=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL’S HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #210
—December 5, 1990—
News and resources for environmental justice.
——
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
The Back issues and Index
are available
here.
The official RACHEL archive is here.
It’s updated constantly.
To subscribe, send E-mail to rachel-
weekly-
request@world.std.com
with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It’s free.
===Previous Issue==========================================Next Issue===
AN INSIDER TELLS WHY EPA IS LIKE IT IS.
EPA celebrated its 20th birthday this week. It was a dismal
affair.
Do you remember back when you got into your first environmental
fight and you first learned of the existence of EPA (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency)? “Thank the Lord,” you probably
said, “I’ve finally located a government agency that’s on my
side; they’ll put these polluters in jail–that’s their job,
that’s what they’re paid to do.”
Then you got deeper into the issues and you found that EPA
officials are indifferent or even antagonistic. You found that
you yourself, rather than the polluters, are viewed by EPA as the
enemy and that the hazardous waste dumpers and EPA and state
officials work closely together while you, the public, are the
outsiders.
You found that you have to spend your own time, and hire outside
experts with your own money, to gather data while EPA sits on the
same data, gathered at public expense.
You ask, why should people paid by the public to protect the
environment not do so? The answer isn’t simple–but now, finally,
an EPA official has written down on paper “Why the EPA Is Like It
Is.” William Sanjour–a 20-year employee of the EPA and a
well-known friend of grass-roots environmentalists–has laid it
out in just 13 pages. Your heart will sing when you read this
little jewel.
“To understand why the EPA is the way it is,” says Sanjour, “you
must start at the top, at the White House.” The President has
four or five top priority programs (defense, the budget and so
forth); these are programs he cares about and from which he wants
real results. Then he has a private, personal agenda–keeping
himself out of the clutches of the law, getting reelected, and
“where will we go after our term of office is over?”
Then there is all the other business of government, including
transportation, housing, education, environment, and other
relatively unimportant stuff. That’s how it is, folks. The
President is, after all, human and he can only focus on a few
things.
The President wants real performance from his highpriority
programs. From all the others, he wants peace and quiet. He wants
not to be annoyed or distracted. Thus an EPA administrator should
be someone everyone can more or less agree on. He or she can make
tough-talk speeches, but above all else, he or she must not make
waves.
People who work for EPA must not be people who like to get things
done. “People who need to see concrete results for their efforts
don’t last long at EPA,” says Sanjour. “When it comes to drafting
and implementing rules for environmental protection, getting
results means making enemies of powerful and influential people.
The kind of people who get ahead [within EPA] are those clever
ones who can be terribly busy while they procrastinate,
obfuscate, and can consistently come up with superficially
plausible reasons for not accomplishing anything,” Sanjour says.
“Thousands of people have spent hundreds of millions of dollars
over decades with nothing to show for it but their own career
advancement.”
But, you say, what about those instances in which EPA has issued
regulations, has collected millions in fines and has even put a
few polluters into jail? “In most cases,” says Sanjour, if you
look carefully, you will find that EPA was forced or coerced into
taking action and rarely ever initiated it.”
Sanjour points out that EPA more often than not opposes Congress
passing really tough environmental laws; a whole industry has
been created by such organizations as Environmental Defense Fund
(EDF) and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) suing EPA to
make them do what the law already requires them to do and for
which they are already being paid; more time and money is spent
figuring out how to remove companies from regulation than is
spent getting companies regulated; fines that EPA collects are
usually smaller than the profits polluters earned by breaking the
law in the first place; and most importantly: most enforcement
cases against influential polluters are started by some
combination of environmental organizations, the media and local
citizens.
Anyone who has to deal with EPA and wants to succeed must know
what the agency’s real priorities are, and act accordingly. Each
office within EPA is slightly different, but the Office of Solid
Waste (OSW-where Sanjour has worked for years) provides a good
example. Sanjour lists the groups that have the most influence on
OSW, in this order: the waste management industry, state
governments, powerful waste producing industries (oil, mining,
electric utilities, chemicals), important Congressmen, national
environmental groups, and, last, the national media.
Just because you (grass-roots groups) are not on the list doesn’t
mean you can’t influence EPA–you just need to know roundabout
ways to make it happen. More on this later.
The major clients of OSW are the companies who make money
“managing” solid and hazardous wastes. This is the industry that
has the most to gain or lose by OSW decisions. The commercial
waste business is a business. Its income is produced by taking
wastes through the gate. Waste is money, the more the better.
Expense is incurred by treating the waste so as to protect the
environment. This costs money. A successful business maximizes
income and reduces expenses to the lowest possible level. The
waste “management” business, by its very nature, must do
everything it can to thwart serious attempts to reduce the amount
of waste produced in America and at the same time must take any
shortcuts it can get away with in the treatment of that waste.
“Most people in EPA equate the waste management industry with the
protection of the environment and the industry’s opponents and
anti-environment NIMBYs,” Sanjour says. “EPA finds it very
comfortable to be allied with a big powerful industry which
presents itself as the protector and defender of the environment.”
Waste management has been the growth industry of the ’80s and is
likely to continue into the ’90s. The industry has grown rich
through its ability to control the governments who are supposed
to be controlling them and it shares the wealth with its
benefactors,” says Sanjour. “Bureaucrats learn that crossing the
industry can get them into a lot of trouble, whereas cooperating
with them has many rewards including the hope of lucrative
employment. Scores of federal and state employees have already
done so, including several former administrators of EPA. Many
others have gotten high paying jobs in law firms representing the
hazardous waste industry and other companies such as consulting
firms and engineering firms with industry clients,” says Sanjour.
Sanjour has formulated a law, which he has named after his former
EPA boss, Gary Dietrich (now a very successful waste management
consultant); “Dietrich’s law” is: “No one in EPA ever went to
jail, or lost his job, or suffered any setback in his career for
failing to do what the law required him to do and for which he
was being paid.” And the corollary to Dietrich’s law is: “Lots of
people have ruined their careers in EPA by trying to do what the
law required them to do and for which they were being paid.” Or,
as Sanjour’s friend within EPA, Hugh Kaufman, has often said, “No
good deed will go unpunished.”
To influence EPA, you must develop the power to influence people
who can influence management-level EPA officials. This means
organizing at the local level, then expanding to statewide
organizing. “If you organize and have a block of supporters, or
at least give the impression that you do, then you can influence
local elections for county officials, state legislatures, and
U.S. Congressmen. You can also use your influence on local banks,
merchants, or anyone else who might be tempted to profit from
having a hazardous waste facility in your back yard,” Sanjour
advises.
“By extending your influence throughout the state, you can affect
state officials and U.S. Senators as well. But in order to do
this, you must make your issue a state issue, otherwise you will
just be brushed off as NIMBYs. Don’t just try to shift your
issues to some other part of the state. Emphasize instead: (a)
not letting your state become the dumping ground for the rest of
the world; (b) the track record of environmental abuse and
corruption of officials of the waste management industry; (c) the
inevitable cleanup and liability costs to the state; (d)
corporate responsibility for its own waste; (e) if waste
facilities are needed, they should be operated by the state,
trade associations, or other institutions for the purpose of
environmental protection, not for profit.
“Someone once said all politics is local. If you can win locally,
then EPA will follow,” Sanjour concludes.
Get: “Why EPA Is Like It Is,” 13 pgs., dated November 17, 1990,
from: William Sanjour, EPA Mail Code WH-562B, 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460; phone (202) 382-4502.
–Peter Montague, Ph.D.
Descriptor terms: epa; william sanjour; waste disposal industry;
osw;