Wild Horse Range known as the Adopt-A-Horse initiative. The program took advantage of provisions in the WFRHBA to allow private "qualified" individuals to "adopt" as many horses as they wanted if they could show that they could provide adequate care for the animals. At the time, title to the horses remained permanently with the federal government. The pilot project was so successful that BLM allowed it to go nationwide in 1976. The Adopt-a-Horse program quickly became the primary method of removing excess feral horses from BLM land given the lack of other viable methods. The BLM also uses limited amounts of contraceptives in the herd, in the form of PZP vaccinations; advocates say that additional use of these vaccines would help to diminish the excess number of horses currently under BLM management.

Despite the early successes of the adoption program, the BLM has struggled to maintain acceptable herd levels, as without natural predators, herd sizes can double every four years. As of 2014, there were more than 49,000 horses and burros on BLM-managed land, exceeding the BLM's estimated "appropriate management level" (AML) by almost 22,500.

The Bureau of Land Management has implemented several programs and has developed partnerships as part of their management plan for preserving wild burros and horses in the United States. There are several herds of horses and burros roaming free on 26.9 million acres of range spread out in ten western states. It is essential to maintain a balance that keeps herd management land and animal population healthy. Some programs and partnerships include the Mustang Heritage Foundation, U.S. Border Patrol, Idaho 4H, Napa Mustang Days and Little Book Cliffs Darting Team. These partnerships help with adoption and animal population as well as education and raising awareness about wild horses and burros.

Renewable energy

Aerial photograph of Ivanpah Solar Power Facility located on BLM-managed land in the Mojave Desert

 

In 2009, BLM opened Renewable Energy Coordination Offices in order to approve and oversee wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal projects on BLM-managed lands. The offices were located in the four states where energy companies had shown the greatest interest in renewable energy development: Arizona, California, Nevada, and Wyoming.

• Solar energy. In 2010, BLM approved the first utility-scale solar energy projects on public land. As of 2014, 70 solar energy projects covering 560,000 acres (2,300 km²) had been proposed on public lands managed by BLM primarily located in Arizona, California, and Nevada. To date, it has approved 29 projects that have the potential to generate 8,786 megawatts of renewable energy or enough energy to power roughly 2.6 million homes. The projects range in size from a 45-megawatt photovoltaic system on 422 acres (171 ha) to a 1,000-megawatt parabolic trough system on 7,025 acres (2,843 ha).
• Wind energy. BLM manages 20.6 million acres (83,000 km²) of public lands with wind potential. It has authorized 39 wind energy development projects with a total approved capacity of 5,557 megawatts or enough to supply the power needs of over 1.5 million homes. In addition, BLM has authorized over 100 wind energy testing sites.
• Geothermal energy. BLM manages 59 geothermal leases in producing status, with a total capacity of 1,500 megawatts. This amounts to over 40 percent of the geothermal energy capacity in the United States.
• Biomass and bioenergy. Its large portfolio of productive timberlands leaves BLM with woody biomass among its line of forest products. The biomass is composed of "smaller diameter materials" and other debris that result from timber production and forest management. Though the use of these materials as a renewable resource is nascent, the agency is engaged in pilot projects to increase the use of its biomass supplies in bioenergy programs.

Environmental policy of the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The environmental policy of the United States is a federal governmental action to regulate activities that have an environmental impact in the United States. The goal of environmental policy is to protect the environment for future generations while interfering as little as possible with the efficiency of commerce or the liberty of the people and to limit inequity in who is burdened with environmental costs. As his first official act bringing in the 1970s, President Richard Nixon signed the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) into law on New Years Day, 1970. Also in the same year, American starts to celebrate the first earth day, which is "the big bang of U.S. environmental politics, launching the country on a sweeping social learning curve about ecological management never before experienced or attempted in any other nation"(RosenBaum, 2016, p. 9). NEPA established a comprehensive US national environmental policy and created the requirement to prepare an environmental impact statement for “major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment.” Eccleston has called NEPA, the world's “environmental Magna Carta”.

 

As a result of the environmental movement in the United States, it continued to mature in the 1970s during which several environmental laws were passed, regulating air and water pollution and forming the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Partially due to the high costs associated with these regulations, there has been a backlash from business and politically conservative interests, limiting increases to environmental regulatory budgets and slowing efforts to protect the environment. Since the 1970s, despite frequent legislative gridlock, there have been significant achievements in environmental regulation, including increases in air and water quality and, to a lesser degree, control of hazardous waste. Due to increasing scientific consensus on global warming and political pressure from environmental groups, modifications to the United States energy policy and limits on greenhouse gas have been suggested.

