United States Office of Planning April 1979 5814 Environmental Protection and Management Agency Washington DC 20460 &ER& EPA Policy Guidance for FY 1980/1981 ------- EPA POLICY GUIDANCE FOR FY 1980/1981 U,S, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D,C, APRIL 1979 Co a ------- ADMINISTRATOR'S POLICY GUIDANCE 1980/1981 DOUGLAS M, COSTLE, ADMINISTRATOR BARBARA BLUM, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR ------- EPA POLICY GUIDANCE FOR FY 1980/1981 TABLE OF CONTENTS ADMINISTRATOR'S/DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR'S POLICY GUIDANCE , 3 ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATORS' OVERVIEWS AIR, NOISE AND RADIATION 11 WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT 16 TOXIC SUBSTANCES . . . 20 ENFORCEMENT 35 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 42 PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 48 ill ------- ADMINISTRATOR'S POLICY GUIDANCE EPA and State and local agencies can be proud of what they have accomplished over the last two years. We have won strong legislative mandates, and we are making good progress in implementing them. EPA is better integrated, and we have begun the process of strengthening our State and local relationships. We are making good progress in developing effective controls for toxics. In area after area we are recognized front-runners in the Administration's reform efforts. The air and the water are getting cleaner. The people, the President, and the Congress support our work: they respect both our professionalism and our ability to get a tough job done. This Guidance addresses the future. But before we go on to define what lies ahead, we wanted to note how far EPA has come. The Agency has been working hard and well. Congratulations and our thanks. In this Agency Policy Guidance we identify what we feel the Agency's priorities should be for the next several years. Our Assistant Administrators follow with more detailed guidance for each of their areas of respon- sibility. We have worked closely with them in developing these program guidances. Broadly stated, the Agency's priorities are as follows: o To reduce public exposure to dangerous pollutants; o To protect sensitive ecological systems; and o To improve management of our environmental programs. REDUCE PUBLIC EXPOSURE TO DANGEROUS POLLUTANTS Over the last several years we have come to understand more of the connections between the thousands of chemicals our society has put into our environment and a great many of the diseases that afflict modern man. EPA has been given lead responsibility for identifying, evaluating, and controlling environmental pollutants. Doing so is one ------- - 4 - of our chief objectives. We are approaching the problem at every point -- when a chemical is produced, shipped, used, or ultimately disposed of. Our Toxics, Air, Water, Pesticides, Drinking Water, Radiation, Hazardous Waste, and spills programs must all give the toxics problem greater priority. In doing so we expect that all action on individual pollutants should generally be governed by the principle of addressing first those that present the greatest health risks. A major part of that effort has been the development of an integrated strategy for toxic substances, a strategy which we will continue to develop and refine throughout 1980 and 1981 through vigorous implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act. As another element of an Agency-wide toxics strategy, we will develop an Agency cancer policy. The policy will provide a framework for continuing decision-making in our pesticides, toxics, and drinking water programs and for emerging carcinogen regulations under the Agency's air, water, and hazardous waste programs. Finally, our urban strategy is a key part of this effort because it is based on attacking the unhealthy environmental conditions of cities. We expect the Assistant Administrators and you to continue to implement our existing urban initiatives and to develop innovative solutions for urban problems. PROTECT SENSITIVE ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS Increasingly during the past two years, we have focused the Agency's efforts on dealing with pollutants as they affect public health. Ultimately, however, we must protect the environment that supports us and all other life. While continuing to clean up our air and water, we need to give much more attention to particularly sensitive environmental systems such as wetlands. Though natural systems like wetlands and fisheries are usually described as renewable -- on the assumption that they can regenerate themselves when depleted or damaged -- we are beginning to learn how fragile they truly are as we begin to understand sensitive ecological relationships. Once a groundwater supply is contaminated with toxics, for example, it may take centuries for natural restoration (or millions of dollars for clean-up) if it is ever to support healthy natural life or to be used for drinking water. ------- - 5 - IMPROVE MANAGEMENT OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS We have made a major commitment to finding better, more effective ways of regulating. There are almost fifty reform efforts in progress across the Agency now. We are beginning to see the results of this commitment, and we expect a great many more initiatives to move into implementation stages over the next several years. We will continue to look for complements to traditional regulation, such as offsets and the bubble, our reporting requirements, sunset, and procedural simplifications. We want your active help in finding better ways to carry out our responsibilities. Specifically, we want to continue to: o Integrate EPA programs — We have made a good start in our efforts to consolidate our grant and permit programs. The integration of programs in water quality, drinking water, solid waste, hazardous wastes, and underground injection can serve as a good model for other program areas. o Strengthen Federal/State/local partnerships -- Establishing the State/EPA Agreements and encouraging appropriate delegation should streng- then and improve environmental programs at all levels. We also need to retain and improve our ability to assess performance at all levels. We want to work for passage of an Integrated Environ- mental Assistance Act as a legislative base for increasing management flexibility between us and the States as well as in State programs. o Improve coordination with other Federal agencies — We must make greater use of the IRLG and Regulatory Council mechanism to assure coordinated and concerted action among all Federal agencies. We must work particularly closely with the Department of Energy in developing environmentally and health sensitive energy policies. o Reform and refine our management practices -- In this area we are emphasizing the completion of Civil Service reforms recently enacted. We must also put in place the planning, zero-based budgeting accountability system for the Agency. ------- In addition, we are reassessing our monitoring with an eye to the quality, utility and compati- bility of our information systems. o Improve regulatory reform -- We are giving major emphasis to the development of more flexible, less costly alternatives to our traditional regulatory approaches, such as the "bubble" concept and "banking" of offsets in nonattainment areas. We want to continue improving the quality of our regulations. One of the most important elements to the latter is continued strengthening of the Steering Committee; we want to enlarge the role of the Regions in this process. o Strengthen the Agency's research capacity and programs -- We want to improve our ability to forecast environmental problems and solutions, particularly in the long term. We need to expand the data base for our regulatory decision-making. Finally, there are a number of cross-cutting issues we want to flag. We expect: o a strong commitment to improving public partici- pation; o a determined affirmative action program; and o continued attention to the Administration's urban programs. The 1980-1981 planning years present a great challenge to us as managers. We must continue to move this Agency toward protecting public health and the environment more fully. We expect that each participant in this planning will consider how his or her program can contribute to these initiatives. ------- The following sections of this Guidance set forth our priorities in greater detail. They serve as the basis for FY 1980 Federal and State program implementation and as the policy framework for program and resource recommen- dations to the President for FY 1981. DoJuglSTs M. Costle Administrator Barbara Blum Deputy Administrator ------- ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATORS' OVERVIEWS AIR, NOISE, AND RADIATION WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT TOXIC SUBSTANCES ENFORCEMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT ------- OFFICE OF AIR, NOISE, AND RADIATION Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals David G. Hawkins, Assistant Administrator PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND INFORMATION Each OANR program plan should include resources and should plan for effective participation. Limited resources should also be available for case-by-case assistance to participants in a small number of major rulemaking and/or permit proceedings. I would also like OANR offices to work with Regional Offices to develop effective public participation programs for their activities. Finally, each office should review existing public information materials in its area of responsibility. Program