STATEMENT OF SENATOR BOB SMITH

RANKING REPUBLICAN

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

ON THE

NOMINATION OF JOHN P. SUAREZ

ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR

OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE, U.S. EPA

May 7, 2002

 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this very important nomination hearing on Mr. John Peter Suarez, whom the President has nominated to the position of Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance at EPA.

 

Mr. Suarez is a highly qualified attorney as his extensive resume shows.  Mr. Suarez has held a number of outstanding State positions.  He has systematically been promoted to positions that require a greater level of skill - I believe that this speaks to his ability to grow into new and more demanding positions.

 

While his resume documents his consistent success in the jobs that he has held, I believe that it is also important to make note of his numerous awards:

·      N.J. Hispanic Bar Association Honoree

·      U.S. Attorney’s Office Public Service Award Recipient

·      N.J. State Bar Association Professional Lawyer of the Year Award

·      U.S. Attorney’s Office Special Achievement Award

·      U.S. Attorney General Director’s Award

 

Mr. Suarez is also involved in a number of legal societies where he has shown great leadership - including being selected to the position of Supreme Court Committee Member for the Hispanic National Bar Association.

 

As we are all aware, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance works very closely with EPA Regional Offices, State Governments, and other Federal agencies, to ensure compliance with the nation's environmental laws.

 

The Bush Administration is justifiably proud of their environmental enforcement record, as documented by the following accomplishments in FY 2001:

 

·      On the theory that compliance results in environmental protection, OECA provided compliance assistance for more than one million individuals and businesses.

·      The Administration required violators to reduce an estimated 660 million pounds of pollutants and treat and safely manage an estimated 1.84 billion pounds. 

·      As a result of enforcement actions, violators will invest $4.3 billion in pollution control and cleanup measures -- the highest-ever such investment.

·      While environmental quality is the most important yardstick to use in measuring success, the Administration completed 222 civil judicial cases and issued 3,228 administrative orders and field citations.

·      Criminal prosecutions resulted in prison sentences totaling 256 years -- an increase of more than 100 years over FY2000 -- along with nearly $95 million in fines and restitution.

·      Finally, supplemental environmental projects -- actions a violator agrees to undertake to protect the environment and human health -- totaled at $89 million -- up 60 percent from FY2000.

 

At this time I would like to submit for inclusion in the record a fact sheet prepared by the EPA office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. 

 

I look forward to Mr. Suarez building on this record of success.

The Office of Enforcement and Compliance is charged with developing an approach that integrates compliance assistance, compliance incentives and innovative civil and criminal enforcement, in order to maximize compliance and reduce threats to public health and the environment.   From my meeting with Mr. Suarez, I am confident that his past legal and management experience, energy, and intelligence will be an invaluable asset to Gov. Whitman and President Bush in that effort.

 

Mr. Suarez’s experience as a State official is also beneficial.  The individual States have shown how effective our environmental laws can be when compliance and enforcement occurs at the State level in cooperation with EPA.  This cooperation is key to maintaining the strength of our environmental laws.   I firmly believe that EPA is best suited to a standard-setting and compliance assistance role, with the States handling the bulk of enforcement actions.  At the same time, EPA should maintain the ability to aggressively enforce the law itself when necessary.

 

A report compiled by the Environmental Council of States (ECOS) documenting State enforcement and compliance success makes an interesting point.  ECOS states that:

 

 “...State enforcement actions are very effective in returning violating facilities to compliance, and . . . their effectiveness increases as the severity increases.” 

 

The effective delegation of primary compliance and enforcement duties by the EPA to State agencies has given our environmental laws the strong foundation that they need.  In fact, States conduct about 90 percent of all enforcement actions.

 

To assist the States in carrying out these duties, EPA must create and maintain a more effective means of compiling a nationwide enforcement and compliance database.  We must not lose sight of the “big picture” when it comes to the enforcement of our environmental laws.  EPA oversight of these compliance and enforcement programs is essential.

Mr. Suarez, I appreciate the sacrifice you are making by continuing your career as a public servant.  I have no doubt that you are up to the challenge and look forward to moving your nomination through the Senate.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

 

Enforcement Accomplishments FY 2001

 

Issue: Is EPA achieving its goals of requiring a high level of compliance by the regulated community and of reducing the release of pollutants into the environment?

 

Status/Next Steps:  EPA’s enforcement program achieved tremendous success in fiscal year 2001, protecting human health and the environment through record setting amounts in injunctive relief, significant reductions in pollutant loadings and an estimated reduction of more than 660 million pounds of harmful pollutants and the treatment and safe management of an estimated record 1.84 billion pounds of pollutants, in addition to a significant increase in the commitment on the part of violators to spend on supplemental environmental projects:

        


‚                                                            Amount spent by violators and liable parties on pollution controls and cleanups nearly doubled – from $2.6 billion in FY2000 to $4.4 billion in FY2001

 

‚                                                            Civil judicial penalties assessed against environmental violators nearly doubled – from $55 million in FY2000 to $102 million in FY2001; civil administrative penalties levied by EPA were down a modest  $1.5 million – from about $25.5 million in FY2000 $24 million in FY2001.    Overall, penalties were way up as our strategy focused on large judicial cases.

