You limited your search to:

 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
Environmental Protection Issues in the 108th Congress
The 108th Congress has acted on a variety of disparate environmental measures; some of these represent proposals or issues that had been under consideration in the 107th Congress and earlier. Environmental issues considered by Congress tend to fall into several major categories: (1) funding issues — whether funding levels are adequate and focused on appropriate priorities; (2) expanding, renewing, or refocusing specific environment programs; (3) environmental issues that are important “subsets” of other major areas of concern, such as energy, defense, or transportation programs; and more recently, (4) terrorism and infrastructure protection in areas such as wastewater and chemical facilities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4537/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 108th Congress
The 108th Congress has acted on a variety of disparate environmental measures; some of these represent proposals or issues that had been under consideration in the 107th Congress and earlier. Environmental issues considered by Congress tend to fall into several major categories: (1) funding issues — whether funding levels are adequate and focused on appropriate priorities; (2) expanding, renewing, or refocusing specific environment programs; (3) environmental issues that are important “subsets” of other major areas of concern, such as energy, defense, or transportation programs; and more recently, (4) terrorism and infrastructure protection in areas such as wastewater and chemical facilities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5885/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 108th Congress
The 108th Congress has acted on a variety of disparate environmental measures; some of these represent proposals or issues that had been under consideration in the 107th Congress and earlier. Environmental issues considered by Congress tend to fall into several major categories: (1) funding issues — whether funding levels are adequate and focused on appropriate priorities; (2) expanding, renewing, or refocusing specific environment programs; (3) environmental issues that are important “subsets” of other major areas of concern, such as energy, defense, or transportation programs; and more recently, (4) terrorism and infrastructure protection in areas such as wastewater and chemical facilities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4536/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 108th Congress
The 108th Congress has acted on a variety of disparate environmental measures; some of these represent proposals or issues that had been under consideration in the 107th Congress and earlier. Environmental issues considered by Congress tend to fall into several major categories: (1) funding issues — whether funding levels are adequate and focused on appropriate priorities; (2) expanding, renewing, or refocusing specific environment programs; (3) environmental issues that are important “subsets” of other major areas of concern, such as energy, defense, or transportation programs; and more recently, (4) terrorism and infrastructure protection in areas such as wastewater and chemical facilities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4535/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 108th Congress
The 108th Congress has acted on a variety of disparate environmental measures; some of these represent proposals or issues that had been under consideration in the 107th Congress and earlier. Environmental issues considered by Congress tend to fall into several major categories: (1) funding issues — whether funding levels are adequate and focused on appropriate priorities; (2) expanding, renewing, or refocusing specific environment programs; (3) environmental issues that are important “subsets” of other major areas of concern, such as energy, defense, or transportation programs; and more recently, (4) terrorism and infrastructure protection in areas such as wastewater and chemical facilities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4534/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4516/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4515/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2699/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2698/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2697/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2696/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2695/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2694/
Environmental Protection Issues in the 107th Congress
This report discuss issues that received congressional attention in the 107th Congress, such as The impact of air quality regulations, key water quality issues, superfund, solid/hazardous wastes, multibillion dollar cleanup and compliance programs, climate change, pesticides, EPA budget, and Science and Technology. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1684/
EPA's Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program: Highlights of Proposed Changes and Impacts on Agriculture
In August 1999 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed regulations to clarify and strengthen the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Section 303(d) requires states to identify surface waters for which wastewater discharge limits are not stringent enough to achieve water quality standards and to allocate further required pollutant reductions among sources in order to attain those standards. This report discusses the major changes in EPA's proposals, compared with existing regulatory program requirements, and potential impacts on agriculture and forestry sources, which have been controversial. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1125/
EPA's Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program: Highlights of the Final Revised Rule
This report discusses the final rule and the key modifications of the August 1999 proposal. The final rule builds on the current TMDL regulatory program and adds details, specific requirements, and deadlines. It retains the basic elements of the 1999 proposal for more comprehensive identification of impaired waters, schedules and minimum elements for TMDLs, and new public participation requirements. At the same time, dropped from the final rule are several provisions that were most controversial in the proposal, including some potentially affecting agriculture and forestry, one that would have required pollutant discharge offsets in some circumstances, and one that would have required states to identify waters threatened but not yet impaired by pollution digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1126/