As established under NEPA, the US was the first nation in the world to introduce the concept of preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate the alternatives and impacts of proposed federal actions. The EIS is designed to forge federal policies, programs, projects, and plans. A large percentage of nations around the world have adopted provisions that emulate the American EIS process.

Policy tools

The two major policy tools for protecting the environment are rules and inducements. The United States has chosen to use rules, primarily through regulation. Such regulations can come in the form of design standards and performance standards. Performance standards specify emission levels and let those covered by the rules decide how those levels will be met. Design standards specify exactly how performance standards will be met.

Alternatively, the government can use inducements, or "market reform". Inducements are rewards and punishments used to influence people or groups. The two major types of market reforms are charge systems, such as emissions taxes, and "tradable permit systems". One type of tradable permit system is an "auction of pollution rights" in which the amount of allowed pollution is set and divided into units, which are then auctioned, giving environmental organizations the opportunity to buy the units to create a cleaner environment than originally planned. Such a plan was implemented for SO₂ emissions in the 1990 Acid Rain Program and has been undertaken for greenhouse gases on a regional scale as a way to mitigate global warming.

Power delegation and policy jurisdiction

Executive branch

Governmental authority on environmental issues in the United States is highly fragmented. While the EPA is the most comprehensive environmental agency, its authority on these matters is not absolute. Virtually all of the executive branch's departments have some area of environmental authority. This contributes somewhat to the cost and questionable efficacy of the United States' environmental regulation. 

As chief execute, the President plays an important role in environmental policy. President's such as Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and Richard Nixon have acted as "bully pulpit" to gain support for environmental legislation. Their role as chief diplomat enables them to enact international agreements with environmental stipulations. Ronald Reagan signed the Montreal Protocol, Obama was a leader in negotiating the Paris agreement and the Bush administration rejected the Kyoto protocol. Presidents can use their soft power to draw attention to environmental issues and set broad administrative goals. They can veto legislation and, through executive orders, regulate administrative behavior.

Federal Agency	Environmental Responsibilities
White House Office	Overall policy, Agency coordination
Office of Management and Budget	Budget, Agency coordination and management
Council on Environmental Quality	Environmental policy, Agency coordination, Environmental impact statements
Department of Health and Human Services	Health
Environmental Protection Agency	Air and water pollution, Solid waste, Radiation, Pesticides, Noise, Toxic substances
Department of Justice	Environmental litigation
Department of the Interior	Public lands, Energy, Minerals, National parks
Department of Agriculture	Forestry, Soil, Conservation
Department of Defense	Civil works construction, Dredge and fill permits, Pollution control from defense facilities
Nuclear Regulatory Commission	License and regulate nuclear power
Department of State	International environment
Department of Commerce	Oceanic and atmospheric monitoring and research
Department of Labor	Occupational health
Department of Housing and Urban Development	Housing, Urban parks, Urban planning
Department of Transportation	Mass transit, Roads, Aircraft noise, Oil pollution
Department of Energy	Energy policy coordination, Petroleum allocation research and development
Tennessee Valley Authority	Electric power generation
Federal Emergency Management Agency	Cleaning up the natural disasters caused by climate change
Department of Homeland Security|United States Coast Guard	Maritime and environmental stewardship, National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC)

Legislative branch

Fragmentation within the executive branch is duplicated in Congress and within the states. In other words, congress shares authority with the president for environmental federal policy. Congress can have a major impact on policy through legislative and oversight hearings. They also have the ability to influence policy by publishing studies and reports, making speeches and introducing legislation. The EPA is the concern of almost two-thirds of the House of Representatives' standing committees and subcommittees and a similar percentage in the Senate. Some seventy committees and subcommittees control water quality policy, for example. Such fragmentation creates both opportunities and problems. While such a variety of committees provide enormous access for environmentalist and industry groups to lobby, the division of tasks means that no one committee or agency looks at environmental problems as a whole. Building policy consensus in Congress is rarely easy because of the diversity of interests and of members whose concerns need to be met.