 

‚                                                            Number of facilities voluntarily auditing and disclosing violations under EPA’s audit policy more than tripled  -- from 437 in FY2000 to 1,754 in FY2001

 

‚                                                            Spending by violators on Supplemental Environmental Projects was up 60% – from $56 million in FY2000 to $89 million in FY2001

 

‚                                                            Total years for criminal sentences for environmental violations rose from 146 years in FY2001 to 256 years in FY2001 as a result of EPA’s strategy to, as a priority, seek jail time for significant criminal cases.

 

‚                                                            Criminal fines fell from $122 million in FY2000 to $95 million in FY2001 – again, our strategy was to go for jail time

 

Rationale: By focusing on environmental results or outcomes, such as the reductions in pollution, and by using all of the tools available, such as compliance assistance, incentives, and enforcement, EPA can address the most serious environmental problems and achieve unprecedented results.

It is significant, for example, that the regulated community achieved an estimated 660 million pound reduction of harmful pollutants that otherwise would have been released to the environment and safely managed an estimated 1.84 billion pounds of pollutants.  These results reflects EPA’s shift from routine cases to the reduction, through a variety of incentives, of the most significant environmental risks and significant patterns of noncompliance.

Snapshot:  End of Year Results FY1999 to 2001 (as of 2-12-02)

 

 

 

Activity

FY 1999

FY 2000

FY 2001

Audit Policy Settlements

106 companies

624 facilities

217 companies

437 facilities

304 companies

1754 facilities

Value of Injunctive Relief

$3.4 billion

$2.6 billion

$4.3 billion

Civil Judicial Penalties

$141 million

$55 million

$102 million

Civil Administrative Penalties

$25.5 million

$25.5 million

$24 million

SEPs

$237 million

$56 million

$89 million

Inspections

22,000

20,000

18,000 (est.)

Administrative Actions

3500

5300

3200

Civil Referrals

403

368

327

Criminal Referrals

241

236

256

Criminal Sentences

208 years

146 years

256 years

Criminal Fines

$62 million

$122 million

$95 million

 

Enforcement Program – Current Activities

 

EPA’s enforcement program remains as strong as ever.  Since January 2001, we have filed and concluded major enforcement and compliance actions to reduce and eliminate harmful pollution:

 

•                                      EPA showed record results in FY 2001 from our enforcement activities – nearly doubling the amount spent by violators and liable parties on pollution controls and cleanups; more than tripling the number of facilities voluntarily auditing and disclosing violations under EPA’s audit policy; almost doubling the civil judicial penalties assessed against environmental violators; and increasing the spending by violators on Supplemental Environmental Projects by 60%

 

•                                      EPA’s enforcement activities under the Clean Air Act to address New Source Review (NSR) violations continue to be vigorous.  Beginning with investigations, of which we have over 100 under way, and concluding with a filed case or settlement, EPA aims to reduce harmful air pollution caused by refineries, power plants and other industrial processes, such as paper mills.1  Our current data shows that – between January 2001 and March 2002 – EPA made 115 information requests; issued 23 Notices of Violation; filed and settled 15 cases, concluding 7 of them (i.e., they were entered by the appropriate court); and engaged in numerous other enforcement activities such as depositions, motion practice and on-going settlement discussions -- all to enforce the Clean Air Act’s NSR requirements.

 

•                                      Our NSR enforcement included a major case against a power plant, PSEG, which alone will reduce the company's emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) by 90 percent and its emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) by more than 80 percent. These decreases represent 32 percent of all the SO2 and 20 percent of all the NOx emitted from stationary sources in New Jersey, and 19 percent of all the SO2 and 5 percent of all the NOx from all sources in the state, including cars and trucks

 

•                                      We issued many imminent hazard orders to address immediate threats to human health an the environment.  For example, EPA issued two imminent hazard orders under RCRA to Magnesium Corporation to address dangerous dioxin levels at the facility and the threat to workers’ health from extremely high levels of hexachlorobenzene in anode dust.  EPA also issued two imminent hazard orders against Seaboard Farms under the Clean Water Act and RCRA to address contaminated drinking water resulting from hog farm waste.

 

•                                      We also issued an Administrative order (made final on appeal in April 2001) under RCRA to address imminent threats from the improper storage and disposal of large volumes of munitions and unexploded ordnance that had been buried at the Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR) on Cape Cod.  The emergency order required the National Guard Bureau to detonate the munitions in a special “controlled demolition chamber” that was present at MMR, except for those munitions and ordnance that were unsafe to move (and which could be blown in place).

 

In other words, EPA has, under Administrator Whitman’s watch, successfully addressed environmental violations using the various tools available, ranging from voluntary incentives to imminent hazard orders.  Concluding cases is no small feat, and we are proud of the accomplishments achieved since January 2001 and will continue to pursue enforcement in order to achieve similar results in the future.

 


         1  These activities reflect EPA’s approach to enforcement generally, which includes the following steps:

•                                      Investigate possible violations by gathering information, e.g., through information requests, citizen complaints, inspections or other reports;

•                                      Review collected information to determine compliance

•                                      Issue “Notices of Violation” or other formal notification to the violator to alert them to the violations detected and give them an opportunity to correct those violations

•                                      Enter into negotiations with the violator in an attempt to reach an agreed upon settlement to resolve the violations

•                                      Proceed with formal enforcement by filing a case for litigation if no resolution of the violations could be achieved.