Environmental Services Markets in the 2008 Farm Bill
This report gives an overview of issues involved in the provisions of the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-234, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act). It includes a brief overview describing environmental services markets, benefits and barriers, recent Congressional action related to the topics, and possible considerations. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc94106/
Accident Prevention under the Clean Air Act Section 112(r): Risk Management Planning by Propane Users and Internet Access to Worst-Case Accident Scenarios
This report briefly describes two issues associated with EPA implementation of risk management planning requirements in the Clean Air Act Section 112(r): whether dealers and distributors of propane and other flammable fuels should be covered by the law, and whether electronic access to off-site consequence analyses (OCA), and especially worst-case analyses, should be restricted to avoid misuse by terrorists or criminals. These issues are addressed by S. 880, as reported, and H.R. 1301 in the 106th Congress. The statutory requrrements and EPA implementation to date also are described. Covered facilities must submit risk management plans by June 21, 1999. This product will be updated when events warrant. For information on the status of legislation, see CRS Issue Brief lB10004, Clean Air Act Issues in the 106th Congress. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs968/
Federal Pollution Control Laws: How Are They Enforced?
This report provides an overview of the statutory framework, key players, infrastructure, resources, tools, and operations associated with enforcement and compliance of the major pollution control laws and regulations administered by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It also outlines the roles of federal (including regional offices) and state regulators, as well as the regulated community. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc98096/
Biotechnology in Animal Agriculture: Status and Current Issues
This report describes several scientifically emerging animal biotechnologies that are raising a variety of questions concerning risks to humans, animals, and the environment, as well as ethical concerns. The report examines applications of the technologies and discusses major issues that may arise. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc87304/
Climate Change Legislation in the 109th Congress
Climate change and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are a continuing issue in the 109th Congress. Bills directly addressing climate change issues range from those focused primarily on climate change research to comprehensive emissions cap-and-trade programs. Additional bills focus on GHG reporting and registries, or on power plant emissions of carbon dioxide, as part of wider controls on pollutant emissions. The bills vary in their approaches to climate change issues. This report briefly discusses the basic concepts on which these bills are based and compares major provisions of the bills in each of the following categories: climate change research, technology deployment, GHG reporting and registries, and emissions reduction programs. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10154/
Climate Change Legislation in the 109th Congress
Climate change and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are a continuing issue in the 109th Congress. Bills directly addressing climate change issues range from those focused primarily on climate change research to comprehensive emissions cap-and-trade programs. Additional bills focus on GHG reporting and registries, or on power plant emissions of carbon dioxide, as part of wider controls on pollutant emissions. The bills vary in their approaches to climate change issues. This report briefly discusses the basic concepts on which these bills are based and compares major provisions of the bills in each of the following categories: climate change research, technology deployment, GHG reporting and registries, and emissions reduction programs. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9809/
Climate Change Legislation in the 109th Congress
Climate change and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are a continuing issue in the 109th Congress. Bills directly addressing climate change issues range from those focused primarily on climate change research to comprehensive emissions cap-and-trade programs. Additional bills focus on GHG reporting and registries, or on power plant emissions of carbon dioxide, as part of wider controls on pollutant emissions. The bills vary in their approaches to climate change issues. This report briefly discusses the basic concepts on which these bills are based and compares major provisions of the bills in each of the following categories: climate change research, technology deployment, GHG reporting and registries, and emissions reduction programs. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7450/
Environmental Risk Analysis: A Review of Public Policy Issues
This report describes and analyzes key issues and legislative options related to risk analysis and risk management at EPA and considers the potential impact of proposed legislative approaches on EPA's rule-making process and final regulations. The report describes the history of EPA's use of risk analysis and then summarizes and analyzes issues and legislative proposals for increasing such use. Legislative activities in the 105th Congress are described. A list of selected references and an appendix where key terms are defined conclude the report. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs649/
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2013
Report that looks at appropriations for the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) FY 2013. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc227764/
Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for Disaster Response, Recovery, and Mitigation Projects
Report that discusses the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as it applies to projects for which federal funding to recover from or prepare for a disaster has been requested by local, tribal, or state grant applicants. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc228081/
Clean Air After the CAIR Decision: Back to Square One?