plans should provide for major improvements in our information base and should include a system for keeping our public information materials current. Please work with our Office of Public Awareness representative in this effort. Our laws, particularly the Clean Air Act, are complex but their purposes and effects can be simply explained. We must make more of an effort to do so. AIR High priority must be given in 1980 to completing all actions required as a result of State implemention plan submissions in 1979. Most plan approvals, disapprovals, and promulgations should be completed in 1979, as should the schedules for implementing the plans. However, some such actions may not occur until 1980. We must have in place systems for tracking State progress in implement- ing their approved plans. We need to emphasize and develop ways of assuring that the States assume their responsibilities under the plans including all new source review responsibilities. It is especially important that we encourage States to implement the program for Prevention of Significant Deterioration. ------- - 12 - During 1980 programs for visibility protection and Prevention of Significant Deterioration for pollutants other than TSP and SO should be ready for implementation. States should be urged to assume responsibility for these programs as well. The next major round of SIP revisions will be in 1982 for those areas where EPA has granted extensions beyond the 1982 deadline. Our guidance requires that for ozone these areas base their revised plans on an air quality model. It appears that the most appropriate technique for protecting future air quality in this round of SIPs will be the relatively complex dispersion models which account for photochemical reactions. We should give high priority in 1980 to the acquisition of data required for these models and to validating them. The 1981 program plan should provide for the use of these models in all areas where required in a time frame that permits technical review and public participation on development of control strategy to assure meeting the Clean Air requirements. The general problem of lack of confidence in air quality data also must be addressed in 1980. Emphasis must be given to the establishment of technically sound sites and procedures for National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS) and State Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) as required by our monitoring regulations. Participation by State/local laboratories in quality assurance programs should be mandatory. If the programs require additional resources, this should receive a high priority in the 1981 budget request. At Headquarters, by December 31, 1890, we must have completed our review and appropriate revision of all existing ambient air quality standards. The plan for 1980 should clearly recognize this requirement and, given the need for a better quantification of benefits, provide for the development of such a data base and analyses as may be required. The budget for 1980 provides funding to complete the development of new source performance standards for all major stationary sources by 1982. The program plans for 1980 and 1981 must demonstrate that we are on a schedule which will meet that statutory deadline. ------- - 13 - No large increment in resources is being provided in 1980 for activities related to hazardous air pollutants. I expect that, before the next fiscal year begins, we will have in place a policy on air carcinogens providing a systematic approach to substantially reduce risks from air- borne carcinogens. Our plan in 1980 should provide for the orderly implementation of that policy with a major intensification of actions in 1981. This program should take into account and be coordinated with other programs regulating risks from toxic or hazardous pollutants. In Mobile Sources we should have completed all vehicle rulemaking specifically required by the Clean Air Act in 1980. Our future 'standard-setting program should address the need to regulate presently unregulated pollutants, and resources to address the light-duty diesel should be available in 1980 in the event that research establishes the need for additional action. Our 1980 program should focus on such assessment activities as may be necessary if standards are to be proposed in FY 1981 or subsequent fiscal years. Given commitments to inspection/maintenance programs in the SIP's, we must be in a position of being able to provide expert guidance to State and local I/M programs. The 1980 plans should address, as a matter of priority, such data gathering and assessment as may be necessary to assure that we can assist I/M programs to achieve their maximum potential. We should give major attention to other activities which will help assure that vehicles in use perform as intended, and the 1980/81 plans should specifically address this concern. In particular, we should continue to examine test procedures to improve their relation to real-world problems. NOISE In FY 1980 I thiAk that every effort should be made to become current with our previous commitments to regulate new products. New commitments should be limited until we are assured that the backlog of previous identifications and/or proposals can be eliminated. If we take on new efforts, they should focus on transportation-related concerns. ------- - 14 - To the extent the 1980 budget is not adequate to complete the required pre-regulatory work for light duty vehicles and tires, the Agency should not make formal commitments. These sources would then be a major initiative in the 1981 budget. Although I am attracted by the idea of using noise labeling as a method of enhancing consumer choice, I believe we should complete promulgation of the general labelling and hearing protector regulations first. Any proposal for additional work in the labeling area in 1980 must be carefully tailored to fit within available resources and my desire for us to complete pending actions. An expanded program may be considered in 1981, but it should have a lesser priority than work related to transportation sources. I am anxious that we show material progress in implementing the Quiet Communities Act. To the extent that our stated goals of 400 communities and 40 States with effective noise programs provide a real basis for program planning, our program plans for both 1980 and 1981 should clearly indicate projected progress against these goals. We should likewise display our actions to undertake investigations and studies on a more complete health base for noise control against a specified objective. I think it important that we develop an outline which indicated the areas in which new information should be produced on a priority basis and that our proposed research-related plans in both 1980 and 1981 indicate how they will meet our needs as outlined. RADIATION In radiation the mission of EPA is now reasonably well defined as a result of the IRG Report, Libassi Committee deliberations, NRC Agreements, and our own actions in developing criteria for waste disposal. The IRG Report indicating the multi-agency nature of the Federal government's nuclear waste management program should be used as a blueprint for defining the scope of and timing required for EPA standard-setting in this area. The program focus in 1980 should be on actions delineated in that report. ------- - 15 - The priority we give to actions under the Clean Air Act must be a product of the reduction in radiation risk which such actions can accomplish compared to reduction achieved in other radiation programs. To the extent that priority must be given to the issue of radioactive waste, and/or to the completion of standards required under the Uranium Mill Tailings Act, I am willing to accept a slower rate of progress on Clean Air Act-related problems in 1980. Nevertheless, the program plan for 1981 should present a full range of actions to effectively implement our deter- minations on the nature of radioactive air pollution problems, we should assign them high priority. Given the acknowledged limitations of our resources, I would expect only limited EPA resources devoted in 1980 to implement EPA's general authorities to provide Federal radiation guidance. I would much prefer that we take time to establish an interagency committee to review the poten- tial scope of the guidance function and assess priorities as our major program action in the guidance area in 1980. Implementation of the committee's recommendations would follow in 1980 and 1981. Additional resources for EPA in 1981 could be sought where necessary to supplement the resources of other agencies. ------- OFFICE OF WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals Thomas C. Jorling, Assistant Administrator The priority objectives of EPA's Water and Wastewater Management programs are to implement statutory mandates providing for: o Achievement and maintenance of the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of the Nation's ground and surface waters, with special emphasis on protection of public health and sensitive aquatic ecosystems; o Treatment, containment, and control of toxic and hazardous materials in solid waste; o Protection of an adequate supply of high quality drinking water for public consumption; and o Federal, State, and local development of integrated environmental management systems which minimize transfers of pollutants between media and which identify optimal ultimate disposal strategies for pollutants. The objectives described above can be achieved most efficiently in terms of both dollars and manpower through: o Effective use of State planning