"Screw It" Pruitt - aka EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt

I worked for several years for the Environmental Protection Agency under the leadership of Carol Browner, whom I loved, and Christine Todd Whitman, whom I disliked.   (I didn't like the directive to address her as "Governor Whitman," actually.)  The current Administrator is the 14th, and he was appointed by the 45th President; I completely loathe both of these men.
  (Edward) Scott Pruitt was born in Danville, Kentucky in May 1968; his family moved to Lexington, Kentucky when he was a boy.  He was awarded an athletic scholarship to the University of Kentucky, but moved on to Georgetown College after a year, where he graduated with degrees in political science and communication.  He then moved to Tulsa, Oklahoma where he earned his Juris Doctor law degree from the University of Tulsa College of Law in 1993.
  After law school, Pruitt started a solo legal practice in Tulsa that he named "Christian Legal Services," which focused on defending Christians in religious liberty cases. He worked out of that office for 5 years before running for the Oklahoma state senate, and he won the election, representing Tulsa and Wagoner counties for two terms.
   After two years in the state senate, Pruitt was selected to serve as the Republican whip from 2001 to 2003.  He was then selected to serve as the Republican Assistant Floor Leader, until 2006.  During that time, he also sat as chairman of a task force for the American Legislative Exchange Council.  There, he sponsored a workers'-compensation reform bill that sought to impose drug tests on workers who were involved in on-the-job injuries or accidents.  In 2005, Pruitt told a radio interviewer that there are "not sufficient scientific facts to establish the theory of evolution."
  In 2010, Pruitt was elected the Attorney General of Oklahoma.  In that role, he opposed abortion rights, same-sex marriage, the Affordable Care Act, and almost all environmental regulations as a self-described "leading advocate against the EPA's activist agenda."  In his campaigns for Oklahoma Attorney General, Pruitt received major corporate and employee campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry, taking at least $215,574 between 2010 and 2014, even though he ran unopposed in 2014.  In his role as Attorney General of Oklahoma, he sued the Environmental Protection Agency at least 14 times.  Pruitt was elected as chairman of the Republican Attorneys General Association in 2012, and was re-elected for a second term in 2013.
  Administrator Pruitt rejects the scientific consensus that human-caused carbon dioxide emissions are a primary contributor to climate change; and has falsely claimed there is no scientific consensus on climate change.  As EPA leader, Pruitt has reversed and delayed numerous environmental rules, relaxed enforcement of existing rules, and has halted the agency's efforts to combat climate change.
Pruitt assumed the office of EPA Administrator on 17 February 2017.
  By the middle of this month, April 2018, Pruitt is under 10 (ten) separate investigations by the Government Accountability Office, the EPA's Inspector General, the White House Office of Management and Budget, and two Congressional House committees over his spending habits, conflicts of interest and management practices.  His spending extravagances include having spent over $3 million for his personal security team of 20+, which has included security at the Rose Bowl, Disneyland, basketball games and family vacations.  He has spent $43,000 for a "sound proof phone booth" inside his office, plus has greatly exceeded the budget for bullet-proof vests, ammunition, art loans from the Smithsonian Institute, and the framing of  a flag in his office.  He also made frequent use of first class air flights, as well as frequent charter and specially scheduled military flights.
   Pruitt has had private, undisclosed meetings with heads of industries; and special concerns have been raised concerning those meetings with coal miners and an appearance in a video promoting the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.  He has been caught using four e-mail addresses, only two of which were known to Congress, and Senator John Barrasso (Republican, Wyoming) has sent sent Pruitt a letter warning  him that the use of those e-mail addresses makes the use of FOIA impossible and is breaking the law.
  Also under investigation are his multiple dismissals of well-known scientists from EPA Science Advisory Boards, whom he replaced with people from the industries and state regulators in the areas they are giving advisement.  Most people know about Pruitt's "renting" a condo in Washington, DC for $50 per night that belongs to a lobbyist whose clients were regulated by the EPA.  He was also involved in a housing scam during his time in the Oklahoma state senate, which (gasp!) incredibly also involved the two assistants for whom he got very large, un-authorized pay raises.  Misters Wagner and Kelly are friends from Oklahoma, and Pruitt used a narrow provision of the Safe Drinking Water Act to autonomously give raises of approximately $28,000 and $57,000 each, which allowed both of his friends to avoid signing conflicts of interest pledges.
    Talk about scheming lawyers!!!!

