1 / 14

DOING MORE WITH LESS

DOING MORE WITH LESS. Shellie Chard-McClary Assistant Director, Policy and Planning Oklahoma DEQ. FEDERAL PROGRAMS OPERATED BY THE STATES. CWA SDWA RCRA CAA SUPERFUND. CWSRF – decrease of ~$662 million DWSRF - decrease of ~$4 million

gloriaanderson
Télécharger la présentation

DOING MORE WITH LESS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DOING MORE WITH LESS Shellie Chard-McClary Assistant Director, Policy and Planning Oklahoma DEQ

  2. FEDERAL PROGRAMS OPERATED BY THE STATES • CWA • SDWA • RCRA • CAA • SUPERFUND

  3. CWSRF – decrease of ~$662 million DWSRF - decrease of ~$4 million 106 – increase of ~$21 million ($18 million for monitoring –FY07) 319(h) – decrease of ~$44.5 million 104(b)(3) – eliminated PWS – decrease of ~$3.5 million Underground tanks – increase of ~$25.8 million Air – decrease of ~$43 million Operator training - eliminated FEDERAL FUNDING TO STATES Compared to FY04:

  4. OTHER FUNDING REQUIRED TO ADMINISTER FEDERAL PROGRAMS • State appropriated dollars • Generally decreasing with focus on education, healthcare, prisons, transportation needs, etc. • Fees paid by regulated community • Generally increasing to make up for shortfall in federal and state funding

  5. FUNDING BREAKDOWNS • Federal Grants – 18% • State General Revenue –30% • Fees Paid by Regulated Community – 52%

  6. STATE QUESTIONS • How high can fees be raised to supplement federally administered programs? • Which programs will get cut or eliminated? • Which programs get returned to EPA? • What are the states priorities?

  7. WHICH TASKS WILL STATES FORGO? • Data entry will suffer in order to perform inspections • Compliance assistance will be reduced to focus more on enforcement actions • Performance Track participation or other voluntary programs will be reduced or eliminated

  8. WHICH PROGRAMS WILL STATES GIVE BACK TO EPA? • TMDLs • Stormwater • CAFOs • SSO/CSO • PWS • Air Toxics / MACT Standards • RCRA

  9. PRIORITIES Which is more important, • Core programs or voluntary programs? • Performing inspections or doing data entry on inspections? • Enforcement or outreach? • Protecting the environment and citizens from arsenic: • in the air or • in water bodies or • in drinking water or • in contaminated land?

  10. Current Determination of Priorities Local Governments Politics States

  11. Ideal Determination of Priorities

  12. EPA BIG EXPENDITURES IMPACTING STATES • Significant number of EPA contractors • Funding for voluntary programs

  13. BOTTOM LINE • States can’t do everything • There must be some trade offs • EPA must publicly support states fee efforts • EPA must bare some of the cuts not just pass through to states

More Related