and program funds to implement water quality management, water supply, and solid waste management goals through State/EPA Agreements; o Management of the $4 billion/year construction grants program to meet the treatment needs of publicly owned treatment works (POTW's) effectively at least cost to all levels of government; o Application of alternative, innovative, and cost- effective technologies and management practices to solve water and solid waste pollution problems; and o Emphasis on resource recovery, reuse, and recycling to conserve energy, materials, and water. ------- - 17 - The objectives and management tools to achieve them will be delivered within a context of program integration and consolidation. An integrated focus for the Agency and for OWWM in particular arises because the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) closed the gaps in the waste disposal cycle left by previous air and water legislation by providing control for the disposal of pollutants in or on the land. Since there is no "free dumping ground", an integrated approach is necessary to determine the best mix of environ- mental controls to minimize the adverse effects of pollution. These integrative efforts will be manifest in the way we deal with identifiable areas of control or regulation. For example; many programs within OWWM act on specific chemicals. When one program is dealing with a chemical, it is imperative that all programs regulating that chemical share knowledge, experience, and implementation. Integration of water quality, water supply, and solid waste programs will generally occur at the State level via the State/EPA Agreement process. EPA will encourage States to conduct integrated problem assessments, develop long-term strategies to solve their water and waste management problems, and commit to one-year work programs to implement their strategies. In return, EPA will supply program and planning grants from the Clean Water Act (CWA), Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and RCRA to assist the States that undertake integrated approaches. An integrated State/EPA agreement process is a logical outgrowth of the Water Quality Management (WQM) program, which is a key focus of the Office of Water and Waste Management. The major goal of WQM is the development of a State and local decision-making process to control point and nonpoint sources of pollution. Current WQM efforts are concentrated on plan implementation to achieve water quality improvements. Continuing WQM grants will only be made to State and areawide agencies who can show evidence of imple- mentation. In managing the $4 billion/year construction grant program, the Agency will consider publicly-owned treatment work systems as a structural and functional component of human community. This should enable questions relating to levels of performance and technology, operations and maintenance, sludge management, pretreatment, toxics, combined storm water overflow and urban drainage to be viewed as parts of a single system. ------- - 18 - EPA's strategy for 1980-81, then, is to orient funding toward meeting environmental requirements through stringent cost-effectiveness review and to stress innovative and alternative approaches to waste treatment, including water and energy conservation, reuse and recycling of pollutants, and small systems. Funds earmarked for State delegation under Section 205(g) of the CWA will be directed toward State assumption of program activities with high pro- fessional quality consistent with Congressional policy and requirements. In addition, the construction grant program will move rapidly toward reinforcing other Agency actions such as the control of toxics and enforcement objectives through implementation of the municipal enforcement strategy. Industry is a key focal point for the application of technology and management practices to control environmental pollution. The multiple controls on industry must be applied in a coherent way to a single facility or industry category to control toxic and hazardous pollutants effectively. The available control mechanisms include spill prevention control plans; best management practices for toxics; BAT, pretreatment, new source performance standards, and BCT; RCRA hazardous waste controls; and underground injection control (UIC). This arsenal of controls will be implemented coherently through consolidated permitting of NPDES, RCRA Section 3005, and UIC permits. Permit consolidation will enable concen- tration on programmatic, environmental, and procedural permitting elements which allow technical and legal talents to be applied effectively and efficiently to achieve environ- mental objectives. All OWWM programs will emphasize conservation of our precious natural resources: energy, water, minerals and other materials. The resource recovery program will strive to maximize the use of energy and materials which are currently disposed of as solid wastes. Municipal and industrial point source control programs will stress reuse of wastewater and recycling of pollutants through standards, permits, and financial assistance. In parti- cular, the construction grants program will focus attention on multi-purpose projects which recover energy and materials and reuse wastewater. Four final OWWM priority areas are: attention to specific ecosystems; development of criteria and standards; implementation of new OWWM public participation regulations; and emergency response. ------- - 19 - An important focus is on specific ecosystems or subsets of ecosystems, such as: ground water as it is influenced by the programs of OWWM; wetlands protection as it is specifically achieved by the regulatory program under section 404, and wetlands as influenced by such other factors as solid waste facility siting, treatment systems siting, and others. The oceans represent another ecosystem which is high priority and can only be protected by the integrated application of OWWM programs. Another integration of OWWM activity ranging across all programs is in development of criteria and standards. Water quality criteria, 404 criteria, 403 criteria, safe drinking water standards, and hazardous substance criteria all will be looked at as they are developed, issued and applied. Overall public participation regulations for water quality, water supply and solid waste programs, which were promulgated in February 1979, will be implemented in 1980. These regulations support program integration objectives by standardizing certain public participation requirements for OWWM programs. They should foster more effective and constructive public involvement across these programs. 1980 must see the emergency response capabilities of OWWM integrated so that the various authorities under the Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Clean Water Act are carried out in a coherent way by adequately trained people. We must build on the emergency response capabilities already in place under section 311 and expand them to recognize that the response is attentive not just to surface waters but also to ground waters and to the landscape and atmosphere. ------- OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals Steven D. Jellinek, Assistant Administrator This Overview Statement lays out what I believe to be the important priorities for achievement by the pesticides and toxics programs for the years 1980 and 1981. As such, it represents my "guidance" to the managers and staff of the two programs and infor- mation of interest to our colleagues throughout the Agency. I have arranged the objectives for each into "general" and "specific" categories. The specific objectives are subdivided further into "highest" priority, "high" priority, and "other." We have no low priority objectives. The general objectives are provided to give a sense of what I believe are the thrust and tone of the programs. The specific objectives are more in the nature of outputs I expect to be delivered. TOXICS —1979 General Objectives o Continue the thrust toward institution- building. From the organizational per- spective: Secure adequate space. Staff up to budgeted levels with qualified professional and support personnel, with special efforts on increasing the number of women and minorities. Organize to the branch level. ------- - 21 - From the regulatory perspective: Place more emphasis on premanufacture review, test standards, and test rules. Give less emphasis to existing chemical regulation. o Complete the development of a priority setting system for choosing chemicals for testing and regulation under TSCA and other statutes; clarify and establish the role of the Toxic Substances Priorities Committee in this system. o Develop a detailed program planning system for each DAA-ship. o Clarify the regional role in TSCA implementation, Specific Objectives Highest Priority o Publish the Chemical Substances Inventory. o Promulgate the final regulations on premanu- facture notification; establish and operate a system for screening and assessing notices; and take actions under TSCA sections 5("e) and 5(f) to prevent or control the manufacture of new chemicals, as required. o Promulgate a final regulation establishing test standards for oncogenicity, chronic toxicity, combined oncogenicity and chronic toxicity, and good laboratory practices. o Propose the first section 4 test rule requiring industry to test 20-30 chemical substances and categories of substances. o Propose a rule under section 8(a) to develop basic use/exposure information on approximately 2-3,000 chemicals to aid in setting priorities for regulation. ------- - 22 - Propose a regulation under section 6 