Earth Day and the Dismantling of the Environmental Protection Agency

Yesterday was the 48th anniversary of Earth Day.  I remember small groups of people celebrating the first Earth Day in 1970.  I was in 8th grade, and my educational world was being shaken by the Federal Desegregation Act.  From going to junior high school on a full-time daily basis, I was suddenly going to school only in the afternoon at another school's buildings; and I was way ahead of the other students in everything except American history.  I remember groups of "hippies" celebrating and protesting on and around the University of Florida campus; but not much else, honestly.
   However, there was a growing movement afoot.  Dad had taken Kathy and me to the Devil's Millhopper and hiking out into the woods almost every weekend - and we always carried a brown paper grocery bag apiece, to pick up any trash we saw.  So I guess I was environmentally aware of certain problems, even though I didn't really think about them.  But suddenly, it seemed, litter was a big social issue.  Then, in 1971, the Public Service Announcement ad with Chief Iron Eyes Cody, with a tear running down his cheek, was released.  A Native American was crying over the trashing of his country; it stamped itself on the nation's memory.
   In part, thanks to Earth Day, President Nixon established the Environmental Protection Agency with an executive order from the White House. Suddenly, it seemed, Congress jumped onto the bandwagon, and the following Acts were passed:
The Clean Air Act  in 1970
The Environmental Quality Improvement Act  in 1970
The Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act  in 1971
The Clean Water Act  in 1971
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act  in 1972
The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act  in 1972
The Marine Mammal Protection Act  in 1972
The Endangered Species Act  in1973
The Safe Drinking Water Act  in 1974
The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards  in 1975
The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act  in 1975
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act  in 1976
The Toxic Substances Control Act  in 1976
The National Forest Management Act  in 1976

  Yesterday, there were a lot of celebrations of Earth Day in and around Boulder, Colorado, my current place of residence.  Here, we have a lot of conserved and protected Open Space, trails, and green ways.  We are backed up against the Roosevelt National Forest, and have lots of parks and recreational facilities.  Boulder is striving to achieve a 85% trash recycling and composting rate.  This area wants to be "green."
   But, as we know, we are racing backwards fast, under the so-called leadership of a head of the EPA who sees his mission as (a) leaving as many citizens as possible exposed to environment degradation, and (b) picking our pockets clean in a breath-taking manner.  Just Google "EPA environmental regulations" and you'll quickly see all the damage that Scott Pruitt and the 45th President are trying to accomplish.
   If  the Democrats can regain the lead in Congress in 2018, and if we can re-capture the White House in 2020, we can swing our environmental incursions back in the other direction quickly.  We can rejoin the Paris Climate Accords, re-enforce CAFE standards, and a whole lot more...    And that same 2020 that will bring us the next presidential election will also bring us the 50th anniversary of Earth Day
   Here's hoping for a much better future for Mother Earth here in the United States, and for a much better, and re-invented, re-energized Environmental Protection Agency, as well!

