WHAT: Days before Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt is expected to testify before Congress in support of the Trump administration’s proposed EPA budget cuts, U.S. Representatives, EPA employees’ union AFGE Local 704 and the Sierra Club will hold a telepresser on Tuesday to sound the alarm about the devastating impact of those cuts on millions of Americans.
WHEN:
Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 11 AM ET/10 AM CT
DIAL-IN:
Phone: 877‑888‑4312
Passcode: Great Lakes (spoken to operator)
WHO:
U.S. Representative Dan Kildee (MI-5)
U.S. Representative Marcy Kaptur (OH-9)
AFGE 704 President Michael Mikulka
Felicia Chase, Water Enforcement Officer and AFGE Local 704 Union Steward
Jack Darin, Director of the Sierra Club’s Illinois Chapter
BACKGROUND:
Proposed Trump administration EPA budget cuts
The Trump administration has proposed a FY 2018 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) budget of $5.7 billion. This amounts to an across-the-board cut of 31 percent, or $2.6 billion, from the current level authorized under the Continuing Resolution (which expires 9/30/17). The current EPA budget funds less than 15,376 staff nationwide, and about 1,000 employees in Region 5, which includes Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin. These proposed cuts would put millions of lives at risk and could have devastating impacts on local economies across the heartland.
Staffing Reductions
The budget reduces EPA staff by 25 percent, down to 11,547.6, a cut of 3,828.4 staff nationwide. This translates into a cut of about 310 (out of 1,078) full-time employees in Region 5.
This number includes all 71 employees in the Great Lakes National Program Office, 60 of whom are located in Region 5*. These extreme cuts would prevent Region 5 from performing its mission, which is protecting human health and the environment
*(N.B. - A majority of the EPA budget is not spent on EPA salaries and expenses. In fact, in FY 2016, EPA spent about 65% ($5.3B) of its $8.3 B budget on grants to states, tribes and municipalities. The remaining 35% was spent on salaries, benefits, travel rent, utilities, internal contracts, etc. The EPA budget only funds less than 15,376 staff nationwide.This is down from 18,110 in 1999, or a 15% reduction.)
Eliminated Programs
Beach Protection: Region 5 would no longer issue grants to help states and local entities monitor if beaches are safe for swimming, nor would it oversee the monitoring done at beaches.This presents a clear and preventable public health threat to one of the biggest recreational and tourist attractions in the region.
Climate Change: Any Region 5 work on climate change would be eliminated. This includes the gathering, recording, charting and interpreting of short and long term data of immediate impact to the region. In the long term this data impacts the health of all. In the short term it can provide vital information for the agricultural industry in the nation’s heartland.
Pollution Prevention: EPA’s program, which is slated to reduce $1.3 billion in government, business and institutional costs by FY 2018, would be eliminated, including the Energy Star Program. Energy Star, which is responsible for reducing the energy used by consumer products, reduced electricity costs nationwide by $430 billion last year.
Radiation and Radon Protection: Region 5’s protection of the six states against radon, a carcinogen, would be eliminated. Radon kills 21,000 people annually, according to EPA data. Educating the public about radon and protection from radiation and radon are two critical activities EPA performs to protect the public health.
Non-Point Source Program: EPA’s program to stop pollution to streams and lakes from non-point sources of pollution. This refers to pollution that is not collected in a pipe (such as factory discharge), but rather is caused by runoff and other sources that can not be attributed to one discharger. By eliminating the grant portion of this program, states would be forced to cut half of the staff devoted to this at the local level. Here’s how much funding is at stake in Region 5, by state:
State Description
Illinois $6,397,000.00
Indiana $4,237,000.00
Michigan $1,987,970.00
Minnesota $2,711,850.00
Ohio $4,115,929.00
Wisconsin $4,023,001.00
Underground Storage Tanks: The program that protects against underground leaching of pollutants from storage tanks would be eliminated in the Region.
Environmental Education: EPA’s ability to educate schools and other shareholders in the six Region 5 states about environmental risks would be eliminated.
Environment Justice: EPA’s program reaching out to those communities in the six Region 5 states disparately impacted by environmental degradation would be eliminated.
Geographic programs: The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (71.7 full time employees), which is designed to restore and protect the five Great Lakes, is eliminated.
Homeland Security: Region 5’s homeland security program, centered around protection of environmental infrastructure, including drinking water, would be eliminated and transferred to a non-expert agency, Homeland Security.
Severely reduced programs
Criminal and civil enforcement: Sharp cuts in the EPA’s enforcement programs could curtail its ability to police environmental offenders and impose penalties. The budget proposal reduces spending on civil and criminal enforcement by almost 60 percent, to $4 million from a combined $10 million. It also eliminates 200 jobs.
Regional enforcement staff: The environmental “cop on the beat” will do fewer inspections, monitoring and enforcement of environmental laws. The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance has been directed “to evaluate ways to reduce federal enforcement inspections.” You can’t find pollution if you don’t do inspections of polluting facilities.
45 percent cuts to State Environmental Grants overall: Cuts to state grants which fund core environmental programs means fewer state staff, less response to citizen complaints, less state monitoring of polluters and less money to respond to environmental emergencies.
Example: Tap water. In a time when state budgets are declining, the EPA is looking to decrease grants that help states monitor public water systems by almost a third, to $71 million from $102 million. The Public Water System Supervision Grant Program has been critical in making sure communities have access to safe drinking water. Flint, Michigan is still reeling from its tainted water crisis, and unsafe levels of lead have turned up in tap water in city after city. Much of the risk to the country’s water supply stems from its crumbling public water infrastructure: a network of pipes, treatment plants and other facilities built decades ago. Although Congress banned lead pipes in 1986, between 3.3 million and 10 million older ones remain, primed to leach lead into tap water.
Superfund Program: The budget proposes to cut spending on cleaning up Superfund sites by $330 million, down to $762 million. Site work would have to stop at many sites or be severely curtailed to accommodate a severe budget cut (30 percent). Cleaning up hazardous waste and contamination that has moved off-site is critical to protection of human health.
Example: Cuts to the Superfund program would cripple the EPA’s response to environmental emergencies such as the East Chicago U.S. Steel lead contamination site and last month’s Hexavalent Chromium spill from U.S. Steel, both in Northwest Indiana.
###