banning or limiting the use of one existing chemical that poses an unreasonable risk to public health. Fully implement the program to help States and school districts identify and control asbestos in school buildings. High Priority Propose testing guidelines for premanufacture notification. Propose remaining test standards for health effects and several fate and ecological effects test standards; resolve inconsis- tencies with pesticides testing guidelines. Conduct health and environmental effects assessments, monitoring, and economic impact analyses to support regulation of new and existing chemicals. Follow premanufacture notices with individual "significant new use rules" and/or individual section 8(a) information rules for a few selected new chemicals, as required. Begin the development of generic follow-up systems for "significant new use rules" and section 8(a) information rules for new chemicals. Begin developing proposed regulations banning or limiting the use of an additional 2-4 existing chemicals that pose an unreasonable risk to health or the environment. Complete an analysis of the issues concerning the impact of testing costs on small volume chemicals and, if appropriate, develop proposed legislative solutions. ------- Other - 23 - Continue the development of TSCA and inter- agency chemical information systems and data bases. Complete the development of responsive and effective document control data services, and FOI procedures. Develop model rules for information gathering under section 8(a). o Develop a process to review and act expedi- tiously on carcinogens, mutagens, and terato- gens under section 4(f). o Initiate the development of generic approaches to banning or controlling the use of chemicals under section 6. o Promulgate the PCB ban rule. o Provide industry assistance on TSCA require- ments . o Distribute State grants. o Continue development of public participation programs. o Support OECD and other planned international harmonization programs. o Propose model regulations under section 8(c) and 8(d) to require recordkeeping and submission of health and safety studies concerning signifi- cant effects of chemicals. TOXICS—1980 General Objectives Continue the thrust toward institution- building. From the organizational perspective: ------- - 24 - Staff up to budgeted levels with qualified professional and support personnel, with special efforts on increasing the number of women and minorities. Build effective staff teams through management actions and training. From the regulatory perspective: Fully operate premanufacture review and test rule development. Increase emphasis on existing chemical regulation, both individual and generic approaches. o Operate a priority-setting system for choosing chemicals for testing and regulation under TSCA and other statutes, in conjunction with the Toxic Substances Priorities Committee. o Operate a detailed planning system for the toxic substances program; initiate formal evaluation; modify program design, as needed, to increase quality and quantity of output; develop, jointly with the R&D community, specific program requirements for high priority research; examine the need for major legislative changes in 1981. Specific Objectives Highest Priority o Fully operate the premanufacture notification review process; take actions under sections 5(e) and 5(f) to prevent or control the manufacture of new chemicals, as required. o Promulgate the section 4 test rule proposed in 1979; propose and promulgate additional test rules. o Conduct health and environmental effects assessments, monitoring, and economic impact analyses to support regulation of new and existing chemicals. ------- - 25 - o Promulgate the section 6 regulations proposed in 1979 banning or limiting the use of one chemical; propose section 6 regulations for several additional existing chemicals. o Promulgate the section 8(a) information rule on 2-3,000 chemicals proposed in 1979. High Priority o Promulgate final testing guidelines for premanu- facture notification. o Propose and promulgate model rules under section 8 (a); promulgate model rules for sections 8(c) and 8(d). o Promulgate the full set of health effects test standards and the fate and ecological effects test standards proposed in 1979; propose additional fate and ecological effects test standards. o Father develop and begin to use generic follow-up systems for "significant new use rules" and section 8(a) information rules for new chemicals. o Publish the revised chemical substances inventory; maintain the integrity of the inventory. o Develop proposed regulations implementing generic approaches to regulation under section 6. o Begin partial operation of TSCA and inter- agency chemical information systems and data bases; continue systems development. o Review and act expeditiously on carcinogens, mutagens, and teratogens under section 4(f). Other Begin reviewing existing test standards as required by section 4. ------- - 26 - o Begin review of overall economic and innovation effects of TSCA. o Provide industry assistance on TSCA require- ments. o Continue to develop public participation programs. o Support OECD and other planned international harmonization programs. TOXICS—1981 General Objectives o Achieve institutional maturity. From the organizational perspective: Have a stable organization in place with technically and managerially qualified staff. From the regulatory perspective: Fully operate all major program com- ponents. Balance emphasis on regulation of new and existing chemicals. o Operate an integrated priority-setting system for choosing chemicals for testing and regu- lation for TSCA and other statutes, in con- junction with the Toxic Substances Priorities Committee. o Operate a detailed planning and evaluation system for the toxic substances program; explore alternatives to established regu- latory approaches. o If appropriate, develop and support pro- posals for major legislative changes. ------- - 27 - Specific Objectives Highest Priority Fully operate the premanufacture notification review process at an improved level; take actions under sections 5(e) and 5(f) to pre- vent or control the manufacture of new chemicals, as required. Promulgate and propose regulations under section 6 with greater emphasis on generic approaches, banning or limiting the use of a significantly greater number of existing chemicals that pose unreasonable risks to public health. Conduct health and environmental effects assessments, monitoring, and economic impact analyses to support regulations of new and existing chemicals. Continue promulgating rules under sections 4 and 8 to obtain data to support assessment and regulation. High Priority o Revise testing guidelines for premanufacture notification to provide more specific guidance, o Complete fate and ecological effects test standards; review existing test standards as required by section 4. o Use routine, generic follow-up systems for "significant new use rules" and section 8(a) information rules for new chemicals. o Complete chemical information systems development; operate systems, services, and data bases at full scale. Other o Continue actions under 4(f). o Maintain industry assistance. ------- - 28 - o Continue to develop public participation programs. o Support international harmonization programs. o Continue TSCA overall economic and innovation impact studies. o Evaluate and refine operating programs. PESTICIDES—1979 General Objectives o Continue the thrust toward institution-building. From the organizational perspective: Secure adequate space. Staff up to budgeted levels with qualified professional and support personnel, with special efforts on increasing the number of women and minorities. Complete the reorganization; fill senior line positions. From the regulatory perspective: Place more emphasis on completing major RPAR actions, initiating conditional registration, establishing the registra- tion standards process, and making registration decisions on new chemicals with adequate hazard data. Give less emphasis to large-scale operation of the registration standards process. o Develop management systems for expediting decisionmaking on high volume operations, such as registration and registration standards. o Develop a detailed program planning system. o Clarify the regional role in FIFRA implementation, ------- - 29 - Specific Objectives Highest Priority Review benefits and risks of 15-20 RPAR com- pounds identified as posing potentially unreasonable adverse effects. Reach 17-23 final risk/benefit determinations on RPAR compounds. Implement the conditional registration program. Process 25-30 new registrations, 5,000-5,600 administrative/technical amendments and 2,000- 2,500 routine/intrastate registrations in an efficient, effective manner. Give registration priority to new chemicals for which complete hazard data are submitted. Inititate the preparation of 42-47 generic standards, including the reassessment of associated tolerances. Evaluate the scientific basis of the system for establishing tolerances, including con- sideration of inert ingredients in order to revise tolerance regulations. High Priority Provide timely and responsive guidance to the States relative to their FIFRA section 5(f) experimental use permits and review 180-240 section 5 registrations in a median turn- around time of 120 days. Review 1,000-1,500 section 24(c) special local needs registrations and conduct overview activities on their final actions. Review 170-220 section 18 emergency exemptions in a median turnaround time of 4 weeks, including full scientific review of pertinent data. ------- - 30 - o Develop proposed