Senate and House committee jurisdictions

Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry	Pesticides
Committee on Appropriations	Appropriations
Committee on the Budget	Budget
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation	Oceans, Research and Development, Radiation, Toxics
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources	Synthetic fuels, Conservation oversight, Energy budget, Mines, Oil shale, Outer continental shelf, Strip mining
Committee on Environment and Public Works	Air, Drinking water, Noise, Nuclear energy, Ocean dumping, Outer continental shelf, Research and development, Solid waste, Toxics, Water
Committee on Foreign Relations	International environment
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs	Interagency subject area
Committee on Labor and Human Resources	Public health
Committee on Small Business	Impact of environmental regulations on small business
House
Committee on Agriculture	Pesticides
Committee on Appropriations	Appropriations
Committee on the Budget	Budget
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform	Interagency subject area
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs	Synthetic fuels, Conservation oversight, Energy budget, Mines, Oil shale, Outer continental shelf, Radiation (Nuclear Regulatory Commission oversight), Strip mining
Committee on Energy and Commerce	Air, Drinking water, Noise, Radiation, Solid waste, Toxics
Committee on Natural Resources	Ocean dumping
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure	Noise, Water pollution, Water resources
Committee on Science and Technology	Research and Development
Committee on Small Business	Impact of environmental regulations on small business

History

Major Environmental Legislation

Year	Law	Year	Law
1899	Refuse Act	1975	Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
1918	Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918	1976	Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
1948	Federal Water Pollution Control Act	1976	Solid Waste Disposal Act
1955	Air Pollution Control Act	1976	Toxic Substances Control Act
1963	Clean Air Act (1963)	1977	Clean Air Act Amendments
1965	Solid Waste Disposal Act	1977	Clean Water Act Amendments
1965	Water Quality Act	1980	CERCLA (Superfund)
1967	Air Quality Act	1984	Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
1969	National Environmental Policy Act	1986	Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
1970	Clean Air Act (1970)	1986	Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
1970	Occupational Safety and Health Act	1986	Emergency Wetlands Resources Act
1972	Consumer Product Safety Act	1987	Water Quality Act
1972	Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act	1990	Oil Pollution Act
1972	Clean Water Act	1990	Clean Air Act (1990)
1972	Noise Control Act	1993	North American Free Trade Agreement
1973	Endangered Species Act	1996	Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
1974	Safe Drinking Water Act	2003	Healthy Forests Initiative

There are many more environmental laws in the United States, both at the federal and state levels. The common law of property and takings also play an important role in environmental issues. In addition, the law of standing, relating to who has a right to bring a lawsuit, is an important issue in environmental law in the United States.

Origins of the environmental movement

The history of environmental law in the United States can be traced back to early roots in common law doctrines, for example, the law of nuisance and the public trust doctrine. The first statutory environmental law was the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, which has been largely superseded by the Clean Water Act. However, most current major environmental statutes, such as the federal statutes listed above, were passed during the modern environmental movement spanning the late 1960s through the early 1980s. Prior to the passage of these statutes, most federal environmental laws were not nearly as comprehensive.

The precursor of the modern environmental movement in the United States was the early 20th century conservation movement, associated with President Theodore Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot. During this period, the U.S. Forest Service was formed and public concern for consumer protection began, epitomized by the publication of The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. The modern environmental movement was inspired in part by the publication of Rachel Carson's controversial 1962 book Silent Spring, which pointed out the perils of pesticide use and rallied concern for the environment in general. Carson argued that nature deserved human protection and referred to pesticides as the atomic bomb for insects. She stated that these pesticides would cycle through the environment hurting humans and nature and thought they should be used wisely. Carson played a big role in environment activism that was later to come. Along with critiques of the misuse of technology from figures such as William Ophuls, Barry Commoner and Garrett Hardin, the ineffectiveness and criticism of the 1960s-era Clean Air and Clean Water acts gave a burgeoning momentum to the environmental movement.

In addition to growing public support, structural changes such as Congressional reform and new access to the courts gave environmentalists new power to enact change. The movement that formed held three key values: ecology, health, and sustainability. These values—that we depend and are interconnected with the environment, that insults to the environment can affect our health, and that we should limit our dependence on non-renewable resources—along with a uniquely sympathetic president and Congress, led to great environmental policy change in the 1970s. In 1972 the Club of Rome report came out which was a scholarly effort to gauge the severity of the environmental problem. A team of researchers concluded with one of the most alarming appraisals of the time and set off widespread debates over the findings, its methods, and policy implications. The model was built mainly to investigate major trends of global concerns such as accelerating industrialization, rapid population growth, widespread malnutrition, depletion of nonrenewable resources and a deteriorating environment. They concluded that if the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion remains unchanged than the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years.