This report discusses three Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) long-term options in regard to Clean Air: (1) starting anew with a new strategy with respect to mitigating transported air pollution based on the decision; (2) allowing the states to sort out the issue through Section 126 petitions; and (3) seeking new legislation providing EPA with the statutory authority to implement either CAIR in some form, or an alternative. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc94165/
Is Biopower Carbon Neutral?
This report assesses the variables involved in determining whether or not biopower (i.e., electricity generated from biomass) is a carbon-neutral alternative to fossil fuels as a way to help meet meet U.S. energy demands and reduce U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It includes information about the biomass carbon cycle, GHG accounting for biopower production, recent developments affecting the assessment, and overview of whether or not it can be considered carbon neutral, and legislative implications. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc97992/
Pipelines for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Control: Network Needs and Cost Uncertainties
This report examines key uncertainties in CO2 pipeline requirements for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) by contrasting hypothetical pipeline scenarios in one region of the United States. The report summarizes the key factors influencing CO2 pipeline configuration for major power plants in the region, and illustrates how the viability of different sequestration sites may lead to enormous differences in pipeline costs. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc96797/
Polar Bears: Proposed Listing Under the Endangered Species Act
This report discusses the polar bear status and they are affected by climate change, contaminants, and subsistence and sport hunting. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc96770/
Agriculture Biotechnology: Background and Recent Issues
This report discusses issues regarding the impacts of GE crops on the environment and food safety, and whether GE foods should be specially labeled. Underlying these issues is the question of whether U.S. regulation and oversight of biotechnology—with responsibilities spread primarily among the U.S. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc87293/
EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On Track?
This report provides background information on recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulatory activity to help address concerns surrounding its power. It examines 45 major or controversial regulatory actions taken by, or under development at, the EPA since January 2009, providing details on the regulatory action itself, presenting an estimated timeline for completion of the rule, and, in general, providing EPA's estimates of costs and benefits, where available. The report also discusses factors that affect the timeframe in which regulations take effect, including statutory and judicial deadlines, public comment periods, judicial review, and permitting procedures, the net results of which are that existing facilities are likely to have several years before being required to comply with most of the regulatory actions under discussion. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc122204/
EPA Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Power Plants: Many Questions, Some Answers
This report discusses the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) proposals for electric generating units (EGU) Greenhouse Gas Emissions. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc267804/
Climate Change and Existing Law: A Survey of Legal Issues Past, Present, and Future
This report discusses climate change and surveys existing law for legal issues that have arisen, or may arise in the future, on account of climate change and government responses thereto. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc267842/
International Environmental Financing: The Global Environment Facility (GEF)
This report provides an overview of one of the oldest international financial institutions for the environment-the Global Environment Facility (GEF)-and analyzes its structure, funding, and objectives in light of the many challenges within the contemporary landscape of global environmental finance. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc40093/
Environmental Protection Agency: FY1998 Budget
EPA appropriations are included in the annual VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriation Bill. Two major issues were whether Superfund cleanups should be accelerated in the absence of statutory reforms and whether the requested state assistance funds are adequate. Because the House and Senate were in agreement on not granting the requested 50% increase in Superfund and in passing increased state funds, the chief conference issue was expected to focus on the roughly $225 million difference between the House and Senate versions. However, a veto threat over Superfund program funding made this a key conference issue. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs396/
Environmental Protection Agency: FY1998 Budget
