Numerous state and local governments are moving to strongly oppose the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposals to relax federal chemical reporting requirements under the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) program. In addition to comments criticizing the EPA proposal, there have been state legislation and city and county resolutions introduced to void EPA's proposed changes.

EPA did little, if any, vetting of its TRI plans with state and local officials and the decision to exclude them from the planning process appears to be costing the agency now. EPA dismissed the need for state and local input on the proposals, despite the fact that: 1) the TRI program was established to inform and empower communities; 2) many states used the TRI reporting as the foundation for their own pollution prevention programs; and 3) analysis indicates the changes will significantly reduce the amount of community-level data available (one in 10 communities with TRI facilities will lose all numerical data on these nearby facilities).

In fact, in its rulemaking, the agency specifically asserted that the reporting changes did not have any federalism implications. Federalism issues are raised when federal regulations will have substantial direct effects on states or on the relationship between the federal government and states. By executive order, if a regulation has federalism implications, the agency that is proposing the regulation must develop a process to ensure meaningful, timely input by state and local officials in developing the regulation. Since EPA dismissed the federalism issue, the agency was able to skip consultation with state and local officials and develop the proposed reporting changes alone. Recent statements and actions of a number of state and locals officials indicate that many strongly disagree with EPA's assertion that the TRI program is simply a national database with no serious impact on state and local activities.

On Jan. 28, California Assemblyman Ira Ruskin, (D-Redwood City) announced that he would introduce state legislation to block the EPA proposals from taking effect in California. Ruskin told the Palo Alto Weekly that the TRI program "has been extremely useful, [and] extremely valuable," and that EPA's proposals "would potentially affect every community in California." Ruskin's proposal would require California's Environmental Protection Agency to establish a toxics reporting program using the current TRI reporting frequency and threshold levels. Additionally, in Chicago, Alderman Coleman introduced a Jan. 11 resolution to oppose EPA's proposals to cut pollution reporting.

Several city and county officials also weighed in against the proposals in comments submitted to EPA. Official comments submitted by Miami-Dade County Commissioner Katy Sorenson underscore the effect of the changes on state and local officials, explaining, "Florida officials have found the TRI program extremely helpful in setting environmental and public health policy. Accordingly, we are concerned that the current proposals will undermine these efforts, particularly at the community level." Sorenson concluded that "[t]he proposed rule puts the interest of chemical facilities squarely in front of the safety of families in the community that I represent. Therefore, I respectfully request that the proposed roll-back of the TRI be withdrawn." Joanne Godley, acting health commissioner for Philadelphia, noted, in comments opposing the reporting changes, "changes to TRI reporting would adversely impact the use of the data by the City of Philadelphia and its citizens." Godley also noted that the changes would allow 14 of the 57 TRI facilities in Philadelphia to stop reporting detailed data on their toxic releases and disposals. Godley urged EPA to "consider the ways in which the proposed Form A exemption will hinder efforts to promote pollution prevention and could lead to non-reporting of significant releases."

The director of the Environmental Quality Division for the Denver Department of Environmental Health, Celia VanDerLoop, notes that "the proposed changes in the Form R reporting run counter to the purpose of [TRI]." VanDerLoop also reports that Denver DEH projects that one-quarter of the chemical releases and disposals tracked by TRI in the Denver area would be lost under the EPA's proposals.

For additional details on comments submitted in the rulemaking, see OMB Watch's Jan. 24 Watcher story called "EPA Gets an Earful on Plan to Reduce Toxic Reporting."