One lawsuit that has been widely recognized as one of the earliest environmental cases is Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Federal Power Commission, decided in 1965 by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, prior to passage of the major federal environmental statutes. The case helped halt the construction of a power plant on Storm King Mountain in New York State. The case has been described as giving birth to environmental litigation and helping create the legal doctrine of standing to bring environmental claims. The Scenic Hudson case also is said to have helped inspire the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act, and the creation of such environmental advocacy groups as the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The Nixon Administration and beginning of the Environmental Decade (1970–1980)

On January 1, 1970, President Richard Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), beginning the 1970s as the environmental decade. NEPA created the Council on Environmental Quality which oversaw the environmental impact of federal actions. Later in the year, Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which consolidated environmental programs from other agencies into a single entity. The legislation during this period concerned primarily first-generation pollutants in the air, surface water, groundwater, and solid waste disposal. Air pollutants such as particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, and ozone were put under regulation, and issues such as acid rain, visibility, and global warming were also concerns. In surface water, the pollutants of concern were conventional pollutants (bacteria, biochemical oxygen demand and suspended solids), dissolved solids, nutrients, and toxic substances such as metals and pesticides. For groundwater, the pollutants included biological contaminants, inorganic and organic substances, and radionuclides. Finally, solid waste contaminants from agriculture, industry, mining, municipalities, and other sectors were put under control. 

The Clean Air Act amendments of 1970 and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act amendments of 1972 moved environmental concerns in a new direction.

The new CAA standards that were to be promulgated were unattainable with existing technology—they were technology-forcing. The standards that the EPA put into place called mainly for state implementation. Each state prepared state implementation plans (SIPs), requiring EPA approval. The 1970 CAA also enacted deadlines and penalties for automobile emission standards in new cars, resulting in the development and adoption of catalytic converters and greatly reducing automobile pollution. 

For wastewater, each discharging facility was required to obtain a permit, and EPA began to issue new federal standards ("effluent guidelines") that required industries to use the "best available technology" for treating their wastes. Congress also established a massive public works program to assist in the construction of sewage treatment plants for municipalities, and most plants were required to meet secondary treatment standards.

The Reagan Administration (1981–1989)

Ronald Reagan entered office skeptical of environmental protection laws and campaigned against harsh government regulation with the environmental arena in mind. As Reagan entered office, he was given two transition reports – one called "Mandate for Leadership" from the Heritage Foundation and one called "Avoiding a GOP Economic Dunkirk" from conservative Congressman David Stockman(R-MI) – that called for drastic changes in environmental regulation, primarily through administrative changes. In pursuit of this strategy, Reagan gradually reduced the EPA's budget by 30% through the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, cut the number of EPA employees, and appointed people at key agency positions who would enthusiastically follow the administration line. Appointees such as Anne Burford at the EPA and James G. Watt at the Department of the Interior were overtly hostile to environmental protection. Through his appointments, Reagan changed the operations of environmental protection from stiff regulation to "cooperative regulation."

Under this administrative strategy of regulatory relief, environmental laws were written and interpreted more favorably for industry interests. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was also given new powers to write regulations. During the first Reagan administration, the OMB was given the power to require a favorable cost-benefit analysis of any regulation before it could be implemented. This was used to delay new regulations, and changes that resulted in regulatory relief often had this requirement waived. At the beginning of the second Reagan administration, the OMB was given more power- all regulatory agencies were required to submit proposals each year for all major environmental regulation- allowing it to reduce regulatory efforts before such proposed regulations became public.

Within few months from entering the White House, Reagan removed the solar panels that his predecessor Carter had installed on the roof of the White House’s West Wing. "Reagan's political philosophy viewed the free market as the best arbiter of what was good for the country. Corporate self-interest, he felt, would steer the country in the right direction," the author Natalie Goldstein wrote in "Global Warming.". In October 2010, president Obama planned to reintroduce the solar panels on the White House roofs, after 31 years.

The George H. W. Bush Administration (1989–1993)

Environmental policy during the first Bush administration contained a mixture of innovation and restriction. George H. W. Bush appointed the first environmentalist, William Reilly, to head the EPA, along with others with strong environmental inclinations. Before accepting the appointment, Reilly secured the President’s agreement to support his pro-environment agenda and his access to the White House, but competing interests ensured conflicts. In other departments with environmental responsibilities and in White House offices, however, he appointed people who were more development-oriented, such as John H. Sununu, Richard Darman, and Dan Quayle. While considerable regulation was initially passed, during his last two years in office he severely restricted regulation, and in 1992, a total freeze was put on new regulations. 

