2
Abstract: The 1990s represented a sea change in the way federal and state governments
interacted to protect the environment. The language of devolution and reinventing
government contributed to attempts by federal agencies to rethink federal-state working
relationships in environmental programs. This study explores two strategies adopted by
two federal agencies, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Office of
Surface Mining (OSM
), in an attempt to redirect federal oversight of state environmental
activities. The EPA’s strategy was the National Environmental Performance Partnership
System (NEPPS); the OSM’s strategy is its REG 8 Directive. This paper begins by
setting the political context that prompted new federal oversight policies. It then explores
both strategies, by reviewing government documents, scholarly and professional reports,
and conducting interviews with state and federal officials. The study suggests how
difficult it is to make significant changes to federal-state working relationships, especially
when such changes occur in complex bureaucratic systems, cover multiple programs and
depart from long-standing existing agency cultures.
1
Background and context
Federal-state working relationships are the lifeblood of implementing most laws,
and environmental laws are no exception. The nature of these relationships depends upon
many things, including the role orientations of federal and state officials, the extent of
behavioral change required (both on the part of the state implementing agency and the
regulatory target group), existing agencies cultures, adequate intergovernmental transfer
of resources, the legal and political context in which they occur. This section provides a
brief overview of the political context for changing federal-state relationships within
environmental policy.
When Congress decided to pass a series of environmental laws in the 1970s,
Senator Muskie and other congressional architects embraced the notion of cooperative
federalism.
2
Cooperative federalism recognized that national and state governments
shared a desire to accomplish social goals. Salons reasoned that both state and national
governments wanted cleaner air, water, and safer disposal of toxic substances, however
interstate competition and other economic forces made it difficult for states to regulate
Convention