EPA appropriations are included in the annual VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriation Bill. Two major issues were whether Superfund cleanups should be accelerated in the absence of statutory reforms and whether the requested state assistance funds are adequate. Because the House and Senate were in agreement on not granting the requested 50% increase in Superfund and in passing increased state funds, the chief conference issue focused on the roughly $225 million difference between the House and Senate versions. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs554/
Environmental Protection Agency: An Analysis of Key FY1999 Budget Issues
On February 2, 1998, the President requested $7.8 billion for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in FY1999. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported S. 2168 (S.Rept. 105-216) on June 12; the full Senate passed the bill on July 17. The House Committee reported H.R. 4194 (H.Rept. 105-610) on July 8, 1998; the full House passed it on July 29; and the Senate passed it on July 30 after incorporating S. 2168's provisions. During the week of October 6, the House and Senate approved the conference report, H.Rept. 105-769, which includes $7.5 billion, thus clearing the bill for the President's signature of October 21 (P.L. 105-276). The Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277) added $30 million more in FY1999 funds. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs556/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2002 Budget
On April 9, 2001, the President requested $7.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY2002, $512.0 million (or 7%) less than the FY2001 funding level of $7.8 billion. The request would not have continued funding of about $500 million for activities earmarked for FY2001, and contained provisions shifting more enforcement responsibilities to the states. Popular wastewater infrastructure funding, state roles, and the future of Superfund were some of the predominant topics. On July 17, the House Appropriations Committee recommended $7.545 billion,$229 million more than requested (H.R. 2620, H. Rept. 107-159). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2163/
Environmental Protection Agency: FY2001 Budget Issues
The request for state and local wastewater and drinking water capital needs was a key issue. The request of $2.91 billion for State and Tribal Assistance Grants, which fund these needs, was about one-half billion less than in FY2000. The House passed $3.18 billion, the Senate $3.32 billion, and the conferees $3.62 billion. The request included $800 million for Clean Water State Revolving Funds, $550 million less than in FY2000. The House passed $1.20 billion, the Senate $1.35 billion and the conferees $1.35 billion. Conferees approved the $825 million requested for Drinking Water State Revolving Funds. Congress denied the Administration's request for a new Clean Air Partnership program. EPA requested $100 million for Mexican border water projects and $15 million for State of Alaska projects. Conferees approved $75 million and $35 million respectively. For state and tribal administrative grants, the conferees approved roughly the requested amount of $1.0 billion. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1075/
Environmental Protection Agency: FY2000 Budget Issues
State and local wastewater and drinking water capital needs were the most prominent budgetary issues. Senate and House authorizing and appropriating chairmen expressed concern over the requested 17% decrease in the State and Tribal Assistance Grants account from $3.41 billion in FY1999 to $2.84 billion in FY2000. The conference agreement on H.R. 2684 provides a total of $3.47 billion. For clean water state revolving funds, the conference committee approved the Senate's level of $1.35 billion, about $175 million more than the House approved and roughly $550 million more than requested. The conference agreement included $332 million for special project grants, about $73 million more than the House's proposal, roughly $232 million more than the Senate approved, and about $304 million more than requested. For drinking water state revolving funds, the conference committee approved $820 million, $45 million more than the House's amount and $5 million less than the Senate approved and the President requested. The conference committee also approved the Administration's request of $885 million for state and tribal administrative grants, which is roughly the same as the amount enacted for FY1999. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs867/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
In the 107th Congress, S. 2797 (S.Rept. 107-222) would have provided $8.30 billion for EPA in FY2003. H.R. 5605 (H.Rept. 107- 740) would have provide $8.20 billion. Both bills would restore much of the water infrastructure funding but there was no final action by the end of Congress. Continuing resolutions funded at the same level as in FY2002. In the 108th Congress, P.L. 108-7 (H.J.Res. 2) provides EPA with $8.08 billion for FY2003. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3801/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