On July 21, 1989, Bush sent a bill to Congress proposing amendments to the Clean Air Act. The core of the amendments were meant to reduce acid rain by limiting sulfur dioxide emissions from coal burning plants, to bring eighty urban areas up to current air quality standards and to lower emissions from over two- hundred airborne toxic chemicals. Bush supported a cap-and-trade system to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions, a strategy which allowed utilities flexibility in meeting the laws goal. The final version of the bill included new regulatory programs for control of acid rain and for the issuance of stationary source operating permits, and expansion of the regulatory program for toxic air emissions. Congress passed the bill with large majorities in both houses, and Bush signed the bill on November 15, 1990.

The private-sector Council on Competitiveness (distinct from the federal Competitiveness Policy Council) was formed in 1989 to play the same role as the previous Task Force on Regulatory Relief that Bush had served on in the Reagan administration, which was to negotiate on behalf of the President for regulatory relief with the heads of federal agencies. This executive branch agency negotiated with EPA Administrator Reilly, leading to industry-favorable rulings such as the redefinition of wetlands and the allowance of untreated toxic chemicals in local landfills (this was later reversed). While previous regulatory-relief efforts, such as Reagan's use of OMB, were subject to Congressional oversight, the Council on Competitiveness was independent and wasn't required to keep records of its proceedings. The Council on Competitiveness received its authority from a White House memoranda and its members included Vice President Dan Quayle, Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady, Commerce Secretary Robert Mosbacher, and White House Chief of Staff John Sununu.

In 1992, Bush opposed international efforts at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil by refusing to sign the biodiversity treaty and lobbying to remove all binding targets from the proposal on limiting global carbon dioxide emissions.

The Clinton Administration (1993–2001)

The Clinton Administration promised a change in the direction of environmental policy. Al Gore, the vice president, and appointees such as Carol Browner in EPA and Bruce Babbitt were all encouraging from an environmental standpoint. Clinton eliminated the Council on Competitiveness, returning regulatory authority to agency heads, and Clinton and Gore argued that environmental protection and economic growth were not incompatible.

Clinton's record as the governor of Arkansas however, suggested that Clinton would be willing to make compromises. Through a number of middle-of-the-road positions, on issues such as grazing fees in the West and clean-up of the Everglades, and through his support of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993 and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1994, Clinton dissatisfied some environmentalists. Specifically, the Green Party and its candidate Ralph Nader were outspoken in their criticism of Clinton's environmental record. 

Despite criticism from environmental purists, the Clinton administration had several notable environmental accomplishments. Clinton created the President's Council on Sustainable Development, signed the Kyoto Protocol (although he did not submit the treaty to the Senate), and stood firm against Republican attempts after the 1994 elections to roll back environmental laws and regulations through the appropriations process. During the Clinton administration, the EPA's budget was increased, and much of the country's natural resources were put under greater protection, such as the restoration of the Everglades and the increase in size of the Everglades National Park. Important U.S. Supreme Court cases from this period included United States v. Weitzenhoff, et al.

The George W. Bush Administration (2001–2009)

The President’s Initiative

In 2002 President George W. Bush announced an environment legislative initiative titled Clear Skies. The Clear Skies proposal's stated goals were to reduce three pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and mercury. Clear Skies was to use a market based system  by allowing energy companies to buy and trade pollution credits. The president argued that since Clear Skies would use a market based system, millions of tons of pollution would be eliminated when compared to the Clean Air Act. However, the president’s critics argued that the Clear Skies policy would weaken provisions in the Clean Air Act.

The Clean Air Act was enacted by the United States Congress and signed by President Richard Nixon in 1970. The main provisions of the Clean Air Act were to control air pollution on a national level and an initiative program called New Source Review (NSR). The NSR initiative would require power plants to upgrade to anti-pollution technologies before they can expand existing facilities and add new technologies. The Clear Skies initiative proposed by the Bush administration main intention was to remove the New Source Review provision and deregulate some of the standards that the Clean Air Act required energy facilities to meet. The proposed removal of the NSR prompted nine northeastern states to file suit in federal court to prevent the new ruling. Advocates against Clear Skies viewed the removal of NSR as a weakening of existing laws and an “assault on the Clean Air Act”. Environmental advocates and their political allies would eventually prevail in defeating the Clear Skies initiative.