guidelines for biological pesticides. o Establish 80-120 pesticide residue tolerances and review 75-100 amendments for food and animal feed crops after review of data and risk/benefit analyses in a median turnaround time of 105 days. o Accelerate the program to classify pesticides for restricted use. Aim for completion in 1980. o Develop and initiate procedures to require early testing to fill data gaps on existing compounds instead of waiting until such gaps are identified in the development of generic standards. o Integrate IPM into the RPAR process and into regulatory actions (e.g., section 18 emergency exemptions) when technically appropriate. Other o Audit 50-70 testing laboratories. o Develop more precise procedures for handling confidential business data. o Conduct training program. o Improve FOI response procedures, so that all requests are given an initial response within 10 days and a final response as quickly as possible. o Monitor for hazard prediction and significance of potential problems. PESTICIDES—1980 General Objectives o Continue the thrust toward institution- building. From the organizational perspective: Build effective staff teams through management actions and training. ------- - 31 - From the regulatory perspective: - Emphasize completion of the remaining RPAR reviews, increasing production of registration standards, and registration decisions on new pesticide chemicals. - Initiate reregistration of existing pesticides. o Operate priority-setting systems for selection of chemicals for the registration standard process and for priority registration decisions, o Operate a detailed planning system; initiate formal evaluation; modify program design, as needed, to increase quantity and quality of output; develop, jointly with the R&D community, specific program requirements for high priority research. Specific Objectives Highest Priority o Review benefits and risks of 12-17 RPAR com- pounds identified as posing potentially un- reasonable adverse effects. o Reach 15-20 final risk/benefit determinations on RPAR compounds. o Implement the conditional registration program. o Give registration priority to new chemicals for which complete hazard data are submitted. o Reregister 1,000-1,400 products from available generic standards. o Complete the generic standards initiated last year, and initiate the preparation of 40-50 generic standards, including the reassessment of associated tolerances. ------- - 32 - High Priority Provide timely and responsive guidance to the States relative to their section 5(f) experi- mental use permits, and review 180-240 section 5 registrations in a median turn- around time of 120 days. Review 1,000-1,500 section 24 (c) special local needs registrations and conduct overview activities on their final actions. Review 170-220 section 18 emergency exemptions in a median turnaround time of 4 weeks, in- cluding full scientific review of pertinent data. Promulgate guidelines for biological pesticides Establish 80-120 pesticide residue tolerances, and review 75-100 amendments for food and animal feed crops after review of data and risk/benefit analyses, in a median turnaround time of 105 days. Other Audit 50-70 laboratories. Improve FOI response procedures, so that all requests are given an initial response within 10 days and a final response as quickly as possible. Monitor for hazard prediction and significance of potential problems. PESTICIDES—1981 General Objectives Achieve institutional maturity. From the organizational perspective: ------- - 33 - Have a stable organization in place, with technically and managerially qualified staff. From the regulatory perspective: Fully operate all major program com- ponents. Substantially complete RPAR. o Operate an integrated priority setting system. o Operate a detailed planning and evaluation system. o Intensify strategy for replacement of older pesticides with unknown or hazardous effects with new, safer pesticides and alternative pest control actions. Specific Objectives Highest Priority o Integrate the RPAR process into the generic standards production process. o Give registration priority to innovative, environmentally protective compounds. o Reregister 1,000-1,400 products from available generic standards. o Complete the generic standards intiated last year, and initiate the preparation of 40-50 generic standards, including the reassessment of associated tolerances, with attention to detail and quality. High Priority o Provide timely and responsive guidance to the States relative to their section 5(f) experimental use permits, and review 180-240 section 5 registrations in a median turn- around time of 120 days. ------- - 34 - Review 1,000-1,500 section 24(c) special local needs registrations, and conduct overview activities on their final actions. Review 170-220 section 18 emergency exemptions in a median turnaround time of 4 weeks. Establish 80-120 pesticide residue tolerances, and review 75-100 amendments for food and animal feed crops after review of data and risk/benefit analyses, in a median turn- around time of 105 days. Other Audit 50-70 laboratories. Improve FOI response procedures, so that all requests are given an initial response within 10 days and a final response as quickly as possible. Monitor for hazard prediction and significance of potential problems. ------- OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals Marvin B. Burning, Assistant Administrator This guidance builds upon the top priority activities set out for enforcement in the EPA Policy Guidance for FY 1979/80. The activities described are our top enforce- ment priorities, not a complete list of all enforcement activities. These priorities are stated as programmatic priorities and as management-institutional priorities, but the two are obviously interrelated. PROGRAMMATIC PRIORITIES Enforcement in Emergencies All EPA, State, and local enforcement personnel should give top priority to any true emergencies involving sub- stantial threats to public health and safety. Containment and removal of the dangers is, of course, the top priority. Follow-up on penalties for violations can be undertaken in the course of other enforcement, rather than as an emergency, This guidance applies, of course, to emergency enforcement response to hazardous spills. At this time in FY 1979, EPA personnel have as their top priority the investigation and prevention of substantial and imminent hazards created by existing or abandoned chemical waste sites. Those efforts will continue as facts may dictate. We expect a large number of civil actions of this nature in FY 1980 and 1981. Major Source Enforcement Effort The major source enforcement effort against violators of the Air Act and Water Act is our next highest priority after emergency situations. Enforcement against these major sources is critically important to accomplishing our environ- mental goals. It is directed against that small minority of major sources which failed to meet the requirements of the Air and Water Acts by the statutory deadlines. It includes many of the most serious and most recalcitrant sources of pollution in the country. By bringing these sources into compliance, with penalties where appropriate, we will keep ------- - 36 - faith with the great majority of firms and public bodies which met their responsibilities and will build the confidence necessary to continue voluntary compliance with all the environmental laws. In FY 1980, Regions and States will bring the major source enforcement actions to decision by settlement, administrative process, or court trial, including appropriate penalties, and make or defend appeals. By the end of FY 1980, the major source drive should be nearly completed, with only a few actions and appeals still pending in trial or appellate courts. In FY 1981, actions and appeals still pending should be completed as rapidly as possible. Enforcement against Automobile and Truck Pollution Because of the great public health and environmental significance of air pollution from automobiles and trucks, especially in urban areas, enforcement against mobile sources of pollution will continue to be a top enforcement priority in FY 80/81. EPA enforcement will continue to ensure that new vehicles meet emission standards. We will increase our emphasis on maintaining the effectiveness of emission control systems throughout the period of their use. To achieve this, EPA's main emphasis will be on inspection and maintenance systems in the major nonattainment areas for auto-related pollutants, supplemented with Head- quarters audits and I/M programs. o To ensure that new vehicles meet standards, EPA enforcement will continue our assembly line audits, recall and warranty efforts. o To ensure that cars in use meet standards and to support introduction of inspection and maintenance systems where needed, EPA will continue to focus investigations and enforcement actions (a) on national or regional fleets, chains, dealership or repair facilities, or "pattern" violations and (b) in major metropolitan areas where auto pollution is high and I&M will be introduced. EPA will encourage State and local anti-fuel switching and anti-tampering efforts. ------- - 37 - We will use private, State, or local contracts to carry out inspections to ensure the availability and purity of unleaded gasoline, and the installation and operation of vapor recovery systems on fuel delivery trucks and at gasoline outlets. EPA and the States, in cooperation with other agencies, will implement any programs authorized to control the leaded-unleaded gas price differential and other 'authorized environmental/energy programs. Consolidated and