ABSTRACT It seems reasonable to start by defining terms and reaching some agreement on what will or will not be discussed. Environment is an all inclusive word which includes not only clean air and clean water but lifestyle and standard of living. As a result, good environment means very different things to different groups. We can all agree that we want an environment which includes a strong economy and a healthy population with leisure opportunities for all. As soon as we attempt to become more specific we run into conflicting opinions and goals.
t - The Federal government is not solely responsible for the environment or for environmental constraints. While the role of the Federal government in the environmental affairs has expanded greatly in the last decade, that role is still limited. The Federal establishment has very limited impact on energy facility sitting issues, no direct control over state and local governments which impose standards more stringent than national standards and virtually no control over private environmental organizations. We are not responsible for Ralph Nader or for the Sierra Club.
t - EPA is not solely responsible for Federal action concerning the environment, health, and safety. For example, OSHA is responsible for safety in the work place, MESA for mining safety, DOT for auto and highway safety, PHs and NIH for public health, and the Department of Commerce for coastal zone planning and management. All Federal agencies are required to prepare environmental impact statements for major actions and the Council on Environmental Quality is responsible for the administration of this EIS system under the provision of the National Environmental Protection Act of 1969. The Department of the Interior would be responsible for strip mine reclamation under the legislation which has now passed both houses of Congress.
All of this is not intended as a cop out. EPA is still the one Federal agency most responsible for environmental protection. However, our charter and authorities are limited. On occasions EPA is criticized (and sometimes praised) for actions not of our doing. It is imminently reasonable to hold EPA responsible for its actions, it is unfair to blame the Federal government or EPA for problems generated by others in the name of improving the environment.
Today I propose to discuss the impacts of EPA's regulatory program on the development of energy resources. I plan to give an overview of the impact of EPA's regulatory program by summarizing the results of a recent report to the Congress on this subject. Then I would like to address a series of specific program areas which I think are of interest to your organization and finally to close with a summary of my views on the tradeoffs between energy development and environmental protection.
IM
(Figure is available in full paper)
t
A study by Chase Econometrics indicates that our environmental program was responsible for 0.5% of the 17% increase in the wholesale price index for the year ending March 1974.