Global environmental policy

President Bush refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol, citing fears of negative consequences for the U.S. economy. Bush also cited that developing countries like India and China were exempt from Kyoto's requirements as a reason for his opposition. When President Bush withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, many of his critics alleged that he made his decision on ideology rather than on science. Suzanne Goldenberg from the Guardian wrote the Bush years are seen “as concerted assault, from the administration's undermining of the science”. Bush’s own Environmental Protection Agency head Christine Todd Whitman said the decision to walk away from Kyoto was "the equivalent to 'flipping the bird,' frankly, to the rest of the world". Also, Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change said the idea of a head of state putting the science question on the table was horrifying. Bush’s critics included Jonathon Dorm, Earth Policy Institute and NASA scientist James Hansen. Dorm contended that the administration made a “covert attempt to silence the science” while Hansen alleged the administration was “trying to block data showing an acceleration in global warming”. 

President Bush’s refusal to seek ratification from the Senate was widely criticized by his opponents in the United States Congress and in the media. Some of President Bush’s harshest critics claim his decision taken on the Kyoto Protocol was due to his close relationship with big oil companies. Greenpeace obtained briefing papers that revealed the administration thanked Exxon for their “active involvement” on climate change. The Guardian reported documents revealed Under-secretary Paula Dobriansky “sound out Exxon executives and other anti-Kyoto business groups on potential alternatives to Kyoto”. However, in 2003, Exxon head of public affairs Nick Thomas denied taking any position on Kyoto.

Campaign promise on the environment

In 2001, President Bush broke a campaign environment promise by reversing a promise he had made during his presidential campaign to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from coal-burning power plants. Governor Bush pledged power plants would have to meet clean-air standards while promising to enact tougher policies to protect the environment. The broken campaign promise was seen as a betrayal by environmental groups. The president’s reversal on regulating carbon dioxide emissions was one of a series of controversial stands on environmental issues. For example, the Bush administration ruled that factory farms can claim they do not discharge animal waste to avoid oversight from the Clean Air Act.

Environmental regulation

The actions taken during the Bush administration were seen by environmentalists as ideological rather than scientifically based. The criticism stemmed from the president’s shifting views while he was a candidate for president and executive action taken as president. The Bush presidency was viewed as being weak on the environment due to ideology and close ties with big oil. However, Eli Lehrer from the Competitive Enterprise Institute contended that the Bush administration issued more regulations than any other administration in U.S. history.

Reducing air pollution

During President Bush’s eight years in office he utilized his executive powers for a number of issues. In an effort to bypass NSR requirements, the president took executive action to “curb plant-by-plant permit reviews”. He also ordered the EPA to develop a regional regulation using a market-based system. The EPA came-up with the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). CAIR was aimed at reducing 70 percent of pollution from coal burning plants. However, CAIR would later be struck down by U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 2008. Additionally, The Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) was also introduced. CAMR was created for the purpose of establishing a permanent national cap on mercury emissions.

Bush environmental legacy

In the later years of the Bush administration, the president engaged in a series of environmental proposals. He called on countries with the largest greenhouse gases to establish a global goal to control emissions and in 2008 initiated the U.S to join the United Nations to negotiate a post-2012 global climate plan after Kyoto expires. The plan calls for inclusion of both developed and developing nations to address greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, during the later years, President Bush’s position on climate changed. The president had taken steps in the later years of his presidency to address environmental criticism of his broken campaign promises, and argued that the Kyoto protocol was a plan to cripple the US economy. This stern position caused him serious credibility challenges on environmental issues both nationally and globally.

The Obama Administration (2009–2017)

Environmental issues were prominent in the 2008 presidential election, and Barack Obama obtained a clear lead above his rival, John McCain, on the environment, winning the backing of 'all mainstream environmental groups' and public confidence on the issue. Upon election, appointments such as that of the Nobel prize-winning physicist Steven Chu were seen as a confirmation that his presidency was serious about environmental issues.

One example of a new initiative by the Obama Administration is the America's Great Outdoors Initiative, which preserves and highlights numerous natural features, and also raises public awareness.