The Chesapeake Bay - Part 5 - Programs

So we know that the Chesapeake Bay needs oysters for its health, and we know that the Bay's salinity is ideal for oysters, but the population in the last fifty years has been devastated.  Maryland used to have  about 200,000 acres of oyster reefs; today the number is about 36,000.  In pre-colonial days, the oysters could filter the entire Bay in about 3 days; and in 1988 the filtration time was 325 days.   The gross value of the oyster harvest dropped 88% from 1982 to 2007.  One report stated that the Bay contained less oysters in 2008 than it did in 1983.  Over-harvesting, pollution, and disease are the known culprits.
   The depletion of the oysters has had a very harmful effect upon the quality of the water in the Bay.  Oysters serve as natural water filters, and the fewer they are, the dirtier the Bay is.  Water that was once clear for several feet is now so turbid that a wader can lose sight of their feet before their knees are wet.
    Efforts of federal, state, and local governments, working in partnership through the Chesapeake Bay Program, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, and other non-profit environmental groups, tp restore water quality have had some good results.  One obstacle to cleaning up the Bay is that much of the polluting substances appear far upstream in tributaries lying in states that are far removed from the Chesapeake itself.  Twenty years ago, the Bay supported over 6,000 oystermen and their families. Today, there are fewer than 500 oystermen.
    Repopulation of the Bay oysters via hatcheries has been carried out by a group called the Oyster Recovery Partnership, with some success.  They recently placed 6 million oysters on 8 acres of the Trent Hall Sanctuary.  And scientists from the Virginia Institute of Marine Science at the College of William & Mary  claim that the experimental reefs they created in 2004 are now home to 180 million native oysters, Crassostrea virginica;  but that is much less than the billions of oysters that once claimed the Bay as "home."
   Earlier this week, it was announced that the 45th Administration planned to cut the Environmental Protection Agency's staff by one-fifth, and eliminate key programs.  The original "leaked" numbers proposed that the White House would reduce annual funding for the EPA's Chesapeake Bay Cleanup project by 93 percent, gutting the program from $73 million down to $5 million for the fiscal year.  The real numbers were released yesterday, and the Bay Cleanup Program will get nothing from the proposed budget.
   The project represents a unique state and federal cleanup plan that began in 2010.  It is working.  The Chesapeake is getting better, and each partner plays a vital role.  The states developed and implemented their own plans to reduce pollution and restore water quality.  The EPA's portion of the cleanup program coordinates the science, research and modeling to implement the blueprint and it makes grants that fund pollution reduction.  Today, pollution is down.  Jobs have been created, human health has been protected, and local economies have been improved.  The Chesapeake Bay's "dead zone" where aquatic life cannot thrive is getting smaller; crabs, oysters and underwater grasses are being to rebound.
   But the Chesapeake Bay is far from saved. Having the budget cut by 93 percent, or more, will reverse all of the progress that has been made.  Bay restoration efforts have a long history of bipartisan support.  Our elected officials have consistently pursued a legacy of clean water.  Let's make sure that they understand that we want to, and need to, preserve and protect the Chesapeake Bay!
     Write to the President, the Vice President, to the EPA, and to each and every one of your Congressional representatives.  Without clean water everything dies.

Under the Heel of "45" and Pruitt - The EPA

Yesterday, by a four vote margin, Scott Pruitt was confirmed as the new administrator of the United States Protection Agency.  He was sworn in yesterday afternoon.  During his election campaign, the tiny-handed tangerine tyrant, aka 45, vowed "to gut the EPA."  Congress has just given that power to 45's hand-picked butcher. Scott Pruitt, has always been highly critical of the Environmental Protection Agency, and now wields the power to to totally reshape the 15,000 employees work place and work standards.
   As the Attorney General of the state of Oklahoma, Pruitt sued the EPA at least 14 times - often in lockstep with the fossil fuel industry - to try to overturn the agency's clean air and clean water regulations.  He has questioned the role humans play in climate change, and argues that much of the agency's authority should in the the states' hands.  Now, Pruitt's actions - and the new executive orders that 45 plans to sign regarding the EPA - could have repercussions for decades, if not centuries. "Most of the business community is looking to Pruitt to make changes that will be enduring - not do things that can easily be undone by the next administration, but really sensible things," said Jeffrey Holmstead, who was an EPA official during George W. Bush's administration, and who is now employed by Bracewell LLP.
    I have personally heard of an executive order in the works that will allow mines almost no restrictions on the waste (toxic and otherwise), sludge, and sediment run-offs that will flow into streams,creeks and rivers.  No more wading in the creeks, or fishing, or anything fun - just rescuing poisoned creatures in the poisoned waters and along stream, creek and river banks...
     I have drawn heavily upon Politico.com as a resource for the following information.  The five items of vital interest to the American public regarding this administration and the United States Environmental Protection Agency are:
1.  Climate Change -   "45" and Pruitt have vowed to dramatically shift course on the Obama Administration's landmark climate change efforts.  The president has threatened to pull out of the 2015 Paris climate deal, in which the US and nearly 200 other nations agreed to make sharp cuts in their greenhouse gas output. The EPA's Clean Power Plan, which requires cuts in the power industry's carbon dioxide emissions,has a target on its back.
2.  Water Protections -  After years of legal confusion about which streams and wetlands deserve protection under the Clean Water Act, the Obama administration issued a landmark regulation in 2015 to cover head-water streams and some wetlands and ponds. Called the Waters of the US rule, or WOTUS, the regulation sparked a fierce backlash from home builders, farmers, and the oil and gas industries, which say it gives the federal government vast power over everything from stock ponds to puddles.  This President has vowed to kill WOTUS as soon as possible.
3.  Executive Orders - Cheeto-cheeks is widely expected to sign one or more executive orders shortly after Pruitt takes the helm at the agency, setting the priorities and tone for his EPA.  Top targets for the orders could include the agency's climate change work, its broad enforcement powers, or its overall approach to regulation.  Of course, executive orders are tied to the president who signs them, and the next administration can quickly undo them.  But EOs can also be used to set in motion a broader set of changes that aren't as easily erased. For instance, industry groups have long urged the EPA to change the way it measures the costs of new regulations, something that could significantly alter the regulatory review process for years.
4.  Personnel - One early "45" adviser, EPA critic Myron Ebell, had a clear recommendation for reining in the EPA: "Slash the workforce."  His call to cut the EPA's staff by two-thirds got a lot of media attention, but would be virtually impossible to accomplish.  Still, attrition can pack a punch, especially when the number of employees nearing retirement age and the promise of an unfriendly leader has sent morale plunging.
5.  Legislation - Truly lasting changes in the country's approach to environmental regulation will require action by Congress.  And after eight years of having their efforts met with veto threats from the White House, Republicans on Capitol Hill now see an opening.  But any such legislation will face a 60 vote threshold in the Senate, so a wholesale revamp that many in the GOP want to see is likely to remain out of reach.  Key Republican leaders have said that they plan to take a rifle-shot approach to the Clean Air Act, and they may try again to influence the reach of the Clean Water Act. However, it's not clear whether they will be able to raise the 60 votes needed...

