Knight Ridder Washington Bureau November 5, 2002, Tuesday HEADLINE: Polluters Pay Less under Bush Administration, Records Show BYLINE: By Seth Borenstein WASHINGTON -- Polluters have paid 64 percent less in fines for breaking federal environmental rules under the Bush administration than they did in the final two years of the Clinton administration, according to federal records analyzed by Knight Ridder. The Bush administration is forcing fewer polluters to pay fines, and the penalties are much smaller than they were under Clinton, according to records obtained by a former top environmental-enforcement official under President Bush. "There's a tremendous problem with environmental policy in general and enforcement in particular in this administration," said Sylvia Lowrance, who was the Environmental Protection Agency's acting assistant administrator in charge of enforcement from January 20, 2001, to May 2002. A 28-year civil servant, she retired in August. "The data don't lie." Lowrance's deputy, EPA civil-enforcement chief Eric Schaeffer, who resigned last February to protest what he charged was weak enforcement, compiled four years' worth of EPA non-Superfund civil-enforcement settlements through Oct. 1, all published in the Federal Register. A Knight Ridder analysis found that during the first 20 months of the Bush administration, civil penalties averaged $ 3.8 million per month. During the last 28 months of the Clinton administration, civil penalties for the same types of violations averaged $ 10.6 million a month. In addition, Bush's EPA is requiring violators to pay much less for environmental projects, such as restoring wetlands, that they are ordered to undertake as part of their settlements. The value of such extra projects plummeted 77 percent during the first 20 months of the Bush administration. Their value averaged $ 2.6 million per month, vs. $ 11.6 million per month during the last 28 months of the Clinton administration. During its last 28 months the Clinton administration collected $ 296.1 million in civil penalties from polluters and $ 324.4 million in additional environmental projects. During its first 20 months, the Bush administration collected $ 76.3 million in fines and $ 52.7 million for additional projects. The Clinton administration averaged 7.75 civil-penalty settlements a month. The Bush administration averages 6.3 per month, a drop of 19 percent. During the Clinton administration the average civil penalty was $ 1.36 million, vs. $ 605,455 under the Bush administration, a drop of nearly 56 percent. The EPA says it does not have figures for 2002, but spokesman Joe Martyak said polluter penalties in fiscal 2001 totaled nearly twice as much as those paid in 2000 under Clinton. Schaeffer's accounting showed that three-quarters of the 2001 settlement fines were agreed upon before Bush took office, but Martyak said polluter penalties were rising under Bush. The EPA's current enforcement chief, John Suarez, vows to be vigilant. "I feel the pressure is out there for us to go do good enforcement cases," enforcement chief Suarez said in an interview. "We will continue to enforce. We must continue to enforce." Current EPA officials said it was unfair to compare the first months of an administration to Clinton's second-term EPA, which had many years of experience. Because Bush's first choice as EPA enforcement chief had to withdraw under pressure on Capitol Hill, Suarez did not take over until August. Before that he was New Jersey's gambling-enforcement chief. During her confirmation hearings in January 2001, EPA Administrator Christie Whitman promised an EPA that collaborates more with business, but added: "We will work to promote effective compliance with environmental standards without weakening our vigorous enforcement of tough laws and regulations." Former EPA enforcer Schaeffer, now director of the Rockefeller Family Fund's Environmental Integrity Project, said, "They've obviously taken the pressure off (polluters), especially on the clean-air cases." Pro-business interests defend Bush's record. Those numbers could reflect "more reason in the Bush administration than in the Clinton administration," said Bill Kovacs, vice president for environmental affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He said the Clinton administration was overly litigious and got higher -- and often unfair -- settlement figures because it threatened prolonged legal action. The Bush administration, he said, "could just be coming in with more reasonable offers." But Lowrance charged that the drop in settlements reflects a lack of support from the White House for strong enforcement of environmental laws. "The administration literally walked in the door, the first action they took on EPA's budget was to announce that they were cutting back on civil enforcement," said Lowrance, who ran that office under Bush. Last year Bush proposed to cut $ 25 million and 270 EPA enforcement jobs, but Congress spared most of that. In his current budget proposal, which is still pending on Capitol Hill, the president asked to eliminate 112 enforcement positions to save $ 10 million. He also asked to send $ 15 million to states to strengthen their enforcement of pollution laws, but the EPA's reports say states do that poorly. The enforcement issue coincides with the administration's plan to loosen an environmental rule that prohibits older utilities from expanding unless they add new air-pollution controls. The Clinton administration sued several utilities under this rule, which businesses said was unfair. The administration's proposed changes in the utilities rule mean that "no one has the incentive to do anything" to settle existing cases, said an attorney who represents sued companies and asked not to be identified. On the other hand, some of the falloff in prosecutions reflects a normal up-and-down cycle of suits and settlements, the attorney said. Sen. James Jeffords, a Vermont independent who is chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, is planning to subpoena EPA enforcement documents on the utility issue, the first congressional subpoena of the EPA since the Reagan administration. "This administration is sending a message to polluters that if you break our environmental laws you'll get a slap on the wrist rather than the full force of the law," Jeffords said. "Our laws are meaningless if they are not enforced." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to: [log in to unmask]