The Trump Administration (2017–present)

The environmental policy of the Trump administration represents a shift from the policy priorities and goals of his predecessor, Barack Obama. While Obama's environmental agenda prioritized the reduction of carbon emissions through the use of clean renewable energy, the Trump administration has sought to increase fossil fuel use and scrap environmental regulations, which he has often referred to as an impediment to business. Trump has announced plans to pull the United States out of the 191 nation Paris agreement. At a presidential debate in March 2016, Trump said he would eliminate the EPA as a part of his plan to balance the budget.

Trump's "America First Energy Plan", focuses on increasing the use of fossil fuels without mentioning renewable energy. It would repeal many Obama policies including the Climate Action Plan and the Clean Water Rule, and limit the EPA's mission to protecting air and water quality. Within days of taking office he signed executive orders to approve two controversial oil pipelines and to require federal review of the Clean Water Rule and the Clean Power Plan. He also invited American manufacturers to suggest which regulations should be eliminated; industry leaders submitted 168 comments, of which nearly half targeted Environmental Protection Agency rules.

Trump's appointments to key agencies dealing in energy and environmental policy reflected his commitment to deregulation, particularly of the fossil fuel industry. Several of his cabinet picks, such as Rick Perry as Secretary of Energy and Scott Pruitt as Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, were people with a history of opposition to the agency they were named to head. The Director of the Climate and Development Lab and Brown University environmental studies professor J. Timmons Roberts said in 2018, "It's been a hard year.... Literally every country in the world is moving ahead [on reducing carbon emissions] without us."

Issues

Since the environmental movement of the 1970s, the nature of environmental issues has changed. While the initial emphasis was on conventional air and water pollutants, which were the most obvious and easily measurable problems, newer issues are long-term problems that are not easily discernible and can be surrounded by controversy.

Acid deposition

Acid deposition, in the form of acid rain and dry deposition, is the result of sulfur and nitrogen dioxide being emitted into the air, traveling and landing in a different place, and changing the acidity of the water or land on which the chemicals fall. Acid deposition in the Northeast United States from the burning of coal and in the West United States from utilities and motor vehicles caused a number of problems, and was partially exacerbated by the Clean Air Act, which forced coal power plants to use taller smoke stacks, resulting in farther transmission of sulfur dioxide in the air. 

During the Carter administration, the United States undertook a risk-averse policy, acting through the EPA and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to research and control the pollutants suspected to cause acid deposition even in the face of scientific uncertainty. The Reagan administration was more risk tolerant. It argued that, given the scientific uncertainties about harm and exposure levels, new expenditures should not be undertaken that would curtail energy security and economic growth. During George H. W. Bush's presidential campaign, he called for new Clean Air Act legislation to curtail sulfur- and nitrogen-dioxide emissions. In 1990, after he was elected, amendments to the Clean Air Act were finally passed that cut emissions by over 12 million tons per year, set up a market-like system of emissions trading, and set a cap on emissions for the year 2000. These goals were achieved to some degree by the installation of industrial scrubbers. 

While the initial costs in cutting emissions levels were expected to be over $4.6 billion for utilities and a 40% rise in electricity costs, the impact ended up being only about $1 billion and a 2–4% rise in electricity costs. Part of the reason for the relatively low costs is the availability of low-sulfur coal.

Ozone depletion

Ozone depletion is the reduced concentration of ozone in the Earth's stratosphere (called the ozone layer), where it serves to block much of the ultraviolet radiation from the sun. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which were used beginning in the 1930s in a number of important areas, were determined in 1974 to be responsible for much of the depletion of the ozone layer. Four years later, the EPA and FDA banned CFCs in aerosol cans. As research in the 1980s indicated that the problem was worse than before, and revealed a controversial massive hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica, three international agreements were made to reduce the ozone-damaging substances- the Vienna Convention, the 1987 Montreal Protocol, and a third agreement in 1990 in London. In the United States, the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments phased out production of CFCs and required recycling of CFC products. 

Although the phase-out of CFCs took almost two decades, the policy is generally seen as a success. While a crisis seems to be averted, due to the longevity of CFC particles in the atmosphere, the ozone layer is only expected to start showing sign of recovery by 2024.

Hazardous wastes

Hazardous waste regulations began in the United States in 1976 with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to govern hazardous waste from its initial generation to final disposition (cradle-to-grave regulation) and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to anticipate possible hazards from chemicals. Following the events at Love Canal, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, or Superfund) was enacted in 1980 to assist in the cleanup of abandoned hazardous waste disposal sites. In the mid-1980s, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (1984) and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (1986) were passed. 

