(This analysis is a preview of the EPA section in the forthcoming
AAAS Report XXIX: Research and Development
FY 2005, a comprehensive look at the President’s budget for R&D
in FY 2005. This analysis contains revised AAAS estimates of R&D,
different from figures presented in the AAAS Preliminary
Analysis of February 5. More tables and continually updated supplemental
materials on R&D in the FY 2005 budget can be found on the AAAS R&D
Web site at http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd.)
Highlights
- The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) R&D budget would fall
7.1 percent or $44 million to $572 million in FY 2005 (see Table
II-17). Although some of the cuts would be due to the proposed elimination
of R&D earmarks, funding for many R&D programs would also decline.
- The extramural Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program would see its
budget fall to $65 million, a steep drop from the $100 million annual
funding levels of the past several years. EPA would eliminate STAR grants
entirely in four research areas.
- EPA’s overall budget would fall 6.9 percent down to $7.8 billion,
with particularly steep cuts to State and Tribal Assistance Grants and
the Science and Technology program.
EPA R&D in the FY 2005 Budget
EPA’s R&D, mostly funded in the Science and Technology account, would total $572 million in the FY
2005 budget request, a cut of $44 million or 7.1 percent (see Table
II-17). The FY 2004 omnibus bill contained 41 congressional earmarks
in the S&T account and another 11 R&D earmarks in normally non-R&D
Environmental Programs and Management account, many of them renewed
from FY 2003, for a total of $56 million in R&D earmarks (AAAS estimates).
The FY 2005 budget would eliminate these earmarks, for a slight net
increase in FY 2005 for EPA’s core R&D programs.
R&D in the S&T account would fall by 4.7 percent to $535 million
in FY 2005. Much of the decrease is due to the proposed elimination
of R&D earmarks. This would free up money for some program increases,
such as particulate matter research which would increase from the congressionally
appropriated level of $35 million this year back up to last year’s funding
level of $64 million next year, and computational toxicology ($5 million
in FY 2003 to $9 million this year to $13 million next year). But most
EPA research areas would see flat or declining funding, including global
change research (down slightly to $21 million), water quality research
(down slightly to $47 million), pollution prevention research (down
$5 million to $33 million), pesticides and toxics research (down $7
million to $29 million), human health and ecosystems research (down
$13 million to $177 million), and drinking water research (flat at $46
million).
EPA’s funding of competitively awarded extramural research would fall
steeply. EPA’s Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program of extramural
research grants would receive only $65 million in FY 2005, down a third
from the $100 million level of this year and the previous three years.
EPA would eliminate STAR grants entirely in the areas of endocrine disruptors,
ecosystems, mercury, and pollution prevention, and cut next year’s funding
in half for existing extramural hazardous substance research centers.
Hardest hit would be ecosystems research, with the elimination of $22
million in STAR grants. EPA would shift funds toward intramural research
in its own labs for the affected areas. With a typical STAR grant totaling
$500,000, EPA estimates that 70 fewer research projects would be funded
next year. Because STAR grants are often multi-year projects, the reduced
FY 2005 request would also mean reductions in planned grant awards this
year to reduce the commitment base next year.
In non-R&D
programs, the FY 2005 budget requests $8
million for the STAR Fellowship Program, below the $9.7 million
appropriation in FY 2004 and similar appropriations in previous years
for this program to encourage science and engineering graduate students
to study environmental science fields that could be of use to EPA’s
mission.
Figure 1. (click
on the image to view or download a color, full-size PDF version of the
chart)
EPA’s S&T investments
are a small part of the overall EPA portfolio (see Figure 1), and are
designed to support EPA’s regulatory and enforcement missions. The proposed
cut to EPA’s R&D mirrors EPA’s proposal to cut the overall FY 2005
budget by 6.9 percent down to $7.8 billion, a loss of $576 million.
EPA requests only $3.2 billion for State
and Tribal Assistance Grants (STG), perennially a higher priority
for Congress than for EPA. Last year, EPA requested a cut in STG from
$3.8 billion to $3.1 billion, but Congress provided $3.9 billion. Most
of this money goes to state, local, and tribal governments to fund environmental
projects, primarily projects to preserve clean drinking water. For Environmental
Programs and Management, which funds most of EPA’s operating expenses,
the request of $2.3 billion represents a slight increase over FY 2004.
The overall S&T account would fall 12 percent to $689 million; the
overall account would decline more than the R&D portion of S&T
because of the completion of non-R&D drinking water vulnerability
assessments in FY 2004.
Impacts of the EPA R&D Portfolio
EPA’s basic and
applied research support (excluding development and R&D facilities)
comprises the majority (75 percent) of EPA’s R&D. The largest part
of EPA’s research is in the life sciences (primarily biology and environmental
biology), with significant support for the environmental sciences and
engineering as well. Although EPA is the major environmental regulatory
agency in the federal government, many other agencies have environmental
responsibilities related to research, resource stewardship, and economic
management of the environment, so EPA is a relatively small funding
source for environmental R&D. In the environmental sciences, EPA
accounts for only 4 percent of total federal support, while in the life
sciences EPA funds only 1 percent of total federal support.
Roughly 45 percent
of EPA’s R&D is performed in the agency’s own laboratories, while
about 16 percent is performed by industrial firms. Nearly a third of
EPA’s R&D is performed by colleges and universities, a share that
has been growing in recent years as EPA has attempted to expand its
links with academia. The FY 2005 proposal to cut STAR funding, however,
would represent a major retreat from EPA’s support of academic research.
The remainder is performed by nonprofit institutions and state and local
governments.
EPA’s R&D
support has been declining slowly for the past few years after steady
growth in the late 1990s. EPA’s R&D budget declined sharply after
FY 1994 and bottomed out in FY 1996 (see Figure 2). In subsequent years,
EPA’s R&D grew until FY 1999. EPA R&D declined again in FY 2000,
and has mostly just kept pace with inflation since then. EPA R&D
has essentially stayed at $600 million in today’s dollars for more than
a decade.
Figure 2. (click
on the image to view or download a color, full-size PDF version of the
chart)
Even the flat funding of recent years may look good compared with what
lies in store. With Congress and the President apparently committed to
reducing the budget deficit in half within the next five years primarily
through holding down domestic spending, the consequences for EPA are becoming
clearer. The FY 2005 budget contains preliminary projections for the EPA budget
out to FY 2009. In FY 2006, EPA R&D
could fall even further to $560 million, and end up well below this year’s
funding level at $569 million by FY 2009. After
adjusting for expected inflation, the five-year Bush budget would leave EPA’s
R&D funding 15 percent below this
year’s funding level in 2009.
- February 25, 2004
AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Program
1200 New York Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 326-6607; -6600
www.aaas.org/spp/rd