The US Environmental Protection Agency

As  a proud former employee (as a contractor) of the United States Environmental Protection Agency,
I was amazed, appalled, and outraged when I read the following in a Reuters news article:
  "US President Donald Trump's administration has moved since he took office last week to curb the flow of information from several government agencies involved in environmental issues, in actions that may have been designed to discourage dissenting views.  Employees at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Interior Department, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have seen directives from the newly minted leadership seeking to limit how they communicate with the public, according to multiple sources.  The moves have reinforced concerns that Trump, a climate change doubter, could seek to sideline scientific research showing that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels contributes to global warming, as well as the career staffers at the agencies that conduct much of this research.  All of the agencies affected by the actions have some input on issues related to the environment and have been involved in various efforts related to climate change, including the effects on natural resources and human health.
   On Tuesday (today), a source at the EPA said that staff had been told by members of the Trump administration not to speak to reporters or publish any press releases or blog posts on social media.  EPA staff have also been asked not to publicize any talks, conferences, or webinars that  had been planned for the next 60 days, the staffer said, asking not to be named.  Asked if the EPA had been gagged, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said on Tuesday: "I don't know ...  we're looking into it.  ...  I don't think it's a surprise we're going to review the policies, but I don't have any info at this time."
   The agency (EPA) also was asked by the White House on Monday to temporarily halt all contracts and grants pending a review, according to multiple sources.  The EPA awards billions of dollars worth of grants and contracts every year to support programs around environmental testing, cleanups, and research.  "EPA staff have been reviewing grants and contracts information with the incoming transition team," EPA spokeswoman Julia Valentine said in a statement.  "The goal is to complete the grants and contracts review by the close of business on Friday, January 27." "

        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A few facts about the Environmental Protection Agency:

   The United States EPA (sometimes known as the USEPA) is an agency of the Federal government; it was created for the purpose of protecting human health and the environment by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress.   The EPA was proposed by President Richard Nixon and began operation on 2 December 1970, after Nixon signed an executive order.  The order was ratified by committee hearings in both the House and Senate. The agency is led by its Administrator, who is appointed by the President and is approved by Congress.  The EPA is not a Cabinet department, but the administrator is usually given cabinet rank.

    The EPA has its headquarters in Washington, DC, regional offices for each of the agency's 10 regions, and 27 laboratories. The agency conducts environmental assessment, research and education.  It has the responsibility of maintaining and enforcing national standards under a variety of environmental laws, in consultation with state, tribal and local governments.  It delegates some permitting, monitoring and enforcement responsibility to US states and the federally recognized tribes.  EPA enforcement powers include fines, sanctions, and other measures.  The agency also works with industries and all  levels of government in a wide variety of voluntary pollution prevention programs and energy conservation efforts.