The aim of hazardous waste regulation is to prevent harm from occurring due to hazardous waste and to pass the burdens of cleanup of hazardous waste on to the original producers of the waste. Some of the problems of hazardous waste regulation are that the negative effects of hazardous waste can be difficult to detect and controversial and that, due mainly to the large amount of hazardous waste that is generated (214 million tons in 1995), regulation can be difficult and costly.

Implementation has been difficult, with years sometimes passing between legislation passage and initial regulations. Superfund was passed in December 1980, just before Reagan took office. The first administrator of Superfund was Rita Lavelle who had worked for a major hazardous waste generator. The result was that her implementation of Superfund was designed mainly to delay regulation, and the subsequent controversy resulted in the resignation of Lavelle, EPA administrator Anne Burford, and several other top EPA personnel. In 1986, Congress passed the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, increasing funding to $9 billion and providing for studies and new technologies. By 1995, Superfund cleanup still took an average of twelve years per site, and costs for each site can range in the billions of dollars. Superfund, while showing improvements, has been probably the most criticized of environmental programs based on costs of remediation, implementation problems, and the questionable seriousness of the problems it addresses.

Risk control policy

Underlying the policy decisions made by the United States is the concept of risk control, consisting of two parts: risk assessment and risk management. The science behind risk assessment varies greatly in uncertainty and tends to be the focus of political controversy. For example, animal testing is often used to determine the toxicity of various substances for humans. But assumptions made about expected dosage and exposure to chemicals are often disputed, and the dosage given to animals is typically much larger than what humans normally consume. While industry groups tend to take a risk-tolerant position, environmentalists take a risk-averse position, following the precautionary principle. 

Another issue is the effect that chemicals can have relative to lifestyle choices. Cancer, for example, typically surface decades after first exposure to a carcinogen, and lifestyle choices are frequently more important in causing cancer than exposure to chemicals. While the governmental role in mitigating lifestyle-choice risks can be very controversial, chemical exposure through lifestyle choices can also occur involuntarily if the public is not properly educated (see Endocrine disruptors). 

Finally, the way that threats are presented to the public plays a large role in how those threats are addressed. The threat of nuclear power and the environmental effects of pesticides are overstated, some have claimed, while many high-priority threats go unpublicized. In order to combat this discrepancy, the EPA published a Relative Risk Report in 1987, and a follow-up report published by the Relative Risk Reduction Strategies Committee in 1990 suggested that the EPA should adopt a more pro-active posture, educating the public and assigning budgetary priorities for objectively assessed high-risk threats.

Regulation of these policies are also very difficult to have implemented. The EPA is faced with many challenges when it comes to emplacing these standards. For a more conservative government less EPA action is allowed to be carried out and even more so now with the potential disbandment of the EPA (2018). The battles over environmental science, the EPA, and regulatory decision making in 2017, as well as over the past two decades, say much about the way Congress deals with environmental, energy, and natural resources issues today, and the many obstacles it will face in trying to chart new policy directions of the twenty-first century. The environmental gridlock that often slows the democratic process makes it very difficult for the EPA to pass the risk control policy that they hope to implement.

Impact

Since the major environmental legislation of the 1970s was enacted, great progress has been made in some areas, but the environmental protection has come at a high price. Between 1970 and 1996, air pollutants dropped 32% while the population grew by 29%. Other pollutants have been more difficult to track, especially water pollutants. While air and water standards have been slowly improving, in 1996 70 million people still lived in counties that didn't meet EPA ozone standards. 36% of rivers and 39% of lakes didn't meet minimum standards for all uses (swimming, fishing, drinking, supporting aquatic life). In the same period, the size of the National Park Service grew from 26,000,000 acres (110,000 km²) to 83,000,000 acres (340,000 km²), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service expanded by over three times to manage over 92,000,000 acres (370,000 km²). In 1995, 41% of the 960 endangered species were stable or improving.

Critics of environmental legislation argue that the gains made in environmental protection come at too great a cost. The overall cost of environmental regulation in the United States is estimated to be about 2% of the gross domestic product-similar to many other countries, but calculating the cost is challenging both conceptually (deciding what costs are included) and practically (with data from a broad range of sources). In 1994, almost $122 billion was spent on pollution abatement and control. $35 billion of that has been in direct government spending, $65 billion was spent by business, and $22 billion was spent by individuals.