Simplified Permitting EPA is consolidating its permit programs, both to simplify administrative steps and to get all important environmental problems addressed in a single process. By October 1, 1979, companies will be able to submit just one application for all water, solid and hazardous waste permits, go through one review, and be issued one permit. We expect application forms for air quality permits to be consolidated in late FY 1980 (or early FY 1981). NPDES second round permits under the Clean Water Act will be issued throughout FY 1980/81. We will begin to issue hazardous waste permits in late FY 1980, accelerating in FY 1981. We will also start issuing Underground Injection permits in FY 1981. In all permitting activities, we will give first priority to large or major sources with serious adverse health effects, including those with significant toxic discharges. Full Federal Compliance President Carter has directed all Federal facilities to come quickly into compliance with Federal, State, and local environmental requirements. By the end of 1980, we expect all, or almost all, Federal facilities both major and minor sources will be in compliance. Regions should see to it that all Federal facilities do indeed come into compliance as soon as possible. EPA will ensure that Federal agencies request necessary funds for compliance by reviewing the agencies plans included in the annual A-106 report. ------- - 38 - EPA is encouraging the States to assume these respon- sibilities for Federal facilities. The States should find the managers of Federal facilities cooperative. EPA will assist the States in getting any disputes resolved. Stationary Sources Completing the Major Source Enforcement Effort contin- ues to be of highest priority in FY 1980/81, including the monitoring of compliance orders to ensure that sources comply with the terms of the orders. We also want to ensure that major sources comply with new requirements placed on them by SIP revisions and by the ambient standards for lead, and to enforce new source performance standards and national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants. As the Major Source Enforcement Effort is completed in FY 1979/80, EPA will design and implement an improved program of compliance monitoring and enforcement to ensure continuous compliance. During FY 1979, regulations will be promulgated for administrative assessment of noncompliance penalties under Section 120 of the Clean Air Act. This program should be fully implemented during the second half of FY 1979 and throughout FY 1980/81. Prompt implementation of these penalties should assist in obtaining and maintaining compliance with the Air Act. Water Enforcement Completion of the Major Source Enforcement Effort, including actions against publicly owned treatment works (POTW's), continues to be of highest priority in FY 1980/81. As this effort is completed, EPA will design and implement an improved program of compliance monitoring and enforcement to ensure continuous compliance. Beginning in FY 1979 and growing in importance in FY 1980/81 will be advice and assistance to delegated States so that State pretreatment programs can be established and the conditions of those programs enforced. During FY 1981 the activities of assisting and advising States and POTW's, modifying permits to incorporate pretreatment requirements, approving POTW treatment programs, notifying affected indirect dischargers, and determining treatment levels should be at their peak level and of prime importance if we are to achieve compliance by all affected POTW's and indirect dischargers by FY 1983 or FY 1984. NPDES permits will be issued as part of the consolidated permits program. ------- - 39 - Strategies for New Programs (TSCA, RCRA, SDWA, FIFRA) In recent years, Congress has provided new programs and has amended existing statutes to respond to the threats of chemical poisons, hazardous wastes, and pesticides, and to protect drinking water supplies. We must carefully devise or revise enforcement strategies under the additional provisions of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the amended provisions of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the hazardous waste provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Under RCRA, our priority enforcement activities in FY 1980/81, in addition to responding to emergencies, include monitoring and enforcing the notification program (Section 3010); reviewing proposed State programs for enforceability and adequacy; issuing permits, monitoring permitted sites, and ensuring that Compliance Schedules are met; and monitoring and enforcing the manifest systems. Under TSCA, our compliance monitoring and enforcement will initially focus on PCBs, chlorofluorocarbons, inventory requirements and to premanufacturing notice requirements. We will continue our special investigative efforts regarding the accuracy and truthfulness of laboratory test data in the toxics and pesticides programs. Under FIFRA, during FY 1980/81 EPA will attempt to develop cooperative enforcement grant programs with the remaining seven States (for a total of 50) and will continue to enforce regulations on pesticide use until States assume this responsibility. Under SDWA, EPA will respond to emergency situations threatening public health and will concentrate on enforce- ment of primary drinking water standards, particularly in non-primary States. Noise Control The noise enforcement program will continue to ensure compliance with standards and requirements for products and procedural labeling as its top priority. Although urban noise can often be controlled through State and local efforts, it continues to be a Federal responsibility to ensure that products meet the standards established under the Noise Act. EPA Headquarters will carry out this function. ------- - 40 - MANAGEMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL PRIORITIES In addition to the preceding programmatic priorities, we have a number of management and institutional improve- ments as top priorities. These improvements have to some degree already been described in the programmatic priorities and they obviously interrelate with them. o Consolidated Permitting -- EPA will consolidate and simplify its permitting activities, mostly during FY 1979 and totally by the end of FY 1980. It will assist and encourage States to do so as well. o Industry Enforcement Strategies — During FY 1979 and FY 1980 EPA will develop and implement industry enforcement strategies for selected industries. o Continuous Compliance -- We will develop programs for ensuring continuous compliance by regulated sources, including compliance monitoring (and information systems for recording and tracking compliance), penalties to remove the economic benefit of non-compliance and remote sensing techniques. o Improved Oversight of State Enforcement -- During FY 1979 and thereafter, Headquarters and Regional personnel will begin to apply standards of perfor- mance to State enforcement activities under all Federal grants or contracts for enforcement. o Management and Management Information Systems — During FY 1979 and FY 1980 as needed, we will review our management, reporting, and information systems (including ADP systems). Our emphasis will be on improved accuracy, usefulness, simplicity, and compatability. o Improved Cooperation with Other Agencies — During FY 1979, 1980, and 1981, we will improve our cooperation with other agencies, such as the Department of Justice, the other members of the IRLG (OSHA, FDA, and CPSC), the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Departments of Energy and Interior. ------- - 41 - Innovative Methods — Throughout FY 1979, 1980, and 1981 the Office of Enforcement will explore innovations such as widened use of penalties to remove economic benefits of delay, environmental auditing, and contracts or grants with citizen groups. Investigating Criminal Violations — During FY 1980/81 EPA enforcement will improve its ability to investigate criminal violations of environmental laws by recruiting and training EPA investigative personnel. ------- OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals Stephen J. Gage, Assistant Administrator During the next two years, three major objectives will be driving the Environmental Protection Agency's research and development program: (1) continuing the integration of the Office of Research and Development into the mainstream of the Agency's activities, (2) enhancing the Office's capability to provide the scientific and technological data the Agency will use for future regulatory and enforcement actions, and (3) improving that data through scientific peer review of research procedures and results, quality control of risk assessments, and quality assurance of monitoring data. Much of the groundwork for achieving these objectives has been laid during the past year. The Research Committees have been quite successful in planning research in five critical areas jointly with the Program Offices. A signifi- cant Public Health Research Initiative ($37 million, 46 positions) was developed and successfully defended with OMB through the cross-agency zero-based budgeting for toxics. A new Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, building on the successful experiences in scientific assessments by the Carcinogen Assessment Group and the Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, has been proposed. Other developments have also built a good foundation for future action. INTEGRATING ORD INTO THE AGENCY'S MAINSTREAM Joint planning of the Agency's research and development activities through the