    In 2016, the EPA had 15,376 full-time employees.  More than half of the agency's human resources are engineers, scientists, and environmental protection specialists; other groups include legal, public affairs, financial, and information technologists. (I was one of the info techs in DC...)

  ** The EPA has been criticized for its lack of progress towards environmental justice.  Administrator Christine Todd Whitman was criticized for her changes to President Bill Clinton's Executive Order 12898 during 2001, removing the requirements for government agencies to take the poor and minority populations into special consideration when making changes to environmental legislation, and therefore defeating the spirit of the Executive Order.  (That's when I quit.)**

   Many issues of environmental justice are localized, and are therefore hard to be addressed by federal agencies like the EPA.  Without significant media attention, political interest, or "crisis" status, local issues are less likely to be addressed.  With a still developing sector of environmental justice under the EPA, small local incidents are unlikely to be solved compared to larger, well publicized incidents.   

Unfortunately,

the White House maintains direct control over the United States Environmental Agency, and its enforcements are subject to the political agenda of who is in power.  Democrats and Republicans differ in their approaches to, and perceived concerns of, environmental justice.  

   The EPA is responsible for preventing and detecting environmental crimes, informing the public of environmental enforcement, and setting and monitoring standards of air pollution, water pollution, hazardous wastes, and chemicals. The EPA aids in preventing and identifying hazardous situations, but with its wide range of responsibilities, it is extremely difficult to construct a specific mission statement for the agency.

   The EPA answers to various groups, it has to compete for governmental funding, and it confronts a wide array of harms to our environment, and, ultimately, us humans.  Its lack of dependable resources, and the current President's dismissal of environmental change are frightening.  We need to contact our local, state, and Congressional representatives and say that  "Enough is enough!"

   The EPA needs support and reinforcements! 

Earth Day - # 45

Today is the 45th annual anniversary of Earth Day.  With today's celebration, people of the world are hoping to spread the word that what is now known as a "small carbon footprint" is extremely important.  I have to admit that the first Earth Day did not make a great impression on me - that was in April 1970, and enforced desegregation had become the law in Florida in January.  My new school was meeting in the afternoon at Howard Bishop Junior High, with Bishop students attending school in the morning.  There had been rioting at the other new school, but our school was quiet.  I don't even remember who was my Science teacher for that half-year.
  My sister Kathy was deeply involved in both the Peace movement and the Environmental movement at that time, so I'm sure we must have discussed it frequently.  I just don't remember it.  I know that my Science teachers at Eastside, once we were in our own building, addressed the state of our environment heavily.  They encouraged all of us to be less wasteful and more in tune with nature.  Spending a lot of time in the swamps and woods in the state of Florida, and having Dad teach me about conservation of resources, I think I was pretty aware of the current issues.
  I became much more aware of the issues when I was a contractor for the United States Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D. C.  There, I worked in the research library - and my main task was reading, evaluating, assigning, and answering any and all comments or questions that were arriving on the EPA's website.  When I arrived, we were receiving 400 to 600 e-mails per month.  When I left, we were receiving 6,000 to 8,000 e-mails per month.   I was amazed by the lack of the publics' knowledge of what the Environmental Protection Agency did, and by their assumption that a US regulatory body could "fix" something as mundane as the time of local trash pick-up.  It was certainly an eye-opening job.
  I did become acquainted with a lot of amazing statistics regarding chemical incidents and how long it takes for certain items to biodegrade.  It's frightening to realize how long the trash we have produced will last.  I became a huge fan of compostability and recycling in my first six months of work there.  If you smoke, and you smoke a filtered cigarette, do you realize that the filter of your cigarette is a man-made synthetic?  That, even if you strip the paper off and shred the filter, it will take more than 270 years for the synthetic material to breakdown into re-usable components?  And that the chemicals that are removed within the filter stay around for 500 years before breaking down?  I recycle.  I compost.  I have my own tiny garden.  I grow catnip for my cats.  I conserve water.  I try not to use a lot of plastic items - and I make sure that the plastic items can be recycled.  I don't own a vehicle.  I get around by mass transit, by foot, and by bicycle.  I'm trying to reduce my carbon footprint - how about you?