In the 107th Congress, S. 2797 (S.Rept. 107-222) would have provided $8.30 billion for EPA in FY2003. H.R. 5605 (H.Rept. 107- 740) would have provide $8.20 billion. Both bills would restore much of the water infrastructure funding but there was no final action by the end of Congress. Continuing resolutions funded at the same level as in FY2002. In the 108th Congress, P.L. 108-7 (H.J.Res. 2) provides EPA with $8.08 billion for FY2003. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3800/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
On April 9, 2001, the President requested $7.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY2002, $512.0 million (or 7%) less than the FY2001 funding level of $7.8 billion. The request would not have continued funding of about $500 million for activities earmarked for FY2001, and contained provisions shifting more enforcement responsibilities to the states. Popular wastewater infrastructure funding, state roles, and the future of Superfund were some of the predominant topics. On July 17, the House Appropriations Committee recommended $7.545 billion,$229 million more than requested (H.R. 2620, H. Rept. 107-159). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3799/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
On April 9, 2001, the President requested $7.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY2002, $512.0 million (or 7%) less than the FY2001 funding level of $7.8 billion. The request would not have continued funding of about $500 million for activities earmarked for FY2001, and contained provisions shifting more enforcement responsibilities to the states. Popular wastewater infrastructure funding, state roles, and the future of Superfund were some of the predominant topics. On July 17, the House Appropriations Committee recommended $7.545 billion,$229 million more than requested (H.R. 2620, H. Rept. 107-159). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3798/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2004 Budget
For FY2004, the President’s budget requested $7.6 billion in budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), $448 million (or 6%) less than the $8.1 billion current funding level. The House approved $8.0 billion in H.R. 2861 (H.Rept. 108-235) on July 25. Senate action is anticipated in September. The request consisted of $3.1 billion for EPA operating expenses, $3.1 billion for assisting state and local governments, and $1.4 billion for cleaning up Superfund toxic waste sites. Wastewater infrastructure needs and the future of Superfund are prominent topics. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3811/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2004 Budget
For FY2004, the President’s budget requested $7.6 billion in budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), $448 million (or 6%) less than the $8.1 billion current funding level. The House approved $8.0 billion in H.R. 2861 (H.Rept. 108-235) on July 25. Senate action is anticipated in September. The request consisted of $3.1 billion for EPA operating expenses, $3.1 billion for assisting state and local governments, and $1.4 billion for cleaning up Superfund toxic waste sites. Wastewater infrastructure needs and the future of Superfund are prominent topics. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3810/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2004 Budget
For FY2004, the President’s budget requested $7.6 billion in budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), $448 million (or 6%) less than the $8.1 billion current funding level. The House approved $8.0 billion in H.R. 2861 (H.Rept. 108-235) on July 25. Senate action is anticipated in September. The request consisted of $3.1 billion for EPA operating expenses, $3.1 billion for assisting state and local governments, and $1.4 billion for cleaning up Superfund toxic waste sites. Wastewater infrastructure needs and the future of Superfund are prominent topics. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs3809/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
On April 9, 2001, the President requested $7.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY2002, $512.0 million (or 7%) less than the FY2001 funding level of $7.8 billion. The request would not have continued funding of about $500 million for activities earmarked for FY2001, and contained provisions shifting more enforcement responsibilities to the states. Popular wastewater infrastructure funding, state roles, and the future of Superfund were some of the predominant topics. On July 17, the House Appropriations Committee recommended $7.545 billion,$229 million more than requested (H.R. 2620, H. Rept. 107-159). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2172/
The Environmental Protection Agency's FY2003 Budget
On April 9, 2001, the President requested $7.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for FY2002, $512.0 million (or 7%) less than the FY2001 funding level of $7.8 billion. The request would not have continued funding of about $500 million for activities earmarked for FY2001, and contained provisions shifting more enforcement responsibilities to the states. Popular wastewater infrastructure funding, state roles, and the future of Superfund were some of the predominant topics. On July 17, the House Appropriations Committee recommended $7.545 billion,$229 million more than requested (H.R. 2620, H. Rept. 107-159). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2171/