five pilot Research Committees already provides a very valuable linkage between the regulatory program offices responsible for developing regulations and the ORD scientists and engineers supporting the regulatory efforts. During early 1979, we will establish seven new Research Committees to cover the joint planning of sub- stantially all of the research in support of regulation and enforcement. Each of the 12 committees will be specifically oriented to the users of the research information, typically Program Office Deputy Assistant Administrators or, in some instances, Division Directors (see Attachment A). ------- - 43 - The new Research Committees will develop multi-year research strategies oriented toward supporting regulatory needs; identify research outputs required within the next budget year (now beginning the FY 1981 cycle); seek the required resources through the Agency's ZBB process; and monitor and evaluate ongoing and completed research. We must make special efforts during this formative period to bring more fully the Agency's enforcement and Regional programs into the joint planning process. In the interest of cost-effectiveness, it will be necessary for the Regional Offices to coordinate their participation and share respon- sibility for representing Regional interests in the Research Committee; ORD will support the Regional Offices in this effort. We will continue to experiment cautiously with matrix management approaches as a means of improving the coordi- nation and delivery of high-visibility, short-term research outputs. Matrix management of the diesel emissions program will continue, and we will consider establishing a limited number of similar programs, such as in Acid Precipitation. Closely related to the evolution of the joint research plannng approach is the long-overdue simplification of ORD'S planning and reporting systems. We must take this step to bring ORD's planning and management approaches into synchronization with (1) the five-year plan developed in the preparation of the Agency's Research Outlook, (2) the multi- year plans developed by the Research Committees, and (3) the Agency's ZBB review and decisions. We must also eliminate the redundant paperwork that absorbs too much ORD staff time. In order to improve accountability for the research and development efforts, we must bring into operation a reliable tracking system for the critical outputs required by the Program Offices as identified by the Research Committees. As a corollary, we must also reduce to a manageable number the outputs to be tracked. While we must have adequate information to monitor progress of the key outputs, we must vigorously resist spending too much time and effort reporting preliminary and fragmented data. Good research management means monitoring the right indicators, not all of the possible indicators, of orderly progress toward objectives. Too much reporting together with overspecification of research investments will counterpro- ductively tie the hands of the research managers and stifle innovative research. Management flexibility must, of course, be coupled with accountability. ------- - 44 - With the increased pressure for higher quality manage- ment of several key research areas, we will be realigning the laboratory reporting relationships to consolidate functional or discipline groupings. These changes, which should improve morale and productivity, will allow us to improve the implementation of the Agency's research efforts. Specifically, the realignment will establish an office for health effects research management; an office to integrate environmental transport, fate, and effects research; and an office to integrate control technology and hazardous waste research. BUILDING A RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR AN IMPROVED DATA BASE We made important progress in the past year in starting the long-term process of building a foundation for a signifi- cantly improved scientific and technological data base for the future regulatory and enforcement actions of the Agency. Planning and budgeting the Public Health Research Initiative was a critical first step, but it was only a beginning. We must now commit ourselves to the de.tailed planning and implementation of the Initiative. Since the Initiative represents the first significant expansion of the Agency's basic environmental health sciences, we must wisely dedicate it to achieving a solid understanding of human health effects caused by both direct and indirect environmental exposures. Because we will be drawing heavily on scientific talent in the private sector to assist us in this effort, we must begin immediately to seek the best scientific advice available to help us in this planning effort. The second critical step, a broad environmental research initiative, must be taken immediately. Because of the heightened awareness in the Administration of EPA's requirements for the best scientific and techno- logical data that can be developed for the Agency's comprehensive environmental regulations, we now have an excellent opportunity to seek a government-wide review of environmental research. This review will focus on how existing and future Federal resources can support broader based, longer term environmental research to build an improved data base. We must assume the leadership in developing the conceptual framework for such efforts, bringing to bear on the program design the best scientific advice available. We must look to the Agency's Science Advisory Board, the President's Office of Science and ------- - 45 - Technology Policy, and the National Academy of Sciences as well as numerous individual scientists in this comprehensive planning and review effort. We are now in the process of developing a select set of initiatives for 1981 and beyond, focusing on protecting humans from environmentally mitigated pollutants; identifying and protecting critical components of ecosystems from injury; and addressing the more global problems of protecting our life support systems. In parallel with these activities, we must 'carefully review the longer-term research already underway in ORD to assure ourselves that we are directing our attentions to the most important future problems and are using the best scientific talent we can attract to work on these problems. We must determine if we are obtaining high quality, well- documented results from our research grants -- the primary mechanism we have for supporting innovative ideas. We must make the scientific community more widely aware of our research grants, encourage much greater competition for those grants, and ensure that they are awarded strictly on the basis of merit through enhanced peer review. We should also see if alternative approaches for handling these longer term grants can relieve the burdensome monitoring loads placed on the individual laboratory researchers. An invigorated, competitive grant program for longer- term research in each research area, coupled with an expanded Anticipatory Research Program, will provide the Agency with an important new base of exploratory research. It is essential that, with the significant infusion of new funding associated with the Public Health Research Initiative, we do not waste this opportunity to build a firmer foundation with the help of the best scientific talent available in the country. IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF DATA USED IN DECISION MAKING Scientific and technological data come in many forms and in varying quality. The credibility and integrity of all data used in Agency decisions is a prerequisite for any analyses. The evaluation and synthesis of the data is an essential step in informing the many far-reaching regulatory decisions. We have made significant progress during the last year in providing carcinogenic risk assessments for the Program Offices and in improving the capability of ORD to prepare Air and Water Quality criteria documents by establishing the new Environmental Criteria and Assessment Offices in Research Triangle Park and Cincinnati. ------- - 46 - We have not yet, however, undertaken the special responsibility assigned by the Administrator to provide quality control of the Agency's risk assessments. With approval of ORD's new Office of Health and Environmental Assessment (OHEA), we must now move ahead, first to quickly develop guidelines for the several types of risk assessments required for the Agency's regulation development, and then to exercise oversight to ensure that the asssessments prepared by the Program Offices conform reasonably to the guidelines. We must also proceed to staff OHEA with the best qualified people we can attract from the scientific community, significantly upgrading in this process ORD's capability to provide consultation to the Program Offices and, upon request, assessments of specific chemicals. Although we in ORD have discussed the role of peer review extensively during the past year, we must now act in the coming year to build into all of the Agency's scientific and technological efforts appropriate review mechanisms. We must begin with enhanced peer review for individual research projects. The ORD senior laboratory management must convey to the professional staff strong support for and assistance in periodic external peer review of individual projects. Whenever feasible, the results of individual projects should be subjected to rigorous scientific or technological scruntiny through publication in referred journals. We should also see that the results of our grants and contracts are published in peer-reviewed journals, slowing the growth of that body of EPA-published "gray literature" which now constitutes the only publication channel for too much of our work. Publication of research results in the peer-reviewed literature must become an important criterion for advance- ment in all of our laboratories. In addition to peer review of individual research efforts, we must systematically review our research programs, While such reviews may begin at the laboratory level, it is usually more appropriate to conduct them at the level of the Deputy Assistant Administrators or even of the Assistant Administrator. Since the Research Committees will be providing the primary focus for the bulk of our research activities, it is logical that we direct our attention increasingly to programmatic reviews along the lines of the committees. We should also be mindful of other mutually supporting programmatic areas which may provide results for several committees, such as biological screening tests, analytical methodologies, etc. ------- - 47 - Finally, we have been expanding in the past year our efforts to provide support to Agency laboratories for quality assurance of environmental monitoring data. We must now assume the lead for improving the quality assurance of all of the environmental monitoring data used in the Agency's decisions. We must first make sure our house is in order by requiring adequate quality assurance practices for all environmental quality monitoring, sampling, and analytical activities conducted in the ORD laboratories or by our contractors or grantees. This policy should become effective immediately. We must also require, through the Blue Ribbon Monitoring Task Force, similar quality assurance practices for all of the Agency's laboratories, contractors, and grantees. Lastly, we must work closely with the Regional Offices to bring quality assurance practices into uniform use in all of the State and local laboratories, which provide the bulk of the environmental quality data available to the Agency. ------- OFFICE OF PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT Overview Statement of Priorities and Goals William Drayton, Jr., Assistant Administrator The Agency's central management objective remains that of creating a national environmental program that derives strength and initiative from decentralization and purposive- ness and environmental coherence from effective integration. Toward these and other ends we must strengthen our analytic and common services in a number of areas. This guidance deals first with that central objective, then with other objectives connected with our analytic and common services. AN INTEGRATED, DECENTRALIZED PROGRAM From its inception EPA rejected the top-down, over- centralized, untrusting Louis XIV/Herbert Hoover form of management common to most government organizations, a form that has failed. Instead we are building on the philosophy of the Federalist Papers: decentralize and democratize within a realistic set of incentives designed to ensure organizationally responsible results. Not only are we doing what makes sense for EPA, but we're setting the pace for others. That's why others in the government have quickly recognized so many of our reforms as models. No matter how satisfying being out front is, however, it doesn't make ground breaking any easier. Although we've come a long way, we still have several years of intense work ahead of us: (1) We should continue to strengthen our regulation development and zero-base budgeting. They provide the structure that makes possible broad involvement in the Agency's two principal cross- cutting areas for decision making: respectively, (a) regulation and policy development and (b) priority setting, management, and resource allo- cation. Regulation development is mature, and ZBB is over the worst of its start-up pains. Both need continuing adjustment and strong support, ------- - 49 - The Regions should contribute more heavily to regulation development and review, especially regarding operational and resource issues. Last year ZBB focused heavily on process; henceforth it should focus more on substantive analysis: getting workload analysis fully implemented, finding efficiencies, developing new program initiatives, and re-examining older programs carefully. We must also continue to help Office of Management and Budget develop cross-agency ZBB. (2) We need both stronger State programs and stronger State/EPA collaboration. State and local officials now staff 85 percent of the national environmental regulatory effort, and we are seeking to delegate even more. We must strengthen our joint environmental management effort, especially in the following areas: We have more than doubled the Federal grant support to State and local units since 1977 (including the addition of the Clean Water Act, Section 205(g) funds). - Our new State/EPA agreements should become more than contracts: they should induce joint planning and they should press decision making up to the senior policy officials on both sides. This should make it easier to refocus programs as our needs change and to innovate and integrate. By 1981 the agreements should cover all our programs. - We must win passage for and then implement our Integrated Environmental Assistance legislation to give the States the flexibility and added resources for such refocusing, innovation, and integration. We should encourage personnel interchange and training, e.g., through group IPA's. (3) Our Regional Administrators must strengthen their management/analytic capacity so that they can better manage their Regions, lead and evaluate the State and local agencies in ------- - 50 - their areas more effectively, and participate equally in Agency-wide policy and management decision making. Unless the Regions' ability to think and manage is strong, both Regional decentralization and EPA's linkage with State and local government are at risk. Headquarters analytic units must help the Regions develop this capacity, and both sides should build strong, continuing ties. (4) Our managers should adopt Agency-wide career paths. True independence, based ultimately on the real ability to move if frustrated, will flow from the professional breadth, self-confidence, and reputation such mobility will foster. It will also give the Agency a management team with Agency-wide environmental perspective and loyalty, a critical step in our successful integration. (5) The Agency's grantees, programs, and managers should be held accountable for their perfor- mance . We do not do this core management task at all well now. Our new personnel performance evaluation and reward program -- probably our most demanding management reform for the next 12 to 18 months -- will make major difference. Our review of monitoring and the new Regional Profiles may help. OUr fundamental scrutiny and rationalization of our many computer-based information systems will help. A systematic regiment of evaluations beginning at the local and State levels and working up is critical. Such evaluations should be backed by a reformed reporting system and tied to the promises made in ZBB. Designing and implementing a practical, integrated, limited-cost way of holding the States' and our own decentralized managers accountable is a difficult, missing part of our management construction. RESPONSIVE, EFFICIENT SERVICES We will continue implementing a number of fundamental improvements in the Agency's services in 1980-81: ------- - 51 - (1) We must begin to manage EPA's personnel. The new Civil Service Reform Act only makes this possible: we will have to make it happen by changing the way each of our managers does his or her most important job. (2) We will begin pilot tests of contracting reform in 1979 to improve responsiveness and cut processing time. (3) The Agency will commit to new computers after a thorough management review of our data needs and of our existing and planned programs. A SMART AGENCY Our analytic services — directly supporting our top managers, helping prepare regulations, checking budget pricing, providing legal or economic analyses, negotiating with other agencies, and the like -- must keep up with a growing workload and maintain a superior level of pro- fessional quality. Compromise here is foolish. We must continue our leadership in regulatory reform. Finding more effective, equitable, and economical ways of doing our work is one of the most useful, highly leveraged opportunities open to us. (Further, as America's largest regulatory agency, we have a responsibility to lead. Our two most important reforms are controlled trading and tools for regulatory decision making, including benefits analysis, Once we set a standard for controlled trading of clean-up requirements, we can allow those we regulate to find more efficient ways of achieving the same (or better) environmental result. These alternatives must also be as administrable and enforceable as our initial approach. Offsets (in both non-attainment and PSD areas), the bubble, banking, brokerage, and perhaps marketable rights should gradually all fit together into an increasingly important complement to traditional "command and control" regulation. If we can make this approach work on a wide scale, we will provide our first positive incentive for control technology innovation and significantly reduce clean-up costs (and therefore resistance to clean-up). ------- - 52 - To strengthen both performance and accountability we should strengthen our program evaluation capacity at all levels. We should also play a stronger leadership role in Administration debates on both economic and energy policies; the best defense is a more sensible alternative. GPO 938 887 ------- |