Senate Hearing on EPA Fiscal Year 2017 Budget
January 1, 2015
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
The Frame
This hearing outlines the legislative debate over how the EPA allocates federal funds, which directly impacts the availability of grants for local water and air quality projects and the scope of federal environmental regulations affecting industries like mining and energy.
Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.
Alaska residents
They are affected by potential changes to water infrastructure funding, air quality grant availability, and federal oversight of land development.
Oil and gas industry
They are subject to potential new federal regulations regarding methane emissions and existing bonding requirements.
Mining industry
They are affected by EPA proposals regarding financial assurance requirements under the Superfund statute.
Last recorded activity January 1, 2015.
Next step not available in the current record.
Summary
Key Facts
- The EPA proposed a $414 million cut to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund.
- The EPA budget request includes a $257 million net reduction for State Revolving Funds (SRFs) overall.
- The EPA requested $235 million for the President's climate change agenda, a 48% increase from the previous year.
- The EPA requested a $27.5 million increase for its enforcement budget.
- The fiscal year 2016 omnibus included $20 million for Targeted Air Shed Grants.
- The fiscal year 2016 omnibus included $20 million for the Alaska Native Villages Water Program.
- Senator Murkowski identified the 'Waters of the United States' proposal as a major concern for Alaska, noting that two-thirds of the state is considered wetlands.
- The EPA is considering new regulations for methane emissions at existing oil and gas wells.
- The EPA is proposing to eliminate the radon protection program.
- The EPA is proposing to eliminate the grant program for particulate matter and ozone issues.
Why It Matters
This hearing outlines the legislative debate over how the EPA allocates federal funds, which directly impacts the availability of grants for local water and air quality projects and the scope of federal environmental regulations affecting industries like mining and energy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Clean Water State Revolving Fund?
Why is the EPA's 'Waters of the United States' rule controversial in Alaska?
What is the status of the Clean Power Plan mentioned in the hearing?
News Coverage
Lobbying Activity
VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES
on behalf of BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF EASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY
VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES
on behalf of WATER AND SEWER DISTRIBUTORS OF AMERICA
VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES
on behalf of EJ WATER COOPERATIVE, INC.
LEWIS-BURKE ASSOCIATES, LLC
on behalf of UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
HARO SOLUTIONS LLC
on behalf of COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
on behalf of POLK COUNTY
Sponsors
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Budget Reallocation
The EPA's 2017 budget request shows a clear shift in priorities, moving funds away from traditional water infrastructure (SRFs) toward climate change initiatives and enforcement.
Connected Entities
Sources
www.govinfo.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance80How much this matters to a regular citizen
- Controversy75Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment20Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz30Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools